4 Procedures in the Jacobs School of Music for Long-Term Contracts

(Academic Specialists)

Appointment and Memorandum of Understanding

Academic specialists who are appointed on a probationary contract are eligible for consideration for a long-term contract any time after three years as a full-time faculty member.  Such consideration must occur during the sixth year of appointment. Promotion within this classification is not possible. Recommendations to the Dean for a long-term contract will be based on an assessment of excellence in assigned responsibilities, and will come from the candidate’s review committee, their academic supervisor, chairs of departments in which any courses have been taught, and the Jacobs School of Music Non-tenure Track Promotion and Policy Committee (NTT Promotion and Policy Committee).

At the time of appointment, an academic specialist shall receive a letter of appointment from the Dean or the Dean’s designee. The Office of the Dean, the academic specialist, and the academic supervisor to whom the academic specialist reports will, during the first semester of appointment, complete a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which articulates how the elements of the job description in the appointment letter are to be fulfilled and evaluated.  Additionally, the MOU will identify which elements from the dossier checklist may contribute evidence of excellence in fulfillment of the duties of the position. The MOU will be discussed and signed by the academic specialist and by the academic supervisor designated by the Dean. The MOU will also be reviewed and signed by the Dean.

Review Committee

At the time of appointment, the academic supervisor, together with the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity, will convene a review committee of at least five members for the academic specialist, of which the academic supervisor shall be chair. If the academic supervisor is the Dean, or an associate dean, then the chair shall be appointed from the other members of the committee. Where possible, the review committee shall include members of the permanent faculty of the school who have expertise in, or relating to, the job responsibilities of the academic specialist. When the responsibilities of the academic specialist fall within the clear purview of a single department—or if the academic specialist’s appointment is specific to a single department—the review committee may be drawn from a single department. Otherwise, representation on the review committee will be drawn from a subset of departments whose mission is supported by the academic specialist’s responsibilities. As personnel in the School may change over time, changes in membership of the review committee will be documented and recorded in the academic specialist’s file. In the event of the retirement or resignation of the academic supervisor or committee chair, a new supervisor or chair will be appointed by the Dean.

As the needs of the School and the interests of the academic specialist evolve, it is possible that the assigned responsibilities of the academic specialist may undergo change. In this event, the academic specialist, the Dean or the Dean’s designee, and the academic supervisor should meet to develop an amendment to the MOU that explains the revised duties and the nature of and reasons for the changes. This amendment should be signed by the academic specialist, the academic supervisor, and the Dean and kept in the faculty member’s file.

The review committee shall have responsibility for conducting annual reviews of the work of the academic specialist during the probationary appointment and will advise the candidate on areas of work which are progressing towards the demonstration of excellence and areas which need improvement in order to advance the case for a long-term contract in accordance with the MOU. The review committee should solicit evaluations from peers or colleagues identified in the MOU as a part of each annual review. The review committee will also examine whether the MOU is an accurate representation of the duties of the academic specialist, and as part of the annual review, will recommend possible amendments.

Reappointment and Long-term Contract Decisions

In order to recommend appointment of an academic specialist to a long-term contract, the reviewing committees of the School must be satisfied that the faculty member has achieved or exceeded the standards of the Jacobs School of Music as reflected in the letter of appointment and the MOU, and as expressed to the candidate in writing by the review committee and academic supervisor, following annual reviews.

In the first year of appointment, academic specialists and their academic supervisors will be notified in writing by the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity about policies and procedures for reappointment and long-term contracts. They also will be given a dossier checklist of items to assemble. Reappointment and long-term contract decisions will be final within the School and will not involve committees and administrators outside the Jacobs School of Music. Non-reappointment and dismissal decisions, however, will be reviewed by the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs.

Preparation of the Dossier

Appointment of academic specialists to a long-term contract is based on demonstrated excellence in the assigned duties as reflected in the letter of appointment and the MOU, together with any amendments.

Academic specialists should submit materials to substantiate their impact on the School and the university community related to their assigned duties. Dossiers are in an electronic format. Possible materials include evidence of service, teaching, research, creative activity, mentorship, organizational activities, and projects.

Letters for the Dossier

Evaluative letters for the dossier may be drawn from expert evaluators within the School, or from the profession at large. Evaluators from within the School should not also be serving on the candidate’s review committee.

The candidate will supply a list of four people from outside their department or area to serve as expert evaluators. The candidate should include a short statement about their connection to each person.

After discussion with the review committee, the review committee chair may compile a separate list of a maximum of four additional expert evaluators from outside of the department if desired. The connection of the candidate to these evaluators (if any) should also be explained.

