1. General Information

Code of Professional Ethics for Faculty

The University of Massachusetts Amherst has a code of professional Ethics for faculty. The code is contained in the University of Massachusetts Amherst Faculty Guide and applies to all faculty at the University. It is suggested that faculty read this code carefully.

I. Professors recognize the special responsibilities placed upon them. Their primary responsibility to their subject is to seek and to state the truth as they see it. To this end they devote their energies to developing and improving their scholarly competence. They accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge. They practice intellectual honesty. Although they may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously hamper or compromise their freedom of inquiry.

II. As teachers, professors encourage the free pursuit of learning in their students. They hold before them the best scholarly standards of the discipline. They demonstrate respect for the student as an individual, and adhere to their proper role as intellectual guide and counselor. They also avoid any personal exploitation of students, staff, colleagues and others and will not abuse their position as members of the academic profession. They make every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to ensure that the evaluation of students reflects their true merit. They respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student. They avoid any exploitation of students, staff, colleagues and others for their private professional advantage and acknowledge significant assistance from them. They protect their academic freedom.

III. As colleagues, professors have obligations that derive from common membership in the community of scholars. They respect and defend the free inquiry of their associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas they show due respect for the opinions of others. They acknowledge academic debts and strive to be objective in their professional judgment of colleagues. They accept a share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution.

IV. As a member of their institution, professors seek above all to be effective teachers and scholars. Although they observe the stated regulations of their institution, provided they do not contravene academic freedom, they maintain their right to criticize and seek revision. They determine the amount and character of the work done outside the institution with due regard to their paramount responsibilities within it. When considering the interruption or termination of service, they recognize the effect of the decision upon the program of the institution and give due notice of their intentions.

V. As a member of the community, professors have the rights and obligations of any citizen. They measure the urgency of these obligations in the light of responsibilities to their subject, to their students, to their profession, and to their institution. When they speak or act as a private person they avoid creating the impression that they speak or act for their college or university. As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, professors have a particular obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and to further public understanding of academic freedom.

VI. As members of the faculty, professors respect the rights of others, regardless of gender; race; age; physical and language handicap; prior civil disability; sexual and religious preference; marital and socio-economic status; or national origin, citizenship and allegiance. Professors avoid such extraneous considerations in the evaluation of peers, students, or in the assignment of duties and responsibilities in the University. Professors promote the ideals of a learning environment that fosters individual right and encourages mutual respect.

Faculty Workload

The workload of each faculty and staff person is constructed according to the nature and specifics of the individual appointment. The department workload outline is set up to distinguish faculty on the tenure track from other appointments. The annual evaluation system is constructed according to departmental workload expectations and University promotion and tenure criteria.

Within the School of Public Health and Health Sciences, the standard class teaching load for tenure track faculty appointed 100% in the department is the equivalent of 3 courses per 9 month academic year. This load is seen as a 40% teaching assignment for the year. This load is based on the assumption that the courses taught are either 3 or 4 credits per class. Partial teaching credit is awarded for instructors of 1 and 2 credit courses. Exceptions to this load distribution may be made for administrative or special department assignments, grant buyouts, dispensation for new or junior faculty, and for other reasons determined by the Department Chair, subject to review by the Dean. The maximum course buyout for faculty on 100% appointments in the department is two courses per year given that all faculty are expected to teach at least 1 course (3 or 4 credits) per year.

Thus, the balance of the workload for tenure track faculty in SPHHS is typically viewed as 40% class teaching, 50% research and 10% service, where in effect the research time includes supervising student research (e.g., honors research, master’s thesis, and dissertation work). Faculty with joint appointments in other units will have their class teaching responsibility reduced in relation to their percentage appointment in the department. Course releases are typically not provided for committee responsibilities or for coordinating lecture series. Faculty not engaged in research or scholarship may have their class teaching load increased beyond that specified by the standard workload.

The primary responsibility of non-tenure track faculty is teaching. Many non-tenure track faculty teach in the undergraduate programs but they can also teach at the graduate level and online. The maximum full-time teaching load for an instructor with 100% teaching responsibilities including service is 3-4 courses per semester. Many lecturers on a 100%-time appointment have additional service responsibilities and should have a commensurate reduction in teaching load. Exceptions to this workload arrangement may be negotiated with the department, subject to review by the Dean.

