Promotion Guidelines for clinical-track faculty

Last updated: May 2024

1. Scope of these Guidelines

The purpose of this document is to establish parameters for the appointment and advancement of non-tenure track clinical faculty in the Luddy School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering (LSICE) in Indianapolis to the ranks of Associate Clinical Professor and Clinical Professor. The school adheres to the Indiana University Indianapolis (IUI) campus guidelines for Promotion and Tenure (P&T). School standards supersede campus standards only insofar as they require a higher or more substantial level of academic achievement than the campus guidelines.

All candidates for academic advancement are advised to study the campus guidelines to understand the many quantitative and qualitative ways candidates may document and substantiate their achievements. It is the candidate’s responsibility to prepare for reviewers a dossier that accurately documents and explains the candidate’s academic achievement. In all dossiers for advancement, it is the responsibility of the candidate to explain the categorization, nature, and significance of academic achievements

2. Clinical Appointments in LSICE

Clinical appointments are appropriate for those who work primarily in the clinical setting. At IUI, the prefix Clinical is used “for appointees whose primary duties are teaching students and residents/fellows and providing professional service in the clinical setting”¹ .

The definition of clinical setting may vary based on the discipline of the appointee, but is generally defined by the university as work in a clinical, professional, or community context that leverages the appointee’s expertise in their discipline. Specific clinical responsibilities and activities for an individual faculty member should be articulated by the candidate’s department upon hiring.

3. Responsibilities for Clinical Faculty

Clinical faculty are responsible for contributing to both the teaching and service missions of the University. Clinical faculty are evaluated for promotion with teaching and service as their areas of responsibility, and must be evaluated as at least satisfactory in both teaching and service, regardless of the type of case they select for promotion. Criteria for being satisfactory in teaching and service are further defined below.

The service responsibilities of clinical faculty include both university service, which supports and develops IUI and its schools and units, and disciplinary service, which supports and develops the research and professional goals of their discipline.

Clinical faculty do not have responsibilities in the area of research/creative activity. Clinical faculty may contribute to the research efforts of a unit through their clinical work, but they are not expected to do individual research, and their continued appointment and advancement in rank must be based on performance in teaching and service.

4. Promotion Expectations for Clinical Faculty

The top-level expectation for promotion for clinical faculty, based on the campus guidelines, is around scholarship in area of excellence. This scholarship must be both disseminated and peer reviewed. Below, we define (1) possible areas of excellence (2) expectations for dissemination of scholarship, and (3) appropriate forms of peer review specific to clinical faculty.

4.1 Areas of Excellence for Clinical Faculty

Campus guidelines list five possible areas of excellence for clinical faculty promotion cases. This addendum to the LSICE P&T Guidelines describes expectations for three of these types of cases, bolded below:

Excellence in service and satisfactory in teaching
Excellence in teaching and satisfactory in service
A balanced-binned case, highly satisfactory in service and teaching
A balanced-integrative DEI case, with integrative activities supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion
A balanced-integrative-thematic case, with integrative activities supporting a chosen theme.

The LSICE P&T Committee is still developing appropriate guidelines for balanced-binned, balanced-integrative DEI and thematic cases, and this document will be updated when those are finalized.

4.2 Dissemination

Disseminated scholarship is a requirement for clinical faculty, and the candidate is expected to demonstrate how their scholarship supports their teaching, their service, or both, based on their selected area of excellence.

4.2.1 Forms of Dissemination

Dissemination of scholarship can take many forms. Particularly for the clinical ranks, publication may not be the most effective or feasible means of disseminating the results of effective teaching or service practices or pedagogical research. When other forms of disseminating results are more appropriate, this fact should be explained and those evaluating the candidate’s work at the primary, unit, and campus levels should consider this alternative form of dissemination.

Other forms of dissemination for clinical faculty, beyond traditional academic publications, may include artifacts presentations, books, case studies, material in media outlets, or other forms of dissemination deemed appropriate by the department or unit. These forms of dissemination still must meet the criteria for peer review described below.

4.2.2 Scope of Dissemination

Expectations differ for the scope of dissemination based on the rank of promotion a faculty is seeking.

For Promotion to Associate Clinical Professor: Candidate must demonstrate a “record of publicly disseminated and peer reviewed scholarship in area of excellence”.
For Promotion to (full) Clinical Professor: “Record of sustained, nationally and/or internationally disseminated and peer reviewed scholarship in area of excellence.”