The review committee chair should contact all potential evaluators to determine their willingness to write a letter evaluating the candidate. The Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity will send the candidate’s dossier, a copy of the Jacobs School of Music procedures for academic specialist appointments, and a copy of the candidate’s MOU (with amendments) to all those correspondents willing to participate. The dossier should include the candidate’s personal statement and Curriculum Vitae, and evidence that demonstrates excellence in the areas of evaluation specified in the MOU.

The final dossier should include a minimum of four evaluative letters. The final dossier may also include letters solicited from former students of the academic specialist.

Unsolicited letters from anyone including present students, mentors outside or inside the Jacobs School of Music, professional colleagues, retired faculty, etc. may be submitted for inclusion in the dossier in a special section.

Review by Committees

At the beginning of the fifth year of appointment, the academic specialist and the academic supervisor will conduct a final review of the MOU and propose any amendments prior to beginning the review process.

After the dossier is complete, including the evaluative letters, it is submitted to several stages of review within the School as described below. Retired/emeritus faculty and the spouse or partner of the candidate may not participate in the discussion or voting at any level.

Committees at each stage of review will conduct votes assessing the achievements of the candidate as reflected in the MOU. The MOU will describe those areas which are to be assessed and voted on in the review process. All academic specialists will be assessed in the area of Service and may be assessed in Research/Creative Activity and/or Teaching as specified in the MOU. Possible votes in Service, and Research/Creative Activity are: Excellent, Very Good, Satisfactory, and Unsatisfactory.  Possible votes in Teaching are Excellent, Very Good, Effective, and Not Effective. Each area of expected activity will receive a separate vote, and there shall be an additional, separate, overall vote (Yes, No, Absent, or Abstention.) on the question of recommending appointment to a long-term contract. Academic specialists may be judged in one or more areas of review. If they are assessed in more than one area, at least one area must be Excellent, and the result must be at least effective or satisfactory as appropriate for each category in the other areas assessed. A committee member must vote Excellent in at least one area to vote yes overall. The votes shall be recorded and reported in the Dossier.

The first stage of review is the assessment and vote by the review committee. The members of the review committee must have been involved in a discussion of the dossier and normally will be present when the vote is taken. If necessary, faculty may participate by various means of distance communication. Faculty members, however, may not give a proxy vote to another faculty member. The review committee letter will include a summary of comments both pro and con from all voting faculty.

The academic supervisor also writes a letter evaluating the candidate and makes a recommendation regarding appointment to a long-term contract. The academic supervisor’s letter includes comments on the contribution of the candidate to the mission of the School.

The next stage of assessment and voting is conducted at the school level by the NTT Promotion and Policy Committee, which is appointed by the Dean and includes two non-tenure track faculty on long-term contracts and three tenured associate or full professors. The voting categories and requirements are the same as those at the review committee level.  Members of the NTT Promotion and Policy Committee must all be present for a vote. If necessary, faculty may participate by various means of distance communication. Faculty members, however, may not give a proxy vote to another faculty member.

Each member both of the review committee and the NTT Promotion and Policy Committee will have access to all the materials in the dossier. Faculty members and administrators may make a recommendation or vote only once on any given case and cannot participate at more than one level. All deliberations are confidential and should not be communicated to anyone outside the process. At all levels of review, however, the recommendation and its rationale should be clearly communicated to the candidate and to the subsequent levels of review.

The candidate will be notified by the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity if there is a negative vote for appointment to a long-term contract by the academic supervisor, and/or if there is a majority review committee or school committee vote against appointment to a long-term contract. The candidate may then write a letter of rebuttal or clarification, if desired, to be added to the dossier. The candidate may also write a letter clarifying remarks by anyone who has submitted material to the dossier. These letters should address matters of substance in the dossier rather than procedural matters. Questions about procedure should be directed to the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity.

After the initial review of the dossier has begun, the contents of the dossier will be frozen. No person other than the candidate may add rebuttal letters or comments based on the confidential materials and letters in the dossier. In exceptional circumstances, the candidate may add important additional materials to the dossiers, provided that all previous review committees are aware of the added material and are given an opportunity to respond.

To be recommended for a long-term contract, the review committee, the NTT Promotion and Policy Committee, and the Dean must be satisfied that the faculty member has achieved or exceeded certain standards of the Jacobs School of Music. These standards relate to the major criteria of the University and to the mission of the School.

The Dean of the Jacobs School will notify the candidate in writing of the final decision.