STRIDE Training for Faculty Recruitment

STRIDE (Strategies and Tactics for Recruiting to Improve Diversity and Excellence) workshops are intended for faculty members with an important role in faculty recruitment efforts (e.g., search committee chairs and members and other key faculty). These two-hour workshops review research driven best practices to recruit for diversity and excellence across every stage in the search process and are designed to help faculty produce diverse candidate pools and run effective searches. These trainings are facilitated by the Office of Equity and Inclusion. More information can be found here: https://www.umass.edu/provost/resources/all-resources/faculty-diversity/stride-faculty-recruitment-workshops.

The SPHHS encourages all faculty members to become STRIDE certified by completing a workshop, regardless of whether or not they are a member of a search committee, and to maintain their certification which should be renewed every three years. This practice will ensure a timely and efficient recruitment process without delay.

Graduate School Mentor Training

The Graduate School offers training for mentors of graduate, postdoctoral, and undergraduate researchers. They use the curriculum developed by the National Research Mentoring Network (NRMN). The efficacy of this program for mentors and their mentees is supported by both qualitative and quantitative data (learn more from the Center for the Improvement of Mentored Experiences in Research, or CIMER). For more information please visit their website. The SPHHS encourages faculty members to enroll in this training.

Adjunct Teaching Appointments

Adjunct appointments are made at the department level and require the approval of the dean. Appointments are created for explicit teaching, mentoring, service and research needs of the department. The length of appointments ranges from one to three years. Adjunct’s will need to be set-up with a NENS account maintained by the department in order to access UMass resources, platforms for teaching, and a UMass email. For assistance, please contact the dean’s office to be referred to the right department to set up a NENS account or if you have an inactive account and need it reactivated.

2. The Review of Faculty

The University has established formal policies and procedures for review processes and decisions involving faculty appointment, promotion, and tenure. Standards, criteria, and procedural guidelines are contained in the "Academic Personnel Policy of the University of Massachusetts" (see Appendix 1). These policies are consistent with AAUP standards for annual review, promotion and tenure and traditions of faculty primary responsibility in matters of faculty status. An annual memorandum from the Provost provides supplemental instructions on the process for recommending personnel actions. Many schools and colleges and the Office of Faculty Development provide supplemental guidance to the faculty as well. All faculty members are encouraged to inform themselves about faculty personnel policies.

Annual Faculty Report and Evaluation

All faculty members are responsible for completing annually the web-based Annual Faculty Report (AFR) that highlights activities and achievements in teaching, research and scholarly activity, and service and outreach for the previous calendar year. The AFR is an evaluative document. The call for completion of the AFR is announced by the School/College, and is evaluated in the latter part of the year. The deadline for completion of the AFR and submission is usually in October. AFR’s are uploaded to the Academic Personnel Workflow System (APWS).

The annual evaluation of faculty and staff will be based directly on the balance of the individual’s designated workload. The initial annual evaluation of the faculty will be made by Department Personnel Committee. The evaluation will be consistent with University promotion and tenure criteria. Committee recommendations will be forwarded to the Department Chair, who adds his or her evaluation. The Department Chair will prepare a written assessment of each faculty member’s teaching, research, and service activities and will meet with each faculty member to discuss the assessment and goals for the coming year. Following the review process, the Department Chair submits the written assessments and makes recommendations to the Dean for individual performance categories. The Dean may add his or her evaluation to the AFR before submitting to the Provost. The individual faculty member has a right to respond in writing to any evaluation added to his or her AFR, and that response must be appended to the AFR. During the time of the annual faculty review, the school requests an updated C.V. and the completion of a faculty survey. An email is sent to faculty from the dean requesting these items. Data from this survey are used in our strategic planning and to measure progress toward SPHHS goals.

