New Page Title

 

SECTION 1: SOLES General Information                                                              

University Calendar

All graduate and undergraduate academic calendars can be found on the University of San Diego’s website: http://www.sandiego.edu/academic-calendars/

For a full calendar of campus events please visit the University’s Campus Event’s page: http://www.sandiego.edu/events/

For SOLES Specific events please visit SOLES’ Event’s page:

http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/events/

SOLES Personnel

A SOLES employee directory, which includes contact and biographical information, can be found on the SOLES’ webpage here: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/directory/.   A university-wide directory can be accessed for all USD employees and students through the university’s webpage: http://www.sandiego.edu/directory/

Faculty Areas of Interests

Department chairs are available to help part-time instructors identify faculty who can serve as lead course instructors and primary points of contact for academic questions. The following list provides an introduction to the areas of expertise among faculty.

 

FACULTY

DEPARTMENT

Viviana Alexandrowicz

Learning and Teaching

 

Bilingual and second language learning, service learning, and specially designed academic instruction in English

Sandy Buczynski

Learning and Teaching

 

STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, & math) education, curriculum design, mobile learning technology, action research, and science teacher preparation

Wendell Callahan

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Community-based interventions to promote wellness and mental health including strengths-based approaches to support positive mental health outcomes of parents and families of K-12 students impacted by homeless in the metro San Diego area.
Educationally-related Mental Health Services (ERMHS) for incarcerated youth with disabilities including the design, implementation, supervision and evaluation of school-based mental health services for incarcerated students with disabilities in San Diego County Juvenile Hall.
Multi-tiered System of Supports (MTSS) including implementation and evaluation of multi-tiered services, interventions and supports for student wellness, positive family engagement and positive school climate in Catholic K-8 schools in the Barrio Logan, El Cerrito, City Heights, Encanto and Oak Park areas of San Diego.

Erika Cameron

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Developing school counseling curriculum and programs for minority students, development of a meta-cognitive skills curriculum for professional school counselors, improving student achievement using a comprehensive school counseling program, school counselor supervision, and play therapy

Paula A. Cordeiro

Leadership Studies

 

Educational administration, multicultural education, cross-cultural educational leadership, and internationalizing the curriculum

Laura Deitrick

Leadership Studies

 

Nonprofit management, including board governance and leadership, economics of the nonprofit sector, organizational behavior and change management, and program evaluation

Edward DeRoche

Leadership Studies, and Learning and Teaching

 

Educational administration, social studies education, and character education

Robert Donmoyer

Leadership Studies

 

Educational leadership, qualitative research methods, research utilization in policy/practice, curriculum theory & policy, and nonprofit and philanthropic leadership

Todd Edwards

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Integration of the biopsychosocial model and systems theory, chronic illness in the family, collaboration between family therapists and health care practitioners, and medical family therapy supervision

Ana Estrada

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy  

 

Process and outcome of child, couples and family therapy, family diversity and social justice, and training of child and family practitioner

James Fabionar

Learning and Teaching

 

Social and cultural foundations in education, history and social science education, youth civic and community engagement, race and pedagogy, and applied research for community and organizational change.

Fred Galloway

Leadership Studies

 

Higher educational policy, the economics of education, and quantitative research methodology and design

Ann Garland

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

Department Chair of Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Quality of public mental health care, training providers in evidence-based practices, and bridging research and practice

Cheryl Getz

Leadership Studies

 

Diversity in higher education administration, multicultural education, study of leadership and group relations, and college student development/social identity

Nedeljko Golubovic

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Addiction disorders, including the intersection between addiction and trauma, consequences of stigmatization and bias towards persons who are actively using substances or are in recovery, impact of substance use on attribution of blame and responsibility, and student-athlete issues related to severe injuries, substance use, and recovery

Zachary Green

Leadership Studies

 

Specialization in organizational leadership and consulting

Kristopher Hall

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Mental health stigma in military populations, counselors-in-training and multicultural skill development, and educational applications for relational-cultural theory

C. Bobbi Hansen

Learning and Teaching

 

Math and science education, curriculum development, and service learning

Nancy Hanssen

Learning and Teaching

 

Literacy, special education, community service learning, and international education

Peggy Hetherington

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Statistics and quantitative design, lifespan development, and cross-cultural competence

Lea Hubbard

Leadership Studies, and Learning and Teaching

Department Chair of Leadership Studies

 

Educational policy, underrepresented students and achievement, gender and education, and leadership and qualitative research methods

Rebekka Jez

Learning and Teaching

 

Inclusive practices in education supporting persons from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, with disabilities, from different socio-economic status, and those who have dealt with trauma at the local and international levels, supporting postsecondary transition of diverse learners and their families, professional growth opportunities for educators

Maya Kalyanpur

Learning and Teaching

Department Chair of Learning and Teaching

 

Intersection of culture and special/inclusive education, families of children with disabilities from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, international development and disability studies, and disability policy

Nick Ladany

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

Dean

 

Supervision, the working alliance, self-disclosures and nondisclosures, multicultural training, ethics, and social justice

Marcus Lam

Leadership Studies

 

Nonprofit financial capacity and sustainability, cost and capital structures; nonprofit health, human services, and housing organizations, innovations in organizational data analysis including use of spatial statistics, geographical information systems (GIS), and hierarchical linear modeling

Heather Lattimer

Learning and Teaching

 

Secondary literacy, teacher education and professional development, action research, international education, and transitions to higher education for first generation students

Florencia Lebensohn-Chialvo

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Identification of family processes involved in the maintenance of maladaptive health behaviors, systemic family theories and therapies, treatment development and implementation, therapist training and supervision

Helene Mandell

Learning and Teaching

 

Teacher performance assessment, field-based teacher education, early field experiences, student teaching models, accreditation and program review

Ian Martin

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Collaborative school level projects focused on intervention results and/or programmatic outcomes, school counseling programs, program evaluation, leadership and policy, and state and national level research on school counseling

Michele McConnell

Learning and Teaching

 

Multicultural teacher education, critical literacy, digital literacy, technology in education, teacher preparation, assessment, and accreditation

Sarina Molina

Learning and Teaching

 

TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages), TEIL (Teaching English as an International Language), TESOL teacher development, and providing educational opportunities to rural communities in developing countries

Terri Monroe

Leadership Studies

 

Leadership theory, canon law, organizational diagnosis and strategies for a diverse society, and practice of authority in high commitment organizations

Afsaneh Nahavandi

Leadership Studies

 

Cross-cultural leadership, ethics, and teams

Christopher Newman

Leadership Studies

 

Outcomes, inequities, and undergraduate student experiences in STEM education, college readiness and pathways into post-secondary education, higher education policy, and race, gender, and class in higher education

JoEllen Patterson

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Family functioning and physical health, health care reform, and mental family therapy training

Reyes Quezada

Learning and Teaching

 

Models of cultural proficiency in professional education programs, bilingual instructional strategies, home-school, community partnerships, adventure based counseling, recruitment, and retention of faculty of color

Lonnie Rowell

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Program development and evaluation in school counseling, men’s issues in counseling and therapy, international collaboration, and cooperation in educational reform

Hans Peter Schmitz

Leadership Studies

 

Specializations in nonprofit and philanthropic leadership and transnational NGOs

Joi Spencer

Learning and Teaching

Associate Dean

 

Access to rigorous mathematics for African American students, developing mathematical understanding in urban school students, cognitive and socio-cultural approaches to teaching mathematics, and the racialized nature of mathematics learning and teaching

Suzanne Stolz

Learning and Teaching

 

Disability studies, universal design for learning, inclusive education, curriculum design, school culture, and online instruction

Teresa VanHorn

Leadership Studies

 

Experiential education, mentoring, online projects, project-based learning and service learning

Lee Williams

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Premarital counseling, interchurch couples, and family therapy training

Sue Zgliczynski

Counseling & Marital and Family Therapy

 

Statistics and quantitative design, lifespan development, and cross-cultural competence

  For complete biography information, please visit: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/directory/.

Professional Education Unit

The Professional Education Unit within the School of Leadership and Education Sciences is a learning community collaboratively engaged in the pursuit of professional competence. It is comprised of the Learning and Teaching Department, the School Counseling Specialization, and the Educational Leadership Development Academy (ELDA). Faculty in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences Professional Education Unit are committed to the pursuit of truth, the attainment of academic excellence, and the advancement of knowledge, as they prepare educational leaders. Candidates in these programs seek licensure and certification in their areas of expertise.  They demonstrate their capabilities as collaborators, agents of change, and leaders who positively impact the communities they serve.

Professional Education Unit – Expected Outcomes

  1. Candidates place value in academic excellence, as demonstrated through their persistence and by following through on commitments.
  2. Candidates demonstrate through verbal and non-verbal observable behavior, the belief that all individuals can learn and succeed.
  3. Candidates place value in self-reflection, as evidenced by active engagement in reflective activities or critical analysis of one's practice.
  4. Candidate place value in critical inquiry, as demonstrated by the use of higher order thinking skills applied to a wide array of investigative pursuits.
  5. Candidates demonstrate community values, as evidence by the use of theory and practice to effectively collaborate with students, family members, community members, and colleagues.
  6. Candidates demonstrate belief in service, as evidence by engagement in professional and community related service activities.
  7. Candidates place value in diversity, as evidenced by interactions with or decisions made relating to students, family members, community members, and colleagues.
  8. Candidates advocate for social justice, as evidenced by verbal or non-verbal observable behavior.
  9. Candidates adhere to the professional code of ethics for their field, as evidenced by verbal or non-verbal observable behavior.
  10. Candidates apply fairness in decision-making to meet the educational needs of all students in a caring, non-discriminatory, and equitable manner, as evidenced in observable behavior of the candidate.