Components of the Final Dossier

Administrative

  • Vote record
  • Internal review letters (review committee, chair, school, dean)
  • External review letters (outside department)
  • Any other solicited letters

General

  • A copy of the MOU will be included in the dossier, and the nature of the MOU will substantially guide the shape of the dossier and the type of evidence assembled.
  • The candidate will provide a current CV including educational and employment history and achievements in the area of service, teaching, and research and creative activity.
  • The candidate will provide a statement (4-5 pages), which should begin with a brief introduction outlining a professional mission statement. The remainder of the statement should focus on specific evidence demonstrating the quality of activities and achievements required by the Memorandum of Understanding. The statement should contextualize the evidence provided and address its significance. Candidates should describe how their professional activities have evolved over the course of their appointment and discuss innovations in their work.
  • Lists of external evaluators, and their biographies will be assembled by the candidate and the Review Committee as appropriate.
  • The Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity will include copies of department and/or school criteria.

Evidence of Service (required)

Academic Specialists typically have greater service expectations than other faculty ranks. Service expectations are described in the Memorandum of Understanding and may include service contributions beyond those listed below. Contributions in the service area may be substantiated by the following:

  • a list of the candidate’s service activities, including committee work
  • contributions to auditions, hearings, rehearsals, student recitals, concerto competitions, and other similar activities
  • reviews and publications (including pre-publication reviews) that are related to professional service
  • social media on behalf of the School and/or the IU community
  • program notes, pre-concert lectures and panels, and other service to the public
  • mentoring students, which may include student advising, letters of recommendation for students, etc.
  • recruitment
  • program committees for festivals and conferences
  • participation in professional organizations
  • judging contests, administering exams, etc.
  • community engagement activities
  • performances and/or presentations in support of music service
  • collaboration with stakeholders both within and beyond the Jacobs School

Evidence of Teaching

Contributions in the teaching area may be substantiated by the following, as appropriate to the specific discipline:

  • a list of specific courses taught (including ensemble direction, chamber music coaching, and independent study supervision) and the enrollments listed by semester and academic year (including numbers and levels of applied students)
  • student evaluations over time (summaries of teaching evaluations, transcriptions of student comments)
  • Reports of annual observations by peers (usually from within the review committee, as well as selected outside evaluators, where appropriate). Guidelines for peer evaluations will be provided by the Office of the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, Research, and Creative Activity.
  • other peer evaluations as available
  • a list of independent study supervision, supervised minor field candidates, and doctoral committee work, if appropriate
  • evidence of student achievement
  • the ability to attract and retain qualified major students in a specific performance area
  • evidence of course development: syllabi, descriptions of innovative approaches to instruction, special curriculum design, incorporation of new technologies
  • performances related to pedagogy
  • copies of pedagogical books, articles, educational recordings, and other materials authored by the candidate
  • pedagogical presentations, both invited and competitive at regional, national, or international meetings or for a similar professional gathering
  • workshops, festivals, and lectures; including peer evaluations of presentations and materials, if available
  • guest teaching and presentations
  • grants for curriculum development
  • teaching awards and recognition

Evidence of Research/Creative Activity

Contributions in the research/creative activity area may be substantiated by the following:

  • publications of any sort
  • recitals on the Bloomington campus and elsewhere, including solo performances and performances with chamber groups, orchestras, or other ensembles
  • performances and/or presentations related to scholarship
  • creative activity such as choreography, stage direction, and stage design
  • recordings and recording contracts
  • development of new technologies
  • digital scholarly projects
  • interdisciplinary activities
  • reviews of books, articles, compositions, performances, and other creative activity
  • grants and contracts for research and/or creative activities
  • awards and honors for research/creative activity

Overview of Timetable for Dossier Preparation and Evaluation

November, Year 5:

The candidate is notified of deadlines and advised of procedures for collection of material. The supervising faculty member and the candidate should review the Memorandum of Understanding at this time, and draft final amendments to it if necessary.

Late Spring, Year 5

The candidate submits to the office of the ADFARCA a curriculum vitae and a list of names of possible evaluators for the dossier. If the candidate desires, names of external evaluators may also be submitted. The academic supervisor and the review committee shall, if desired, submit names of possible evaluators.

Early Fall, Year 6

The candidate’s completed dossier must be ready for action by the review committee. The dossier will be approved by the supervising faculty member after discussion with the candidate.

The dossier is submitted to the review committee.

The dossier, including recommendations from the review committee and the academic supervisor, is submitted to Jacobs School of Music Non-tenure Promotion and Policy Committee.

Mid-Fall, Year 6

The dossier, including recommendations from all previous evaluations, is submitted to Dean.

 

License

Jacobs School of Music Long-Term Contract Handbook for Academic Specialists Copyright © by Jacobs School of Music. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book