Pre-tenure Review

In the third year of service, faculty will undergo a pre-tenure review. This review consists of an assessment of progress in many of the same aspects of a faculty member’s promotion and tenure review, and suggestions for areas of improvement if needed. This review is indicative of the possible success or failure of the faculty member in the full promotion and tenure review, and if not successful, will result in termination of the faculty member’s appointment.

Periodic Multi-Year Review(PMYR)

The periodic multi-year review of all faculty is distinct from the annual and major personnel action reviews. This review serves two purposes: 1) this review expands the narrow time window of the annual reviews into an overview of a faculty member’s performance that will both inform evaluations and rewards and aid academic planning; 2) these periodic overviews make possible timely consultation, intervention, and assistance that will stimulate and encourage professional development in directions that will benefit both the faculty member and the institution. The multi-year review will also effectively account for faculty members’ professional activity. PMYR is to be conducted every seven years for all faculty members after receiving tenure. The purpose of PMYR is to assist tenured faculty in their continuing professional development. A faculty member who has been awarded tenure and promotion has demonstrated excellent performance and represents a large investment on the part of the University. Tenure is awarded with the assumption that the faculty member will continue to develop professionally and demonstrate a continued high level of performance. PMYR evaluates performance over a number of years and assures that the talents of faculty members and their contributions to the University are maximized throughout their careers.

The review will include a brief statement, typically between 1000-2000 words and not to exceed 2500 words, submitted by the faculty member that summarizes and assesses their principal activities during the period since the last PMYR or promotion review and their goals and approach to achieving such goals in the areas of teaching, research and service in the coming years. In addition, the faculty member will submit their current curriculum vitae. The Department Chair will supply all evaluations of the faculty member’s teaching performance carried out during the previous six years, and the AFRs for the prior six years and the current year, including any supplemental materials that normally accompany AFRs.

The DPC and the Department Chair will review the individual’s AFRs, curriculum vitae, teaching evaluations, and the submitted statement. After review of the materials, the DPC and the Chair will each recommend that the statement submitted by the faculty member be either: 1) accepted, with further comments or suggestions optional; or 2) revised. A recommendation to accept the submitted statement will be made when the faculty member’s past performance and future goals, as documented in the materials submitted, indicates that no changes in the faculty member’s work or plans are seen as required in order to continue the professional progress of the faculty member. A recommendation to revise the submitted statement is made when the individual’s past performance and future goals, as documented in the materials submitted, is indicated in order to promote the faculty member’s continued effective contribution and professional progress. In making either recommendation, the DPC and the Chair will also recommend whether or not to provide the resources for professional development requested in the faculty member’s statement, whether it is an accepted or revised statement. Final approval rests with the Dean.

For more information on the PMYR process, refer to the following link: https://www.umass.edu/ctl/grants-awards/periodic-multi-year-review-pmyr-grant

3. The Tenure/Promotion Review Process

There are two evaluation processes that ‘tenure track’ faculty undergo during their careers at the University of Massachusetts. The first is tenure. Tenure as defined in Appendix II is “the right of a faculty member to continuous employment in an academic position until retirement age, subject to dismissal or suspension only as established in Trustee policy.” Tenure decision year as defined in Appendix II is “the academic year during which a faculty member is considered for an appointment with tenure.” The second process, promotion, may be linked with the tenure process. Promotion involves moving from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and from Associate Professor to Full Professor. In most cases, the tenure process is linked to promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor.

The tenure and promotion (Assistant to Associate Professor) and promotion (Associate to Full Professor) processes are outlined in detail in the "Academic Personnel Policy of the University of Massachusetts" (see Appendix II) commonly referred to as the “Red Book”. In short, the process is a multi-stage evaluation in order by the: 1) Department Personnel Committee(DPC); 2) Department Chair; 3) School Personnel Committee(SPC); 4) Dean; 5) Provost; 6) Chancellor; 7) Board of Trustees; and the President of the University.(In cases of promotion only, the Provost has the authority to make the final decision, and the case does not advance to the Board or President.)Each level is advisory to the next leveluntil the final decision is reached. Faculty should be familiar with this process and are encouraged to ask questions to Chairsand the Dean for clarification. Ultimately, the President has the authority to appoint members of the faculty to tenure/promotion or promotion to Distinguished Professor or to a named professorship with the concurrence of the Board of Trustees.