Center for Educational Excellence

Through the Center for Educational Excellence (CEE) the university offers a variety of professional development opportunities aimed at improving teaching for part-time and full-time faculty.  Please visit their website (www.sandiego.edu/cee) in order to see what programs are offered each semester. CEE is often seeking faculty to deliver workshops.  If you are interested in doing so, please contact the CEE Director, Dr. Sandra Sgoutas-Emch, at ext. 4005.  The Center for Educational Excellence is located in Camino, 1F.



SOLES 2017-2018 Organizational Chart

 

copley

SOLES Abbreviated Strategic Plan 2016-2018

Mission

The mission of SOLES is to engage with students and our communities to continuously learn through inquiry and practice that supports social justice and effects meaningful change in our diverse society.

Vision

We shape the future by providing inclusive education as the foundation of social justice and the means to enhance human dignity and improve the quality of life.

Core Values

Multiculturalism and Social Justice: We believe in developing leaders, educators, counselors, and therapists who will advocate for equity and inclusion in the professional settings in which they serve. We believe in challenging all forms of discrimination, including race, class, gender, disability, sexual orientation, religion, in our local, national, and global community and in working as change agents to undermine oppression.

Excellence in Teaching: We are committed to excellence in educating our students in our graduate and undergraduate programs. SOLES faculty provide innovative and responsive instruction, meaningful practical learning with opportunities for critical thinking, and high quality mentoring for all our students. We strive to graduate students who will be exemplary representatives of SOLES and leaders in their professions.

Care for the Whole Person: Consistent with the USD Way statement, as a community, we pledge to respect the value and human dignity of each and every person. We are committed to treating everyone with courtesy and compassion so that they feel valued, cared for and respected. Our actions are grounded in our Catholic tradition of social justice and love for our community.

Community Engagement: We are committed to engaging with community partners at local, national, and global levels to build and sustain teaching, scholarship, and service opportunities for our faculty, students, and staff. Community engagement includes pursuit of mutually-rewarding partnerships with community leaders, scholars, educators, and service providers. Such partnerships are essential for relevant and high quality practice training for our students, applied research opportunities, and fulfillment of our mission to serve.

Excellence in Scholarship: We are committed to contributing to knowledge generation in our fields through creative and rigorous scholarship. Our strengths are in applied research grounded in, and contributing to counseling and therapy, education, and leadership. We also seek to be effective translators of emerging scientific developments into practice through our scholarship and teaching.

Strategic Priorities

  1. Expand SOLES’ Commitment to Multiculturalism and Social Justice
  2. Strengthen, Develop, and Grow Academic Programs in SOLES
  3. Increase SOLES’ Engagement with K-12 Catholic, Public and Charter/Community-Based Schools
  4. Enhance SOLES’ International and Local Presence

 



SECTION 2: Office and University Information

 

Audio/ Visual Equipment and Media Center

Requests for A/V equipment owned by SOLES can be addressed to:

WILLIAM HOAGLAND

Audio Visual Technician and Support Specialist

MRH 105, (619) 260-7576,  whoagland@sandiego.edu

SOLES has 13 handheld video recorders, 2 portable LCD projectors, and 3 portable projection screens available to staff and faculty for check-out.

Instructional Media Services (IMS)

http://www.sandiego.edu/its/resources/media/

The University of San Diego provides a wide variety of media services and support to faculty, staff, students, the campus, and the community through the Instructional Media Services group. Some of the services provided by IMS include: production of video tapes, digitization of video for Internet or intranet use, creation of video for CD/DVDs, documentation of events and lectures, and provides assistance to students. In addition to video production, we provide print and non-print graphic design services.

Online Tutorials

http://www.sandiego.edu/its/resources/media/tutorials.php

Requests for audio-visual equipment not owned by SOLES can be made through your program’s administrative assistant, or directly to the Media Center (260-4567).

Media Center

http://www.sandiego.edu/its/resources/media/

Phone: 619-260-4567

Location: Maher 186 (Basement – East Wing) Hours:

Fall & Spring: Monday – Thursday: 8am – 7pm, Friday 8am - 6pm

 Intersession & Summer: Monday – Friday: 8am – 5pm

Equipment Inventory

https://www.sandiego.edu/its/services/digital-media/pricing-guide.php#Academic

Copley Library Reserves

Contact:

Lisa Burgert, Reference Librarian

(619) 260-4695, lburgert@sandiego.edu

 

The SOLES library liaison is available to provide library instruction, consultations, reference assistance, purchase materials, and more.

 

Hours

  • Copley Library is open 7 days a week.

Library Catalog

Online Databases

  • Copley Library provides access to over 150 online databases with access to abstracts, full-text articles, news articles, videos, dissertations, book chapters, and more
  • Log in with your MySanDiego user name and password.

Reference Assistance

  • Librarians are available to help you and your students in person, by chat, text-message (619) 727-6652, email, phone (619) 260-4765, and by appointment. http://libanswers.sandiego.edu/

Reserves

  • Requests are processed on a first-come, first-served basis. You are encouraged to submit requests at least two weeks before the beginning of the semester.
  • Questions? Contact Leslie Hovland, Interlibrary Loan and Reserves Assistant, reserves@sandiego.edu or (619) 260-5973.

Interlibrary Loan

  • If Copley Library does not have the book or video you need they will able obtain copies from other institutions.
  • Circuit
    • Borrow material from SDSU, UCSD, CSU San Marcos, San Diego County, and San Diego Public libraries. Complete the online request form or visit the academic libraries in person with your USD ID card.
  • ILLiad
    • Copley Library will request books not available from Copley or Circuit from other institutions.

Questions? Contact Alexander Moran, Head of Interlibrary Loan at moran1@sandiego.edu or (619) 260-2364.

 

Emergency Procedures

Major Telephone System Failure

In the event of a natural disaster or other event that results in a major telephone system failure you may use one of the two lines listed below:

619-294-7654 or 619-297-9044

These lines operate independently of the campus telephone system and are permanent outside lines that are part of the University’s emergency communications system.

Accident Reporting

Required by the University of San Diego:

The University of San Diego strives to provide a safe and secure working environment for all employees. However, when a work related injury or illness occurs (i.e. injuries and illnesses that arise out of, or are incurred in the course of job related activities on behalf of the University), the University shall provide appropriate medical care and treatment to the injured worker through its Workers’ Compensation program.

 

REPORT IMMEDIATELY ALL EMPLOYEE AND STUDENT WORK RELATED ACCIDENTS AND ILLNESSES, REGARDLESS OF SEVERITY, TO:

PUBLIC SAFETY

(619) 260-2222 (Emergency) -OR- (619) 260-7777 (Non-Emergency)

HUMAN RESOURCES

(619) 260-7677

The Department of Public Safety will:

Provide immediate first aid and/or offer transport to the

  • appropriate medical provider, dependent upon the severity of the injury.
  • Complete the Safety/Security injury report.  Copy will go to Human Resources.
  • Provide the victim’s supervisor with a supervisor’s injury report (Supervisor’s Report of Work Injury), which is to be completed by the supervisor and promptly returned with all copies to Human Resources.

THE ABOVE TWO REPORTS ARE THE ONLY AUTHORIZED REPORTS FOR JOB RELATED ACCIDENTS OR ILLNESSES.

Supervisor’s Responsibilities:

  • Contact Public Safety immediately when an on-the-job accident occurs.
  • Complete and return the Supervisor’s Report of Injury to Human Resources immediately.
  • All questions should be answered in full.
  • All time lost due to an on-the-job accident must be reported to Human Resources immediately.
  • Be observant of potential accident facilitators in your area.  Correct where possible and communicate to employees the proper method of protection and use.

Accidents Involving Students and Visitors:

The University needs your cooperation in order to keep USD a safe place. It is very important to report accidents and injuries immediately to Public Safety so that they can promptly investigate the facts and document the circumstances.

A student or visitor who has had an accident and needs emergency medical attention and/or requires other assistance should call the Public Safety emergency number at ext. 2222. For non- emergencies, call ext. 7777. The responding officer will assess the situation, coordinate assistance and write a report.

It is important to note that USD does not provide accident or medical insurance coverage for students or visitors. Students not covered by their family’s medical or property insurance are strongly encouraged to purchase individual policies. Information regarding medical insurance available for student purchase can be obtained from Student Affairs.  

For more information on risk management please see USD’s policy for Employee Work Related Injuries and Illnesses https://www.sandiego.edu/hr/documents/WorkRelatedInjuriesIllnesses.pdf

Required by OSHA:

A report on all job related accidents and illnesses that require medical treatment (other than first aid) administered by a physician or by registered professional personnel under the standing orders of a physician is required by OSHA.  Medical treatment does not include first aid treatment (one-time treatment and subsequent observation of minor scratches, cuts, burns, splinters, and so forth, which do not ordinarily require medical care) even though provided by a physician or registered professional personnel.

Consequences if above reports are not made or injuries not treated:

Victim’s Supervisor:

  • Possibly subject to criminal prosecution by OSHA
  • Possibly subject to liability lawsuit by victim

Department Head:

  • Possibly subject to criminal prosecution by OSHA
  • Possibly subject to liability lawsuit by victim

University:

  • Possibly subject to criminal prosecution by OSHA
  • Possibly subject to liability lawsuit by victim

Reporting Procedure by Human Resources:

  • Report to Worker’s Compensation insurance carrier injuries and illnesses involving medical expense.
  • Report to Worker’s Compensation insurance carrier all time lost by employee and/or student workers related to an on-the-job accident.
  • Report serious injuries and fatalities by telephone or telegraph to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health.
  • Post annual summary of occupational injuries and illnesses in a place where notices to employees are customarily posted.  The report shall be posted no later than February 1st and remain in place until March 1st.

Any Questions or Problems, call:

Human Resources 619-260-4594 and/or Public Safety 619-260-7777

Counseling Services

The University of San Diego Counseling Center (USDCC) is located in Serra Hall, Room 300. During the fall and spring semesters, the hours of operation are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and Wednesdays until 6:00 p.m. The telephone number is (619) 260-4655.