4.3 Peer Review

Disseminated scholarship by Clinical faculty must be peer-reviewed. For clinical faculty, this peer review can be conducted by members of either the academic or professional communities the appointee interacts with. However, dissemination is evaluated based on its rigor and contribution; thus, significantly greater weight is placed on academically peer-reviewed scholarship.

For clinical faculty, note that patient/client evaluations may not be used to document peer review - the appointee’s scholarship must be evaluated by independent academic or professional peers to ensure it documents the appropriate contributions to teaching or service, based on the appointee’s selected area of excellence.

5. Criteria for Promotion

5.1 Teaching Criteria for Promotion

As described in the campus P&T Handbook, teaching comprises multiple elements, broadly categorized as: classroom delivery of instruction; student mentoring and advising; curriculum development; and the scholarship of teaching and learning.

5.1.1 Excellence in Teaching for Clinical Faculty

For excellence in teaching, a clinical faculty must document and demonstrate evidence of the quality of their teaching activities, and a record of peer-reviewed and disseminated scholarship of teaching.

It is required for all clinical faculty seeking promotion in excellence of teaching to demonstrate extraordinarily successful teaching and learning outcomes, grounded in a sophisticated teaching philosophy with evidence of innovative and reflective teaching practice.

Clinical faculty whose area of excellence is teaching must also demonstrate excellence in some of, though not necessarily all, the following areas articulated by the campus Handbook:

Course or curricular development
Mentoring and advising
Scholarly activities, including awards
Professional development efforts in teaching

Candidates must also be able to demonstrate a sustained record of peer-reviewed and disseminated scholarship of teaching, at (at least) the local/regional level for promotion to Associate Clinical Professor, and (at least) the national level for promotion to Clinical Professor.

5.1.2 Satisfactory in Teaching for Clinical Faculty

For satisfactory in teaching, a clinical faculty must document and demonstrate evidence that the quality of their teaching activities has been satisfactory in fostering appropriate learning outcomes.

Clinical faculty must also demonstrate satisfactory performance in some of, though not necessarily all, the following areas articulated by the campus Handbook:

Course or curricular development
Mentoring and advising
Scholarly activities, including awards
Professional development efforts in teaching

Candidates do not need to demonstrate peer-reviewed or disseminated scholarship of teaching to achieve satisfactory in teaching.

5.2 Service Criteria

As described in the campus P&T Handbook, service must contribute to the unit and/or campus mission. The service responsibilities of clinical faculty include both university service, which supports and develops IUI and its schools and units, and disciplinary service, which supports and develops the research and professional goals of their discipline through the application of their professional expertise.

5.2.1 Excellence in Service for Clinical Faculty

To achieve excellence in service, clinical faculty must be able to demonstrate significant contributions that go beyond normal distribution of service effort expected at the university, and the candidate must document and demonstrate the quality and impact of their service work through peer-reviewed and disseminated scholarship.

Importantly, to achieve excellence in service, a clinical faculty member must be able to demonstrate that their work involves the application of their professional expertise, and that it has contributed exceptional outcomes which impact practice in their field. The work must demonstrate impact beyond individual clients/patients/recipients of service, by disseminating the findings to other practitioners in their discipline.

The campus P&T Handbook articulates that, to be used as the area of excellence for a promotion case for clinical faculty, the quality and impact of professional service “must be assessed as academic work characterized by the following:

command and application of relevant knowledge, skills, and technological expertise;
contributions to a body of knowledge;
imagination, creativity and innovation;
application of ethical standards;
achievement of intentional outcomes; and
evidence of impact.”

Candidates must also be able to demonstrate a sustained record of peer-reviewed and disseminated scholarship of service, at (at least) the local/regional level for promotion to Associate Clinical Professor, and (at least) the national level for promotion to Clinical Professor.

5.2.1 Satisfactory in Service for Clinical Faculty

To achieve satisfactory in service, clinical faculty must document and demonstrate contributions to university service in line with their department’s expectations, and disciplinary service which meets routine or required levels based on the department’s expectations.

5.3 Research/Creative Activity Criteria for Promotion

Scholarly investigation or creative work that directly supports or informs pedagogy or course development (sometimes called “teaching research”) may be considered scholarship of teaching and included in a promotion dossier. Similarly, scholarly investigation or creative work that directly supports or informs the research and professional goals of their discipline or of the university (sometimes called “service research”) may be considered scholarship of service and included in a promotion dossier. Documentation of these activities should be in the teaching or service section of the candidate’s promotion dossier, not in the research/creative activity section.