The promotion/tenure evaluation is initiated by the Department Chair who informs the faculty members of their tenure decision year. The Chair then asks the faculty members to nominate several external reviewers who will evaluate their progress. The Chair will also nominate several external reviewers. Generally, the Chair will finalize a list of external reviewers from those nominated by the faculty member and the DPC. The Chair will then request evaluation letters from these external reviewers. There is a school timeline for the review process that is distributed to departments annually. The Provost’s Office provides a master calendar which can be found here: https://www.umass.edu/provost/resources/all-resources/academic-personnel/reappointment-promotion-and-tenure

Documentation of Faculty Progress

Faculty considered for promotion and tenure will prepare documentation of their efforts in the form of a dossier referred to as the Basic File, which will be uploaded for review to APWS. The Basic File includes the following major categories of performance:

1. The Curriculum Vitae;
2. Personal Statement Regarding Research, Teaching and Service;
3. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning;
4. The Scholarship of Research and Creative Accomplishments;
5. Scholarship of Service to the University, Society, and the Profession.

Departmental Personnel Committee

Each department forms a Department Personnel Committee (DPC) that is advisory to the Provost on personnel issues such as promotion and tenure. The DPC is formed in different ways either as a committee of selected faculty members or as a committee of the whole, according to the bylaws of the department. When constituted, the DPC elects a Chair of the committee. The DPC oversees most personnel actions in the department and advises the Department Chair on Personnel Issues. Guidance on which faculty are permitted to vote on this committee is described in each department’s bylaws. Charges of the committee are:

1. To independently review teaching, research, creative accomplishments, scholarship and service relative to a faculty member's appointment;
2. To act in an advisory role to the Provost and the faculty on issues related to the tenure and promotion processes.

The primary role of the committee is to provide the initial evaluation for promotion and tenure using criteria appropriate to the faculty member's responsibilities. It should be emphasized that the committee must conduct its activities consistent with the requirements of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and in a manner that guarantees an individual's right to privacy.

The faculty member under review will receive a copy of the evaluation letter prepared by the DPC and may respond to the evaluation by writing a letter that then becomes part of the Basic File.

School Personnel Committee

The School Personnel Committee (SPC) functions as described in the Board of Trustees document and the collective bargaining contract. It operates according to personnel policies as identified by and in accord with University equal opportunity regulations(see Article IX of the School By-Laws, Appendix I). The School Personnel Committee is formed by one representative of each department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Communications Disorders, Health Promotion & Policy, Environmental Health Sciences, Kinesiology and Nutrition for a total of six members. On the initial meeting of the academic year, the SPC elects a Chair who organizes meetings regarding personnel issues for the School. The promotion file including letters from the DPC and Department Chair are reviewed and a recommendation is forwarded to the Dean. The charge of this committee is similar to that of the DPC:

1. To independently review teaching, research, creative accomplishments, scholarship and service relative to a faculty member's appointment;
2. To act in an advisory role to the Provost on issues related to the tenure and promotion processes.

The primary role of the committee is the same as that of the DPC. The faculty member under review will receive a copy of the evaluation letter prepared by the SPC and may respond to the evaluation by writing a letter that then becomes part of the Basic File.

Criteria Evaluated in the Faculty Review Process

The following information outlines the kinds of activity accomplishments deemed important in the promotion/tenure or promotion to Full Professor review process. Each department has provided a culture document that describes some of these accomplishments more specifically for its discipline. The kinds of activity are not completely different between the two review processes although the promotion to Full Professor offers higher standards in these activities. The list is not complete and questions concerning additional activities to be included should be directed to the Department Chair or designated senior faculty assigned to assist the candidate. The evaluations shall be applied in light of the differences in mission and work assignments at their particular location.