If a serious concern arises after hours, there is an “on call” psychologist, who can be reached by calling public safety at ext. 2222 on campus or 619-260-2222 from off campus.  They will page the on-call psychologist.

 

If you are concerned about the well being of a student, colleague or yourself please consult with the Counseling Center.  Depending on needs and counselor availability, recommendations may include services provided by USDCC or may involve services provided by other professionals. USDCC services may include individual sessions of personal/social counseling provided by the Counseling Center's staff at no cost and/or group counseling sessions. Recommendations may also involve referrals to professionals such as psychiatrists, physicians, drug/alcohol abuse specialists, nutritionists, and attorneys. The USDCC also stresses the importance of preventive educational interventions. Non-traditional services reach a larger number of students and help maintain a campus climate that supports the optimal functioning of a diverse student population.

 

Workshops, trainings, and seminars are provided throughout the year, as are consultations to parents and campus professionals on mental health issues. The USDCC also provides a self-help library including over 300 titles on issues such as time management, self-esteem, gender issues, multicultural awareness, stress etc. Support groups have addressed topics such as body image/eating concerns, academic concerns, substance abuse, freshman adjustment and relationship issues. Academic consultation is available to all students desiring to improve or enhance their performance. The psychological staff provides a variety of assessments and recommendations, including academic counseling, screenings for possible learning (through Disability Services), and personal counseling. Test-taking approaches, time management skills, stress management and other coping skills are available as well.  More information on the services offered by USDCC is available at https://www.sandiego.edu/usdcc/

Office Procedures

Email List Servs

Each program area has an e-mail mailing list.  Additionally, some programs have their own list-serves.  If you want to be included, please tell your Program Assistant, Program Director, or Department Chair.  If you would like to be included in the SOLES Newsletter sent to all faculty and staff by the Dean’s Office, please submit your information to the Dean’s Executive Assistant.  In addition, SOLES maintains a listserv for part-time instructors to which your e-mail address will be added by the Dean’s office.  This list is maintained to notify part-time instructors of important information.

Email Signature Template

It is strongly encouraged that all SOLES employees utilize the university’s email signature template (shown below).

 

DIEGO TORERO (NAME: ALL CAPS, ARIAL, 12 POINT)

Official Mascot (Title: Arial Italic, 12 point)

On Campus Address, Room 123 (Bldg/Room number: Arial, 12 point)

5998 Alcalá Park

San Diego, CA 92110-2492

Phone: (619) 260-4600

diego@sandiego.edu

www.sandiego.edu

Physical Mail

All full-time employees are eligible for an individual mailbox in the SOLES mailroom. Additionally, a designated department mailbox is located in the faculty lounge in 223A for all part-time faculty.  If you would like your own box, there are a limited number that can be requested on a first-come, first-serve basis.  Please see your program assistant for details. Please be sure to check this box regularly.  Boxes will be emptied at the end of every month.  If you need a student to drop paperwork off for you, please have him/her give it to your program assistant.  They will then place the item in your box.  Please DO NOT instruct students to place items directly in your mailboxes.  Students should not have access to other students’ work and information nor to the staff/faculty mailroom.

Examination of a Textbook/Desk Copies

In order to obtain an examination or desk copy of a textbook you must contact the textbook publisher.  Examination copies must be returned within the publisher’s stated time frame, if not adopted for the course.  Desk copies may be obtained free of charge if you have already adopted the textbook for your course.  Note:  You will not be reimbursed for any textbook purchases without pre-approval from the department or program chair.  For more information please contact the department’s assistant.

Ordering Textbooks

The Higher Education Opportunity Act requires USD to disclose information about textbooks and supplemental materials to students at the time they register for classes. Thus in order to comply with the law, USD faculty must turn in their textbook and supplemental material orders by the first day of pre-registration for that term. Additionally, it is beneficial to USD students for faculty members to turn their orders in early. This allows the bookstore to explore the option of rental textbooks for a class (which is often the cheapest possible option for the students) and to pay students more for their textbooks at book buy-back time if the textbook is being used again the following term. It also allows students time to shop around for the best prices.

The Torero Store sends textbook requisition forms to professors and/or the department prior to the ordering deadline. You can also place a textbook order by sending an email with the pertinent information to textbook@sandiego.edu.If you would like to review a desk copy of a textbook, submit your request on the publisher’s web site.  

 

Course Packs: In accordance with federal law, copyright permission must be obtained for copyrighted citation(s) included in course packs. The process involves a lot of legwork. Permissions are held either by publishers or individual authors, and royalties generally must be paid to the rights holder. It is essential that course packs are requested at the same time that textbook orders are requested. This leaves enough time to handle any copyright-related obstacles that arise and helps to have course packs ready for students.

Parking Permits & Information

For a complete list of USD parking rules and regulations, including information about permits and fee schedules, please visit the Parking Services website, http://www.sandiego.edu/parking.  Under the “parking Information” tab, click on the link for the Rules & Regulations document (PDF) version to view the policies.

Photocopies

Faculty can perform smaller copying jobs on the School of Leadership and Education Sciences photocopiers, located on the premises.  If you need larger quantities, please submit materials to your executive assistant along with a completed Print Shop requisition form (found on the following website http://www.sandiego.edu/copy/documents/copy_requisition.pdf). You may also submit the form and the materials to be copied via email (send to:  usdcopy@gmail.com) Simple orders should take less than a week.  Complicated orders (i.e., special paper or binding requests) should take less than two weeks.  The USD Print Shop also provides free delivery on campus for completed orders.  Please note that it may take two days to process hand-delivered Print Shop requests.  Remember that your respective executive assistant provides administrative support to several of your colleagues; therefore, allow appropriate time for processing these requests.

 

Think Green Before You Print!

  1. Use both sides of the paper
  2. Go digital - read, send and store documents digitally
  3. Be selective about what you print
  4. Know how long the document is before you print
  5. Use narrow margins

Supplies

Please ask your executive assistant for any supplies you need.  Keep in mind that supplies are ordered with cost efficiency in mind.  The university receives discount pricing through contracts with specific vendors, utilizing a preferred vendor system with which great discounts are given for many basic office supplies.  It is for this reason that SOLES does not reimburse for supplies purchased with personal funds.

Telephone Calls

Personal long-distance calls should not be made on office telephones except in emergency circumstances.  If any such calls are made, you will be asked to reimburse the budget when the charge comes in.

For budgetary reasons, long-distance telephone calls costs or costs reflecting an unusual expense will be monitored.  Faculty should be prepared, if asked, to justify the expense.

Payment Card Transactions  

All SOLES Credit Card processing is fully outsourced to a third party service provider (TPSP) and SOLES personnel does not receive, store, process or transmit any cardholder data on the premises.  If a customer wishes to pay in person, we accept cash or checks. SOLES personnel may direct a customer to Any Computer with Internet Access to process a credit card payment.  SOLES personnel may NOT direct a customer to a specific USD computer terminal to process a credit card payment.

Faculty Office Hours

Full-time faculty members are expected to schedule 5 office hours per week.  Please post your office hours’ schedule on your door and in your course syllabi.  Specific hours must be listed; “by appointment” is not sufficient.  Faculty teaching online courses are expected to be available to students during office hours through the web portal or by phone.

 

Typically, part-time faculty list about one hour of office hours per week per course.  Specific hours must be listed; “by appointment” is not sufficient.  Office hours should be scheduled to accommodate students.  Part-time faculty should work with department chairs and program assistants to identify on campus locations for office hours. The Faculty Directory Information form must be completed prior to the first week of classes each semester. Please return it to your program administrative assistant.

Out of Town Procedures

During the semester, all efforts should be made to avoid being out of town during regularly scheduled course meetings and office hours.  If faculty have circumstances that require you to be out of town during normal office or class hours, you must complete an “Out of Office” form prior to departure (located at http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/faculty-and-staff/handbooks-policies-forms.php) and give it to the program administrative assistant who will then e-mail this information to staff and administrators as appropriate. Faculty are expected to schedule make-up office hours, online course meetings, and/or alternative learning experiences to make up for any time missed while out-of-town.

Procedures for mail when faculty are on sabbatical or other extended leaves of absence:

In order to ensure that items such as student paperwork or departmental mail are addressed in an appropriate and timely manner, when a faculty member is out of the office for an extended period of time, the executive assistants will monitor the mail.  If an item comes in that looks like it may need immediate attention, the assistant will bring the item to the department chair or program director.  The Director/Chair will determine whether the item should be opened or if it can wait until the faculty member returns. In order to keep the mailboxes from overfilling, executive assistants will periodically move the non-urgent items to the faculty member’s office.

Outside Employment

Each full-time faculty member must file a report via the Outside Employment Form for the year (even if there is none). This form will be collected by the Dean, Associate Dean, or Department Chair at the time of collecting Faculty Planning Reports.  Outside employment should not interfere with a faculty member’s devoting a full work week to university business.

Room Scheduling

Schedule Requests:

The School of Leadership and Education Sciences building, Mother Rosalie Hill Hall is available for scheduling classes, events, meetings, and workshops.  Academic course scheduling is handled through our academic scheduling process. Please contact your department for specific questions.

 

 

For more information, please contact the Event Scheduler at mrhevents@sandiego.edu.

Space and Capacity:

The following is a table of rooms located in the MRH building. The table provides information regarding the capacity and square footage of each room.

Space Name

Formal Name

Capacity

Limit

Square

Footage

MRH -107

MRH 107 - Seminar Room

12

375.0

 MRH -127

MRH 127 - Methods and Video Conferencing

28

1,307.0

MRH -131

MRH 131 - Classroom

28

706.0

MRH -133

MRH 133 - Classroom

28

705.0

MRH -135

MRH 135 - Classroom

24

755.0

MRH -137

MRH 137 - Seminar Room

16

419.0

MRH -139

MRH 139 - Seminar Room

16

432.0

MRH -141

MRH  141 - Seminar Room

16

402.0

MRH -145

MRH 145 - Classroom

24

601.0

MRH -147

MRH 147 - Seminar Room

12

392.0

MRH -201

MRH  201 - Classroom

24

733.0

MRH -207

MRH 207 - Seminar Room

10

239.0

MRH -211

MRH 211 - Classroom

30

768.0

 MRH -216

MRH 216 – Classroom Lab (walk-in)

32

973.0

MRH -214

MRH 214 - Classroom Lab

24

760.0

MRH -116

MRH 116 –Auditorium

188

3,485.0

 MRH -102

MRH 102 – Executive Classroom

60

2,042.0

In addition, the following areas are available for banquets and receptions.

Other Available Space:

Space / Formal Name

Space Capacity

Sit Down Meal*

Space Capacity

Reception

Square

Footage

Sala, Bishop Buddy

70

115

1,400

West Plaza

300

500

6,000

Parkman Plaza

100

165

2,000

Inner Courtyard

65-75

120

1,690

Hilton Loggia

N/A

85

1,077

*For banquets furniture rental is required

Security

Report any suspicious activity in the building to Security (7777) immediately, especially when the University is not in session.  If you have an emergency, dial 2222.  Remember you must dial the (619) 260 – xxxx prefix prior to these extensions if calling from a non-campus line. For your personal safety, do not confront suspicious individuals, or try to resolve suspicious activity on your own.  

Keep all equipment of value locked up when not in use. Do not give keys to your office or other rooms assigned to you to unauthorized persons. Persons who are authorized to have keys include faculty members, certain graduate employees, and program assistants.

SOLES Website Responsibilities

Revised:  August 12, 2016

Maintainers: Reviews the content and information for each assigned section and ensures information is accurate and up-to-date; makes all edits and changes to the website. Each academic department, center and office should have a person designated as website maintainer.

Content Person(s):  Reviews the content and information for each assigned section and ensures information is accurate and up-to-date; provides changes and updates to the maintainers(s).

Publishers: Assistant Dean, Associate Director for Marketing and Communication, Web Developer

Support Staff

Work Related to Faculty Scholarship

For faculty members who are working on publications or other areas of scholarship, some support can be offered to you. The executive assistants are available to you for work that is related to your outside publications. However, there are limits to what extent they can offer their help. Please use the following as guidelines:

  • Work directly with the executive assistant that is assigned to your area.
  • Be reasonable and not excessive.
  • Provide advance notice - at least one week in advance of any large quantities of copying  (20+) or typing (10+).
  • In the case of copying, staff is instructed to send anything that is considered a large quantity of copying to the Print Shop. Therefore, advance notice is essential.

If you need something mailed via Next Day Mail or Federal Express, make sure to check in with the staff ahead of time. Given sufficient notification, staff will try to find a work-study student who can walk your mail to the campus mail drop off location.  If a student employee is not available, and you are not able to make the deadline, you may drop it of at Federal Express personally and seek reimbursement through the university.

SECTION 3: General Policies and Procedures

 

American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Statement on Professional Ethics

http://www.aaup.org/report/statement-professional-ethics

The statement which follows, a revision of a statement originally adopted in 1966, was approved by the Association’s Committee on Professional Ethics, adopted by the Association’s Council in June 1987, and endorsed by the Seventy-third Annual Meeting.

 

INTRODUCTION

 

From its inception, the American Association of University Professors has recognized that membership in the academic profession carries with it special responsibilities.  The Association has consistently affirmed these responsibilities in major policy statements, providing guidance to professors in such matters as their utterances as citizens, the exercise of their responsibilities to students and colleagues, and their conduct when resigning from an institution or when undertaking sponsored research.  The Statement on Professional Ethics that follows sets forth those general standards that serve as a reminder of the variety of responsibilities assumed by all members of the profession.

In the enforcement of ethical standards, the academic profession differs from those of law and medicine, whose associations act to ensure the integrity of members engaged in private practice.  In the academic profession the individual institution of higher learning provides this assurance and so should normally handle questions concerning propriety of conduct within its own framework by reference to a faculty group.  The Association supports such local action and stands ready, through the general secretary and the Committee on Professional Ethics, to counsel with members of the academic community concerning questions of professional ethics and to inquire into complaints when local consideration is impossible or inappropriate.  If the alleged offense is deemed sufficiently serious to raise the possibility of adverse action, the procedures should be in accordance with the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, the 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings, or the applicable provisions of the Association’s Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

 

THE STATEMENT

  1. Professors, guided by a deep conviction of the worth and dignity of the advancement of knowledge, 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 professors 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 professors may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously hamper or compromise their freedom of inquiry.

 

  1. As teachers, professors encourage the free pursuit of learning in their students.  They hold before them the best scholarly and ethical standards of their discipline. Professors demonstrate respect for students as individuals and adhere to their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors.  Professors make every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to ensure that their evaluations of students reflect each student’s true merit.  They respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student.  They avoid any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students.  They acknowledge significant academic or scholarly assistance from them. They protect their academic freedom.

 

  1. As colleagues, professors have obligations that derive from common membership in the community of scholars.  Professors do not discriminate against or harass colleagues.  They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates.  In the exchange of criticism and ideas professors show due respect for the opinions of others. Professors acknowledge academic debt and strive to be objective in their professional judgment of colleagues.  Professors accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution.

 

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

 

  1. As members of their community, professors have the rights and obligations of other citizens.  Professors measure the urgency of these obligations in the light of their responsibilities to their subject, to their students, to their profession, and to their institution.  When they speak or act as private persons, they avoid creating the impression of speaking or acting 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.

Annual Faculty Accomplishment and Planning Report

Directions for Completing the Annual Faculty Accomplishment and Planning Report:

The Annual Faculty Accomplishment and Planning Report is a tool used to assess faculty members’ progress toward their objectives for the calendar year in the areas of Teaching, Research, and Service. This form can be accessed through the SOLES website: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/faculty-and-staff/handbooks-policies-forms.php#policies

 

The form is due each February. Upon its submission, each faculty member will meet with the Dean, Associate Dean or Department Chair individually to review progress and accomplishments from the past year and to plan goals for the subsequent year.  The entire document should be completed and submitted at least one day prior to the individual meeting.  For non-tenured faculty, this document could assist you as you organize and update your Promotion and Tenure file.

 

A digital copy of the planning and evaluation document should be sent to the Dean’s assistant at the end of each year so they can be stored in a central location (the Dean’s Office).

Annual Program Assessment

All programs in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences complete an annual assessment cycle by using faculty determined methods to measure program and student learning outcomes. Facilitated by the Assistant Dean of Accreditation & Assessment, every program establishes and publishes program/student learning outcomes, outlined in a curriculum map that shows appropriate points in the program for assessing candidate development. Assessment plans and findings are collected and stored, with the aid of the SOLES Accreditation & Assessment Office, using the University’s Assessment Management System – TRAC DAT. Annual  assessment reports are posted to the SOLES’ Sharepoint site for faculty, staff, and administrators to access when reviewing pedagogy, curriculum, or  assessment processes.

Search & Appointment Policies for Tenure-Track Faculty

The goal of the School of Leadership and Education Sciences is to recruit and select highly qualified faculty committed to the mission of the University. Candidates for appointment will display an understanding of the central role of the School of Leadership and Education Sciences at USD and an appreciation of the teacher/scholar model. SOLES is committed to University policies regarding equal opportunity and commitment to diversity in its hiring practices. The hiring of faculty in SOLES encompasses a series of phases. For additional guidance and detailed steps, please consult the SOLES Faculty Recruitment Handbook.

 

Before commencing the search, be sure to familiarize yourself with USD and SOLES recruitment and appointment policies. The provost’s policies including the “Faculty Recruitment and Retention Toolkit” can be accessed at http://www.sandiego.edu/provost/docs-forms/index.php.

Appointment, Reappointment, Rank, and Tenure Policy

School of Leadership and Education Sciences

University of San Diego

Approved by SOLES Faculty May 16, 2007

 

  1. THE FACULTY'S ROLE IN RANK AND TENURE DECISIONS
  2. The University of San Diego maintains the quality of its faculty through objective and thorough appraisal by competent faculty members of each candidate for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. The Rank and Tenure Committee of each school or college is given primary responsibility for this appraisal. Each Committee will include the school or college Dean as a voting member. The Committee's functions include the recognition and encouragement of each candidate's achievements (USD, 4.2.1, p.1).
  3. THE COMMITTEE'S RESPONSIBILITIES

 .               STRICT CONFIDENTIALITY is essential to the Committee's deliberations and recommendations. Committee members, and others with whom it is essential for the Committee to consult, must maintain confidentiality in all written and oral communications concerning the appraisal of candidates (USD, 4.2.2, p.2).

  1. The Committee should strive for promptness and dispatch in the performance of its duties, consistent with judicious and thorough consideration of each case (USD, 4.2.2, p.2).
  2. The Committee shall assess the evidence provided to it. If in the Committee's judgment the evidence is insufficient to permit it to make a clear recommendation to the President, the Committee's chair will request amplification from the candidate or from the recommending Department Chair or Dean (USD, 4.2.2, p.2).
  3. Recommendations of the Committee form the basis of action by the President. The Committee's recommendation will include a statement of all significant evidence, favorable and unfavorable. Favorable recommendations require a two-thirds positive vote of Committee members present at the meeting when the vote is taken, with the additional requirement that the favorable votes constitute at least a simple majority of the possible votes of the total Committee membership (USD, 4.2.2, p.2).
  4. The Committee will report its vote to the President. If its decision is not unanimous, the Committee's report may include separate concurring or dissenting opinions (USD, 4.2.2, p.3).
  5. After notification of the President’s decision, the Committee will send the candidate a copy of its recommendation and accompanying rationale (or summary of report) made to the President (USD, 4.2.2, p.3).
  6. In May, the outgoing ARRT Committee Chair will review USD and SOLES policy changes from the previous year and update the SOLES appointment, reappointment, tenure, and promotion document as needed (SOLES 5/16/07).
  7. The Chair of the ARRT Committee will ensure that minutes of ARRT Committee meetings are recorded, approved by the Committee with any corrections noted, and maintained in the Dean’s office (SOLES 5/16/07).
  8. The ARRT Committee will hold an annual meeting for tenure-track faculty members in order to review submission procedures and guidelines, and to answer any questions related to the ARRT review process (SOLES 5/5/10).