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

• A variety of evaluation data, both formative and summative, from a variety of sources that reflect teaching performance based on class observations and involvement in classes.
• An individual's involvement in activities that are focused toward improvement of his/her teaching.
• All courses taught during the academic year by semester and enrollments.
• Advising undergraduate and graduate students.
• Performance of students in subsequent courses, tangible results and benefits derived by clientele.
• Any other pertinent information you feel should be included regarding teaching ability and effectiveness.
• Supervision of graduate and undergraduate dissertations, theses, projects. Type of degrees and years granted.
• Membership on graduate degree candidates’ committees.

The Scholarship of Research and Creative Accomplishments

• Publications – List in standardized bibliographic form. The contribution of the candidate should be clearly indicated.

1. Articles published in refereed journals
2. Books or part(s) of books
3. Articles published in non-refereed journals
4. Articles published in in-house documents
5. Research reports to sponsors
6. Papers accepted for publication (include page numbers)
7. Manuscripts in progress(in a separate list)

• Funded research projects, grants, contracts

1. Date, title, agency
2. Completed or in progress
3. Funded amount
4. Percent effort supported by grant/contract and role (e.g., PI, co-investigator)

• Patents
• Creative accomplishments (dance compositions, instructional films, stage performances, etc.)
• Academic studies and advanced degrees (List all programs completed or participated in which enhance teaching/coaching and therapeutic intervention abilities.)
• Participation in seminars and workshops (Include sponsor and short description of activity.)
• Activities related to Community Participatory Research with products that demonstrate impact at the community level or beyond.
• Papers presented at professional and technical meetings (Include meeting, paper titles, date, and invited or personally submitted.)
• Speaking engagements, consulting activities, services to governmental, professional, and industrial associations, educational institutions, etc.
• Honors and awards of scholarship or professional activity
• Membership and active participation in professional and learned societies(include offices held, committee work and other responsibilities.)
• Editorial responsibilities or review of books or articles

Teaching Innovations

• Course revisions (including curriculum integration, writing intensive, etc.)
• Extension education courses developed or conducted
• Textbooks or manuals authored
• Any other pertinent information regarding research, creative accomplishment, and scholarship
• Description of new methods of teaching established courses
• New courses developed

Service and the Scholarship of Service to the University, Society, and the Profession

• Service to the University

1. Record of committee work at campus, college, department and University levels
2. Participation in University or Campus governance bodies and related activities
3. Administrative support work (College, Department, or Program representative)
4. Record of contributions to the University's programs to enhance equal opportunity and cultural diversity

• Outreach Services as a representative of the University

1. Participation in community affairs as a representative of the University
2. Service to governmental agencies--local, state, or federal
3. Service to business and industry
4. Service to public or private organizations (including community engagement that has been impactful)

• Service to the Profession

1. Active participation in professional and learned societies (e.g., offices held, committee work, and other responsibilities).
2. Any other pertinent information you feel should be included regarding service to the profession.

Criteria for Advancement in Promotion and Tenure

The Department and School have a wide range of knowledge sub-domains and disciplinary approaches to the study of Public Health and Health Sciences. The criteria for advancement in promotion and tenure will be consistent with the general university guidelines (see Appendix III), the individual contract expectations in regard to workload contributions in teaching, research and service, and the norms established for each knowledge subdomain at a major research institution. Those norms strongly influence faculty evaluating their colleagues for promotion and tenure, but no specific criteria may be codified without being negotiated with the faculty union. Faculty who expect to advance in tenure and rank must demonstrate commendable levels of performance in all components of his/her positioning the three major categories of:

1. Teaching ability and effectiveness;
2. Research, creative accomplishments and scholarship;
3. Service to the University, society, and the profession.

Teaching ability and effectiveness will be judged in relation to direct and indirect teaching at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Direct teaching involves responsibility for particular courses within the department academic programs whereas indirect teaching involves advising and mentoring of students. Commendable levels of performance in direct teaching will include the demonstration of being an effective teacher as judged by studentevaluation. Effectiveness in teaching is judged by the performance level and the positive change in performance level achieved by students in the class setting. Additional norms include effectiveness of communication, appropriateness of techniques used for communication, and the cutting-edge contemporary nature of the content of the course taught. Indirect teaching includes mentoring of undergraduate and graduate students in research labs and thesis/dissertation work. A student’s successful completion of their degree reflects positively on a faculty mentor.