III.                  ARRT COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

 .               The ARRT committee shall be composed of six tenured SOLES faculty members representing each of the three departments, two at-large positions, and the SOLES Dean. Two elected, non-tenured faculty members will be present for policy meetings only. Tenured faculty representatives are elected to two-year staggered terms on the ARRT Committee. The Department of School, Family, and Mental Health Professions and two at-large representatives start their terms during academic years that begin in even-numbered years. The Leadership, and Learning and Teaching representatives start their terms in academic years that begin during odd-numbered years. Separate ballots will be used for electing each representative. Candidates for tenure and promotion are not eligible to serve on the committee in a year they file for tenure and/or promotion (SOLES 10/3/2000, SOLES 4/4/2012).

  1. The ARRT Committee for the following academic year will be elected at the May SOLES faculty meeting. At that time, the September ARRT meeting will be scheduled (SOLES 3/10/04).
  2. The Chair of the ARRT Committee will be elected by the members of the Committee at the May SOLES meeting. The Dean may not serve as Chair of the ARRT Committee (SOLES 3/10/04).
  3. ELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTION

 .               In general, an Assistant Professor is eligible for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor no sooner than the tenure decision year. With limited exceptions, the rank of Associate Professor is conferred only upon faculty members who have earned the terminal degree in their field. Faculty hired before September, 1997, may elect to be considered for promotion pursuant to the version of this paragraph in effect in the rules approved by the Board of Trustees (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).

  1. In general, an Associate Professor is eligible for promotion to the rank of Professor after a minimum of five years of full-time service as Associate Professor, at least two years of which are spent at the University. The rank of Professor requires that significantly greater expertise and achievement be demonstrated by the faculty member and, with limited exceptions, is conferred only upon faculty who have earned the terminal degree in their field (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).
  2. Exceptional performance or extraordinary conditions may warrant accelerated promotion (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).
  3. In an exceptional case the ARRT Committee may initiate a recommendation for promotion (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).
  4. A recommendation for promotion is based on positive evidence of professional performance and achievement. It is not justified by longevity or lack of negative indications. Therefore, promotion from one rank to another is not to be considered automatic (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).
  5. Petition for Review of Non-Promotion. Appeals from decisions not to promote are governed by "Appeals from ARRT Decisions", with the following restriction: Negative decisions regarding promotion will be reviewed on appeal only in exceptional cases, since the normal recourse is to reapply (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).
  6. ELIGIBILITY FOR TENURE

 .               Tenure is permanence of appointment until retirement. A grant of tenure affirms that the candidate has contributed to the University throughout his or her probationary period and is valued as a permanent member of the University community (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).

  1. Tenure must be granted after a probationary period of seven years of full-time service at the University. The faculty member shall be notified of the decision on tenure not later than the end of the sixth year of service (USD, 4.2.2, p.4).
  2. Up to three years of previous full-time service at another institution may be counted as part of the probationary period. The Dean will state the amount of service accepted as part of the probationary period in writing at the time of the initial appointment (USD, 4.2.2, p.5).
  3. Scholarly leave of absence without pay for one year or less will not count as part of the probationary period unless the individual and the institution agree in writing to an exception to this provision at the time the leave is granted (USD, 4.2.2, p.5).
  4. In all cases there will be at least two full (non-expedited) ARRT Committee reappointment reviews before the tenure review (SOLES, 3/10/04).
  5. REAPPOINTMENT AND TENURE REVIEW TIMELINE

Under the biennial system, ARRT reviews of non-tenured faculty take place as follows:

  1. Candidates not awarded prior years of service at another Institution or institutions:

Candidate Year

Term Year

Type of Review

Purpose

1

Fall

Expedited

2nd year reappointment

2

Fall

Full

3rd & 4th year reappointment

3

Fall

Expedited

5th year reappointment

4

Spring

Full

6th year reappointment

5

Fall

Expedited

7th year reappointment

6

Spring

Full

Tenure/Promotion

(Tenure begins at the start of the 8th year of service)

Candidates in their first, third, and fifth years of service follow an expedited review process. Instead of a complete file, candidates submit to the Dean, by December 1, a list of recent and current activities in teaching, scholarship, service, and support of the mission. The Dean attaches the list to a ballot that is sent to all tenure track faculty members. The faculty members vote either to reappoint the candidate or to have a full ARRT Committee review. Full reviews are triggered when voted for by one-third or more of the eligible tenure track faculty (not counting the candidate) (SOLES 10/1/2003).

 

    1. Candidates awarded one year of service at another institution or institutions.

Candidate Year

Term Year

Type of Review

Purpose

1

Fall

Expedited

2nd year reappointment

2

Fall

Full

3rd & 4th year reappointment

3

Spring

Full

5th year reappointment

4

Fall

Expedited

6th year reappointment

5

Spring

Full

Tenure/Promotion

(Tenure begins at the start of the 7th year of service)

 

    1. Candidates awarded two years of service at another institution or institutions:

Candidate Year

Term Year

Type of Review

Purpose

1

Fall

Expedited

2nd year reappointment

2

Fall

Full

3rd & 4th year reappointment

Candidate Year

Term Year

Type of Review

Purpose

3

Spring

Full

5th year reappointment

4

Spring

Full

Tenure/Promotion

(Tenure begins at the start of the 6th year of service)

 

    1. Candidates awarded three years of service at another institution or institutions:

Candidate Year

Term Year

Type of Review

Purpose

1

Spring

Full

2nd year reappointment

2

Spring

Full

3rd & 4th year reappointment

4

Spring

Full

Tenure/Promotion

(Tenure begins at the start of the 5th year of service)

  1. PROCEDURES TO TRIGGER FULL REAPPOINTMENT  REVIEW IN PLACE OF EXPEDITED REVIEW (SOLES 3/10/04)
  1. Full reviews for candidates in expedited review years can be initiated by any of the following methods:
  2. The candidate, by written request to the Dean.
  3. The ARRT Committee, through majority vote.
  4. The Dean, by written request to the ARRT Committee.
  5. Vote of one-third of the eligible tenure-track faculty in the SOLES (not counting the candidate).
  6. Within one week of the tenured faculty vote, candidates will receive a letter from the ARRT chair informing them of the overall outcome of the vote. At the request of the candidate, the ARRT chair will include the number of votes received for expedited and full review (SOLES 5/16/07).

VII.                  EXTERNAL LETTERS OF REVIEW OF A CANDIDATE’S SCHOLARSHIP (SOLES, 5/29/03 and 5/16/07) As part of the dossier for tenure and/or promotion to associate or full professor, a candidate must include written evaluations of scholarship from external reviewers. The sending of the formal external review letter and candidate documentation will be completed by October 1st. The external reviewers will be informed that the review letter must be received at least 2 weeks prior to the university date for submission of documentation for tenure and/or promotion. This date is usually in January.

 .               Criteria for selection of External Reviewers: In most cases external reviewers will be faculty in Institutions of Higher Education. All faculty recommended to serve as external reviewers of a candidate’s scholarship must be above the current rank of the faculty candidate. (SOLES 12/7/2011)

  1. These letters are to be written by individuals that have the scholarly achievement and/or demonstrated expertise as scholarship is defined in the SOLES Statement on Scholarship.
  2. Identification of Potential External Reviewers: The candidate will produce a list of 7 potential outside reviewers. Information about each potential external reviewer must include reviewer name, rank or position, and institutional affiliation and any special titles. The candidate must also include a rationale for recommending this individual and what relationship, if any, the candidate has with the reviewer. The list of potential external reviewers (along with contact information) must be submitted to the Dean by August 1st of the review year. The Dean will provide the ARRT Committee Chair with the list of external reviewers to be contacted. The ARRT Committee will review the Dean’s selections for approval at its first meeting in September. (SOLES 12/7/2011)
  3. Soliciting External Reviewers: The Dean will contact each potential external reviewer to ask if he or she would be willing to serve as a reviewer of the candidate’s scholarship. The potential external reviewer will be informed of the expectations of the evaluation review that is included in a letter addressed to the ARRT committee.
  4. Formal External Review Procedures: The Dean will provide each external reviewer with:
      1. The candidate’s Curriculum Vita.
      2. A representative sample of the candidate’s scholarship.
      3. A standard letter requesting commentary about a candidate’s scholarship.
      4. A copy of the criteria for reappointment, promotion and tenure, and the SOLES statement on scholarship.

The representative sample of the candidate’s scholarship will be supplied by the candidate. This will include a statement on their scholarship along with 3 to 4 samples of their scholarship. The candidate will provide the Dean’s office with an electronic version of the Curriculum Vita, scholarship statement, and scholarship samples (excluding books) so that all of the materials can be sent electronically to the external reviewers.  The Dean’s office will supply a paper copy of the materials to the external reviewer upon request. (SOLES 12/7/2011, SOLES 4/4/2012).

Each reviewer will address his or her response to the chair of the ARRT committee. The sending of the formal external review letter and candidate documentation will be completed by October 1st. The external reviewers will be informed that the review letter must be received at least 2 weeks prior to the university date for submission of documentation for tenure and/or promotion. This date is usually in January.