The research, creative accomplishment and scholarship norms for advancement will vary with the chosen knowledge sub domain of the faculty person. Research norms will be employed with faculty emphasizing a science or humanities focus. It is expected that faculty will develop, and demonstrate within the level of the respective track, a systematic cutting-edge line of research, creative accomplishment, and/or scholarship.

Service and outreach contributions will be evaluated based upon activities within and outside of the university. In-house service will normally be reflected in committee work at the department, college, and university levels. Service is judged on the effective contribution to administrative and procedural functions of the institution. Service outside the university will normally involve consulting to government, industry, and state and local agencies that relate to the individual’s chosen line of research, scholarship, or creative accomplishment. Contributions here are evaluated in relation to the significance of the advising and the degree of sustained consultation.

From Section 4.6 of the “Red Book” (see Appendix I):

Recommendations for promotion shall be based on qualifications and contributions in the areas of teaching; of research, creative, or professional activity; and of service; and on the following considerations:

a) For appointment to Assistant Professor, the faculty member must possess the appropriate terminal degree, or equivalent professional experience, and have a record of achievement in the field of academic specialization. In addition, the candidate must show promise of continuing professional development and achievement.

b) For promotion to Associate Professor, the faculty member must have a record of achievement sufficient to have gained recognition on and off campus among scholars or professionals in his or her field; and must show promise of continuing professional development and achievement.

c) For promotion to Professor, the faculty member must have a record of achievement sufficient to have gained substantial recognition on and off campus from scholars or professionals in his or her field; and must show significant potential for continuing professional achievement.

From Section 4.9 of the “Red Book” (see Appendix I):

The award of tenure can be made only by the President with the concurrence of the Board of Trustees. Consideration of a candidate for tenure shall be based on the following:

a) Convincing evidence of excellence in at least two, and strength in the third, of the areas of teaching; of research, creative or professional activity; and of service, such as to demonstrate the possession of qualities appropriate to a member of the faculty occupying a permanent position.

b) Reasonable assurance of continuing development and achievement leading to further contributions to the University.

The Chair’s Responsibilities in the Tenure Process

In the evaluation process, the Department Chair’s responsibilities include evaluating the dossier of the faculty member seeking promotion or tenure and promotion. The Chair considers the recommendation of the DPC in writing an evaluation letter that is submitted for review by the School Personnel Committee. The faculty member under review will receive a copy of the evaluation letter prepared by the Chair and may respond to the evaluation by writing a letter that then becomes part of their Basic File.

The Dean’s Responsibilities in the Tenure Process

The role of the Dean in the evaluation process includes an independent evaluation of the dossier of the faculty member seeking promotion or tenure and promotion, including the evaluation of the Department Chair/Head and the evaluation of the SPC. The Dean considers the recommendation of the Chair/Head, the DPC and the SPC in writing an evaluation letter that is forwarded with the dossier to the Provost’s office for consideration. The faculty member under review will receive a copy of the evaluation letter prepared by the Dean and may respond to the evaluation by writing a letter that then becomes part of the Basic File.

The Provost’s Responsibilities in the Tenure Process

Once the Basic File has undergone reviews by the DPC, Chair, SPC and the Dean, it is then forwarded to the Provost’s Office for review. The Provost considers all previous reviews during evaluation of the Basic File. In tenure cases, the Provost writes a letter to the Board of Trustees recommending tenure; if the Provost does not recommend tenure, the case does not advance to the Board. In promotion cases not involving tenure (except promotion to Distinguished Professor or to a named professorship), the Provost writes a letter to the candidate to inform him or her of the final decision.

The Role of the President and the Board of Trustees

The Board of Trustees has the statutory authority to make decisions in matters of faculty status and may delegate that authority only to appropriate administrative officials (Mass. G.L. c.75 §3A). The President has been delegated the authority to appoint members of the faculty to tenure with the concurrence of the Board of Trustees. Within the framework of Trustee policy, the chancellors have been delegated the authority to make decisions in all matters of faculty status. Any re-delegation of appointing authority to the Provost or other academic administrative officials is subject to the approval of the Board of Trustees.