    1. Policies Related to External Letters of Review of Scholarship Solicited by the Dean:
      1. Candidates for tenure and promotion shall have samples of their work reviewed by at least three scholars solicited by the Dean from other institutions in the candidate’s field of expertise.
      2. Letters should be addressed and sent to the ARRT Committee Chair. The ARRT Chair will provide the Dean with a copy of each letter.      
      3. Letters are confidential and available only to members of USD who are part of the ARRT process.
  1. Policies Related to Optional Letters of Review of Scholarship Solicited by Candidates: Candidates may solicit non-confidential reviews in addition to those solicited by the Dean. Candidate-solicited reviews will be kept separately from reviews solicited by the Dean and be identified specifically as candidate-solicited for the ARRT Committee.
  1. PROCEDURES FOR REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE

 

  1. General Procedures:
      1. Prior to his or her appointment, each faculty member will have been given a copy of this Policy. Expectations and/or emphases not explicitly stated in this Policy (see Criteria for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion) will also have been brought to his or her attention in writing. These expectations and/or emphases should be brought to the attention of the Committee no later than the time the faculty member first becomes a candidate for review. Status with respect to rank and tenure is not altered by a faculty member’s transfer between departments or schools within the university (USD, 4.2.2, p.1).
      2. The process of evaluation for reappointment, promotion, or tenure is initiated and conducted by the relevant department or school [School of Leadership and Education Sciences] (USD, 4.2.2, p.1).
      3. The Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the President in all matters concerning reappointment, promotion, and tenure of faculty candidates  (USD, 4.2.2, p.1).
      4. The Dean will maintain a confidential archival file for all candidates evaluated by the ARRT Committee. After each review, copies of the ARRT Committee’s letter to the President, the letter from the Dean to the ARRT Committee, confidential faculty letters to the ARRT Committee, confidential external review letters, and the ARRT Committee’s letter to the candidate, will be placed in the candidate’s ARRT file by the Dean. The Dean is responsible for bringing each candidate’s archival file (if any) to the meeting at which he or she will be reviewed (SOLES. 3/10/04).
      5. The President grants reappointment and promotion to faculty members. After notification to the Board of Trustees, the President grants tenure to faculty members (USD, 4.2.2, p.1).
  1. Initial Steps
      1. Each Dean and/or Department Chair is required to establish written procedures for the preparation of candidates' files, including recommendations and relevant supporting data (USD, 4.2.2, p.2). Candidates should follow the written policies in preparing their materials for submission (SOLES, 5/16/07).
      2. At the beginning of the academic year, each [the] Dean [in cooperation with the ARRT Committee Chair] will prepare a list of names of faculty eligible for reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure [in SOLES] (USD, 4.2.2, p.2), SOLES parenthetical insertions, 5/16/07). Once approved by the ARRT Committee, the list will be distributed to all tenure track faculty by the October faculty meeting for review and correction, if necessary (SOLES 5/16/07).
      3. Any faculty member who wishes to be considered for early tenure or full professor will notify the dean in writing by May 31st of the academic year prior to the anticipated review (SOLES 2/3/10).
      4. Faculty members shall be given timely notice of when decisions affecting their reappointment, promotion, or tenure will be made, so that they will have adequate opportunity to prepare their file (USD, 4.2.2, p.2). The ARRT Committee Chair will send a letter by the end of September to each candidate notifying them of their current status and file due dates (SOLES 5/16/07).
      5. At a minimum, each candidate should provide a summary of course evaluations dating back to the previous promotion or date of hire (SOLES, 10/3/2000). The candidate should also include collegial evaluations of teaching that were conducted in the period since the last ARRT review. Collegial evaluation might take many forms, including peer observation of teaching, peer evaluation of course materials, evaluation of instructional contributions including the development of new courses and other program development activities, evaluation of student work artifacts, or other items (SOLES, 2/2/05).
      6. At a minimum, each applicant should submit all publications since the date of his/her promotion or date of hire (SOLES, 10/3/00). [note: To abide by the tenure and promotion page limit, candidates may place publications in a separate binder. However, separate binders will not be forwarded to the President].
      7. As part of the dossier for tenure and/or promotion to associate or full professor a candidate must include written evaluations of scholarship from external reviewers. The sending of the formal external review letter and candidate documentation will be completed by October 1st. The external reviewers will be informed that the review letter must be received at least 2 weeks prior to the university date for submission of documentation for tenure and/or promotion. This date is usually in January (SOLES, 5/29/03).
      8. Candidate files will not contain letters from current students, whether solicited or unsolicited (SOLES, 5/5/04).
      9. Whatever materials a candidate has turned in by the stated deadline for candidate submission of promotion and tenure materials shall be the content made available to faculty for their consideration.  No materials are to be added to faculty-review materials after the candidate’s submission deadline.  However, candidates may submit supplementary material to the Dean’s office after the deadline, with the understanding that these materials will be kept in an ARRT Committee notebook that will be utilized only by the ARRT Committee (SOLES, 12/7/07).
      10. Recommendations concerning a candidate from Department Chairs, Program Directors, and/or the Dean in their capacities as such must be submitted to the Committee prior to the conclusion of their deliberations. These recommendations, including any amendments or additions to them by the recommender, must be included as part of the evidence provided by the Committee to the President. These recommendations should include a comprehensive assessment of the candidate's qualifications; evidence in support of that assessment; and the recommender's report of his or her consultation with faculty members of the candidate's department or academic unit, including any dissenting opinions (USD, 4.2.2, p.2).
      11. The Dean shall write a letter regarding the candidate’s performance, and forward it to the chair of the ARRT committee at least one week prior to the ARRT meeting. The Dean will outline his or her evaluation of the candidate’s performance in each of the four areas (teaching, scholarship, service, and support of mission/values of the University), and whether or not they support the candidate’s request for reappointment, rank, or tenure (SOLES, 2/28/01).
  1. Candidate Review Process
      1. One week before candidates’ files are due, the chair of the ARRT Committee will invite tenure track faculty in SOLES to submit evaluative letters for its review. The notice will include the date that the files will be available for viewing and the last day on which faculty letters may be submitted. The deadline for receipt of letters shall be at least one week before the meeting of the ARRT Committee. The faculty should be allowed a minimum of two weeks for reviewing the file and submitting letters. Letters should focus on the four ARRT criteria. The letters are confidential and for the ARRT Committee only. Information from the confidential letters, but not the letters themselves, can be included in the ARRT letter to the candidate. If information from confidential letters is included in the letter to the candidate, it must be done in such a way as to protect the identity of the writer. Confidential letters are not normally forwarded in the candidate’s dossier to the President unless the President requests it. However, pertinent information may be shared, without identifying attributes, in the letter to the President. The letters are maintained in the Dean’s office in a confidential file until two years after the candidate terminates her or his employment at USD (SOLES, 5/5/04, SOLES 12/7/2011).
      2. Letters of Support Attesting to a Candidate’s Areas of Contribution: In situations where a candidate has made a contribution in areas such as public policy, school governance, professional organization leadership, etc., he or she can solicit non-confidential letters from references that describe these contributions. All such letters should be addressed to the chair of the ARRT committee (SOLES 5/29/03, revised 5/16/07).
      3. At least five members of the ARRT Committee must be present to constitute a quorum at the meeting (SOLES, 3/10/04).
      4. ARRT members will review the candidate’s materials and the Dean’s letter prior to the ARRT meeting. The ARRT members will also review the University ARRT Guidelines and the SOLES ARRT Guidelines prior to attending the ARRT meeting (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      5. The chair of the ARRT committee will run the ARRT meetings (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      6. ARRT committee members will discuss the candidate’s qualifications in the four areas. Discussion of the candidates will be confidential, and no part of the discussion will be shared with anyone outside of the ARRT meeting (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      7. After the discussion of the candidate, ARRT members will vote on whether they will approve, disapprove, or abstain regarding the request by the candidate for reappointment, rank, or tenure. If the candidate is going forward for both rank and tenure, separate votes will be recorded for rank and tenure decisions (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      8. Favorable recommendations require a two-thirds positive vote of Committee members present at the meeting when the vote is taken with the additional requirement that the favorable votes constitute at least a simple majority of the possible votes of the total Committee membership. A minimum of 4 votes is required to communicate a decision (SOLES, 3/10/04).
      9. The ARRT committee will write a report to the President indicating whether or not they support the candidate’s request for reappointment, rank, or tenure, and their reasons for their position. The memo will include the vote(s) for reappointment, rank, or tenure. The Dean’s letter will be forwarded with the ARRT report to the President (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      10. In addition to an overall vote for reappointment, rank, and tenure, ARRT members will be asked to vote on the level of performance of the candidate in each of the four areas (teaching, scholarship, service, and support of mission/values of the University). ARRT members will be asked to vote if the candidate’s performance: 1) Exceeds expectations, 2) meets expectations, or 3) is below expectations. ARRT members may also abstain if they feel they cannot properly evaluate a candidate’s performance in a particular area. A vote of “exceeds expectations” means the ARRT member believes the candidate’s performance is especially meritorious and should get special recognition. A vote of “meets expectations” means the candidate’s performance is solid. A vote of “below expectations” means the ARRT member has significant concerns about the candidate’s level of performance, and that special attention should be paid in developing this area on the part of the candidate. Judgments as to whether or not the candidate meets, exceeds, or falls below expectations should take into consideration the candidate’s level of experience (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      11. The ARRT Committee will continue to send the below, meets, exceeds ratings to the candidates, but the ratings will not be reported to the President (SOLES, 3/10/04).
      12. After notification of the President’s decision, the Committee will send the candidate a copy of its recommendation and accompanying rationale (or summary of report) made to the President (USD 2.4.2 , p. 3). The letter from the ARRT committee will include the following: 1) the frequency distribution of votes in each of the four areas; 2) whether or not the ARRT committee approved the request for reappointment, rank, or tenure; and 3) any written comments or feedback the ARRT committee believes are important for the candidate to know such as areas of strength or areas that need attention or development (SOLES, 2/28/01).
      13. The Dean will provide the candidate a copy of his or her letter sent to the ARRT committee, or provide feedback to the candidate in some other form acceptable to the Dean and candidate (SOLES, 2/28/01).
  1. ADVERSE RANK AND TENURE DECISION
  1. The appropriate administrative officer will give the candidate a written explanation of the reasons for denial of reappointment, promotion, or tenure (USD, 4.2.2, p.3).
  2. A candidate may appeal the President's decision not to recommend reappointment, promotion, or tenure. Appeals are governed by "Appeals from ARRT Decisions" in section 4.6. (USD, 4.2.2, p.3).
  3. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS  FOR REAPPOINTMENT  DECISIONS

 .               Reappointments may be for one year or other stated periods, subject to renewal. When the Committee has identified special concerns that may jeopardize future reappointment, the candidate should be informed in writing of those concerns at the time of reappointment (USD, 4.2.2, p.3).

  1. Standards for Notice. Because a probationary appointment carries an expectation of renewal, notice of non-reappointment, or of intention not to recommend reappointment, will be given in writing according to the following (USD, 4.2.2, p.3):
    1. Not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination.
    2. Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination.
    3. At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years at the University.

XII.                  CRITERIA FOR REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE

The following criteria apply to the evaluation of faculty candidates for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. They are meant to govern the evaluative processes of rank and tenure committees, and to give faculty candidates an understanding of University expectations with respect to these processes.

 

In the context of the employment decision for which they are being considered, candidates shall be judged on the basis of their performance in 1) teaching; 2) research, creative work and professional activity; 3) university and public service; and 4) support of the University of San Diego.

 

In evaluating a candidate's qualifications within these four areas, reasonable flexibility shall be exercised by balancing, where the case requires, heavier commitments and responsibilities in one area against lighter responsibilities and commitments in another. Numerous sources of information should be used in the evaluation of the candidate. Special emphasis should be given to peer evaluations.

 

Superior attainment, as evidenced primarily in teaching but not excluding research or other creative achievements, is an indispensable qualification for reappointment, promotion, and the granting of tenure.

 

The criteria set forth below are not intended to set boundaries to the elements of performance that may be considered, but rather to serve as guides in judging the candidate (USD, 4.2.3, p.5).

 

  1. Teaching
      1. Effective teaching is an essential criterion of reappointment, promotion, and the granting of tenure. Evaluation of the effectiveness of teaching shall be based upon the candidate's total performance. This evaluation should include considerations such as command of the subject; continuous growth in the field; ability to organize and present materials; capacity to awaken in students an awareness of the relationship of the subject to other fields of knowledge; a spirit of enthusiasm which vitalizes teaching; ability to arouse curiosity in beginning students and to stimulate advanced students; fairness in grading, through both subjective and objective considerations; participation in the guidance and advising of students (USD, 4.2.3, p.5).
      2. Consideration shall be given to the variety of demands placed on instructors by the types of teaching called for in various disciplines and at various levels (USD, 4.2.3, p.6).
      3. The Committee will clearly indicate the evidence upon which the appraisal of teaching effectiveness has been based. The following evidence of teaching effectiveness is required (USD, 4.2.3, p.6):
  1. colleague evaluation
  2. student evaluation
  3. self-evaluation

Other types of evidence may also be submitted as supporting teaching effectiveness. Examples of these types of evidence are the following (USD, 4.2.3, p.5):

    1. participation as a guest or public lecturer
    2. participation in team teaching
    3. development of new and effective means of instruction
    4. development of course materials
  1. Statement on Teaching for the School of Education and Leadership Sciences (SOLES, 5/13/14)

Except in the instance of cardinal numbering (1,2,3) priority is not implied or assigned and no ordering of importance is intended.

  1. Values Statement Regarding Teaching: Candidates for promotion and tenure should be able to clearly articulate the philosophy and goals of their teaching as they relate to their specific field. Teaching is a dynamic endeavor that involves creativity, experimentation, leadership, personal reflection and collaboration. Candidates should specifically address teaching challenges and strategies for improvement. Further, candidates should provide evidence of how their teaching works synergistically with the other criteria for promotion and tenure at USD (scholarship, service, support for the mission and values).
  2. Definition: Teaching can take on many forms. Quality teaching is responsive to students’ needs, facilitates critical thinking, respectfully challenges students, models continuous learning, values multicultural perspectives, strives toward specific learning outcomes, and engages students in the learning process in an inclusive way. The ARRT committee recognizes that quality teaching is multidimensional and complex. As such we have created a working definition in an attempt to encourage candidates to reflect and report on high quality teaching across many professional contexts.
      1. Academic Advising- Mentoring and advising students beyond course selection and matriculation is a valuable area of teaching. Developments and improvements to advising can have a huge impact upon student learning.
      2. Classroom Instruction- Developing new teaching strategies, incorporating new technologies, designing new assessment strategies, engaging students in innovative experiential learning experiences, locating new course materials and designing appropriate assignments help to enhance classroom instruction and maintain high expectations of quality classroom teaching.   Classroom instruction may also take place beyond the SOLES classroom involving students in global learning experiences.
      3. Clinical Instruction and Supervision- Many professional training programs involve some form of clinical or supervisory instruction. The goals and learning objectives of these educational experiences can be very different from classroom teaching. Advancing supervision strategies, improving assessment practices and/or designing innovative clinical experiences are important teaching endeavors.
      4. Curriculum Development- Programs and faculty consistently work to respond to new developments and/or changes in requirements (i.e., state licensing boards, credentialing requirements, accrediting bodies, etc.). Designing and redesigning courses, course sequences and program requirements are important teaching elements that can play a major role in student training and their ability to access professional opportunities.
      5. Domestic Diversity Learning – Across advising, classroom instruction, clinical instruction and supervision, and curriculum development activities, faculty are creating intentional learning environments for students to understand the historical, social and political forces that have contributed to and maintained social and educational inequities, have adversely affected people’s mental health and well-being, and are disproportionately represented in U.S. racial/ethnic minorities and immigrant communities. These efforts aim to increase students’ levels of self-awareness, knowledge, and skills in working with individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds. In this context, diversity is defined broadly and include, but are not limited to: addressing nationalism, culture, class, race/ethnicity, ability/disability, religion/spirituality, gender, and sexual orientation.
  1. Criteria for Assessment: It is helpful to distinguish between the criteria for evaluating teaching from the actual methods that we use to evaluate teaching. No single criterion is adequate to measure teaching, and some criteria may not apply in all cases. These criteria, to some extent, may overlap and include:
      1. Does the teaching demonstrate command of the subject?
      2. Is the teaching innovative? Is technology or any other innovative tool/approach used in a pedagogically meaningful and effective way?
      3. Are teaching materials organized and presented to students effectively?
      4. Does the teaching help students become intrinsically motivated to learn and pursue the subject and the contents?
      5. Are strategies in place to measure student performance?
      6. Does teaching involve strategies for constructive feedback?
      7. Are student academic and dispositional challenges addressed constructively?
      8. Does teaching promote experiential and/or transformational learning opportunities?
      9. Does teaching demonstrate involve attempts to construct beneficial learning environments?
      10. Does the instructor provide information that is useful or valuable to know?
  1. Methods of Assessment: The above criteria are difficult to measure. Efforts to assess teaching can parallel the challenges that researchers face trying to define and operationalize constructs. No instrument is a perfect measure of the construct. These indicators, particularly in isolation, are not infallible. The candidates under review should use the items listed below as resources for developing a case that they have met expectations in the area of teaching:
  2. Colleague evaluation - A colleague evaluation offers a candidate feedback that pinpoints their strengths and areas for improvement exposed in other forms of assessment. Colleague evaluations should be conducted at the request of the faculty member wishing to be reviewed, and may be a required evaluative tool at the department/program level.  The ARRT committee encourages candidates to include more than one colleague evaluation. When selecting a colleague reviewer the candidate should consider the nature of the collegial relationship and the potential for the colleague reviewer to be objective and/or constructive in their assessment. Colleague evaluation can take many forms, but should involve a structure established within a collegial relationship. The colleague reviewer should offer feedback that: 1) considers whether the courses of the faculty member have appropriate content and offer students sufficient opportunity to acquire desired professional knowledge and/or skills; 2) considers whether the grading system and evaluation/assessment tools are consistent with course content and student skill development; 3) examines the teaching methods of the faculty member for effectiveness; and 4) recognizes the risks and successes inherent in creative teaching methods. Potentially, the colleague reviewer should facilitate feedback before, during, and after teaching sessions. Feedback should be based on: 1) examination of materials for the course (e.g., syllabus, handouts, tests, web pages, etc.); and 2) classroom observation(s) in the classroom or clinical instructional settings and/or 3) data gathered from ongoing teaching mentoring.  After the colleague evaluation, the peer reviewer should produce a report that is discussed with the candidate being reviewed and presents the strengths and areas for improvement for the teaching of the faculty member.
      1. Student Evaluations- Student review of teaching is required in SOLES via an on-line evaluation system.  Sixteen items are scored on a seven-point scale and three open-ended student questions reflect more qualitative or attitudinal factors.  While student reviews occur each semester, they should not receive a superior rating over other forms of assessment during the review process. Candidates under review should respond to student ratings and explain important contextual information that may aid ARRT committee members in analyzing student assessment data. Candidates may include other forms of informal student-elicited assessment data if available. Though candidates are encouraged to include the conditions and purposes for which the data was collected (e.g., conducting research on teaching, peer facilitated mid-semester evaluation, etc.).
      2. Self-Evaluation – It is important for candidates to reflectively assess their own teaching. For example, a self-assessment document may include, but not be limited to, teaching goals, methods for achieving these goals, and plans for achieving teaching excellence. The document may be supported by a collection teaching examples/documentation that demonstrates implementations or successes of their teaching philosophy, improved teaching skills, consideration of alternative teaching objectives and methods, or other aspects of their teaching that warrants discussion.
      3. Supplementary Forms of Teaching Evidence- Additional supplementary evidence may, but is not required to, include the following:
      4. Teaching awards.  Awards for teaching, nominations for awards, or grants related to instructional innovations should be included.
      5. Evidence of teaching excellence through publications.  For example, individuals may publish articles on how they teach a course or the development of a new course for the field.  Likewise, developing a widely used text for a training program could be additional evidence for teaching excellence.
      6. Feedback on courses by alumni.  Former students who are now in the work force may be able to give a different perspective on the quality of the materials or concepts taught in course.  Were there important deficits?  Or, do they feel the course prepared them for the real world in that particular area?
      7. Employers/Supervisors – Do employers or supervisors of our current students (schools, agencies) believe they have the necessary skills to be successful?  Likewise, do employers or supervisors of our students after graduation feel our graduates have the necessary skills, or do they perceive deficits in a particular area?
      8. Curricular materials.  Faculty may include course or clinical instructional materials that they have developed including syllabi, curricula, global learning materials, online materials, and/or handbooks that have contributed to supporting students’ learning.
      9. Performance on program, state, or national exams – The ability to pass sections of a comprehensive exam might point to the strength or deficiencies in a particular class.
      10. Evidence of Teaching Development- Candidates under review may take advantage of any external (campus or off-campus) resource designed to address issues related to teaching. These resources may be used for a range of instructional needs that could include syllabus consultation, videotape feedback or direct observation in order to provide faculty with confidential, independent feedback about teaching through a variety of formats. Candidates may want to include evidence of professional development activities that specifically speak to challenging areas noted within the other forms of teaching assessment (self-evaluation, colleague evaluation, student-evaluation).
  1. Research, Creative Work and Professional Activity
      1. In evaluating the candidate's publications or recognized artistic productions, the Committee should seek evidence of a productive and creative mind; and the candidate's professional activities should be examined for evidence of achievement and/or leadership in the field. Evidence of research, creative work, or professional activity is not limited to publications or presentations at meetings of professional associations. Contributions by the candidate in the form of publications and presentations for the advancement of scientific or other critical inquiry, professional practice, or education shall be judged research, creative work, and professional activity when (1) they develop new ideas, add to the knowledge of an academic discipline, or incorporate scholarly research, and (2) they are disseminated in academic or professional communities.
      2. Publications and other creative accomplishments should be evaluated, not merely enumerated. Work in progress should be assessed whenever possible.
      3. When jointly authored work is presented as evidence, the Department Chair or Dean must establish as clearly as possible the role of the candidate in that joint effort. It should be recognized that special cases of collaboration occur in the performing arts and that the contribution of a particular collaborator may not be readily discernible by those viewing the finished work. When the candidate is such a collaborator, the Department Chair and Dean should evaluate the candidate's contribution and should provide outside opinions based on observations of the work while in progress (USD, 4.2.3, p. 6).
      4. Statement on Scholarship for the School of Leadership and Education Sciences (SOLES, 5/04/05)

 .               Values Statement Regarding Scholarship: Although pursuing scholarship may provide benefits to the individual (e.g., satisfy intellectual curiosity, help in achieving rank and tenure), we recognize that scholarship’s primary value lies in its ability to advance the public good and one’s profession. Therefore, candidates for promotion and tenure should be able to clearly articulate the foci and goals of their programs of scholarship as they relate to advancing the public good in the specific areas outlined below (knowledge base, teaching, practice, and policy). Further, we recognize that scholarship does not occur in a vacuum, and candidates should consider how their programs of scholarship work synergistically with the other criteria for promotion and tenure at USD (teaching, service, support for the mission and values).

  1. Definition: Scholarship is the creation and dissemination of new knowledge. Scholarship must reflect new knowledge, rather than a simple restatement of preexisting knowledge. New knowledge, however, can be created through synthesizing or integrating pre-existing knowledge in new or innovative ways. Scholarship should advance the knowledge base, teaching, practice, or policy within a profession or the public domain. Peer review is also an essential part of scholarship. Through peer review, others who are knowledgeable can help us (and the field) assess the extent to which a piece of work adds to the body of knowledge and is of potential value to the field.
        1. Advancing the knowledge base – Scholarship that advances the knowledge base could take multiple forms including: empirical research, historical research, theory development and testing, methodological studies, synthesizing knowledge through literature reviews, or philosophical inquiry and analysis. Applying or integrating concepts and research from other disciplines can be another means of advancing the knowledge base of the profession.
        2. Advancing Teaching – Scholarship can advance the way in which knowledge is taught or learned. Scholarship in this area would include: developing new or improved textbooks, developing new or innovative approaches to teaching, assessment of new or current teaching practices, or studying the processes by which information is learned.
        3. Advancing Practice – Scholarship can advance the practice of a profession. Scholarship in this area can include: developing practice implications from research, developing new or innovative approaches to practice, developing new or improved methods of assessment, revising or developing new theories for practice, evaluating current or new practices, or advancing the ethical standards of practice within the profession.
        4. Advancing Policy – Scholarship can also advance policy within a discipline or the public domain. Scholarship in this area may include: critiquing an existing policy, evaluating the effectiveness of a current policy, or developing policy implications from research, theory, or historical analysis. To qualify as scholarship, there must also be dissemination of the knowledge to the public and/or individual’s profession. Dissemination could potentially take different forms, including:
  1. Journal articles or monographs
  2. Books
  3. Presentations
  4. Assessment instruments
  5. Internet or websites (e.g., electronic journals, etc.)
  6. Policy papers
  7. Final public grant reports
  8. Criteria for Assessment:

It can be helpful to distinguish between the criteria for evaluating scholarship from the actual methods that we use to evaluate scholarship. No single criterion is adequate to measure scholarship, and some criteria may not apply in all cases. These criteria, to some extent, may overlap with one another. They include:

  1. Is the information new or innovative? In other words, does it add to the field’s body of knowledge? A literature review in an article, for example, should make the case that the article offers something new (and of potential value) to the body of knowledge.
  2. What is the quality of the process through which the new information was derived? For an empirical study, this would likely be the methodological rigor of the study. For a non-empirical piece, does the author use other compelling logic or evidence to support his or her argument? The quality of the work is important because it can impact the credibility of the author’s conclusions.
  3. What was the quality of the review process? Did an informed and critical audience evaluate the work prior to the work being disseminated?
  4. Does the new knowledge have potential value to others? In other words, what will be the impact of the work? Although this can be very difficult to predict in most cases, it is still a worthwhile question to ask regarding our scholarship. Will others benefit from this new bit of knowledge, or is it simply a trivial fact with little relevance?
  5. How broadly will the information be disseminated? As a general rule, the broader the dissemination, the greater the potential the resulting work will have an impact. It may be possible to argue in some cases, however, that dissemination of a work to a smaller but influential target audience can produce greater impact.
  1. Method of Assessment:

The above criteria are difficult to measure. Efforts to assess scholarship can parallel the challenges that researchers face trying to define and operationalize constructs. No instrument is a perfect measure of the construct. These indicators, particularly in isolation, are not infallible. The faculty members under review should use the items listed below as a guideline for developing a case that they have met expectations in the area of scholarship.

  1. Peer Review – It is important to assess whether or not a piece of work was peer reviewed, and the quality of that review process. Assessing the quality of review may mean looking at several questions. How many individuals reviewed the work? Was the work reviewed on a local, regional, national, or international level? To what extent is there evidence that the reviewers are recognized for their knowledge in the area? What is the acceptance rate of the journal or conference (where applicable)?
  2. Selectivity of Publisher or Journal – The selectivity of a publisher or journal can be an indicator of quality. Since more prestigious journals generally receive a higher volume of submissions, they can usually be more selective in what they publish. Thus, the acceptance rate of a journal or publisher can be an indicator of the quality of scholarship.
  3. Evidence of Impact through Breadth of Dissemination – In general, scholarship that reaches a broader audience has the potential to make a greater impact. The greater the exposure, the more opportunity there will be for individuals to use or apply the ideas from the scholarship to make an impact. Breadth of dissemination could be measured in different ways. The number of books sold or the circulation of a journal could be used to measure breadth of dissemination for books and journals. Other measures may be appropriate for less traditional forms of scholarship (e.g., number of hits for a website that qualifies as scholarship).
  4. Number of Citations – Another potential measure of impact may be the number of times a work is cited by others. Since few pieces of work are widely cited, this may be a rather high standard to hold. Yet, those pieces of work that are widely cited can be clearly recognized as having an impact.
  5. Other Measures of Impact – In some cases, other means of measuring impact may be appropriate beyond those stated above. It may be possible, for example, for an individual to document how his or her scholarship has influenced teaching or practice within a discipline. Or, an individual might be able to document how his or her scholarship has influenced legislation or policy.
  1. Scholarship’s Relationship to the Other Criteria
      1. Relationship to Teaching – The Teacher-Scholar model implies that scholarship is both distinct and an integral part of teaching. To best prepare our students for their professions, we need to educate them on the most recent knowledge in the field. Being active scholars helps us infuse the most recent knowledge and practices into our teaching. Insights gained from teaching, similarly, can become the impetus for scholarship, particularly in advancing the scholarship of teaching.
      2. Relationship to Service – Although scholarship is a criterion for achieving rank and tenure, we believe its primary value is in its ability to advance one’s profession or the public good. If scholarship is pursued in this spirit, then scholarship can be viewed as a means of providing service to others.
      3. Relationship to Mission & Values – We recognize that scholarship is a value-based endeavor. We believe that the Mission and Values of the University of San Diego should inform our scholarship. Our scholarship should also be informed by the ethical and professional standards within our particular fields. We will also strive to respect the dignity and rights of those involved in our scholarship (e.g., research participants, students, co- authors, or others)
  1. University and Public Service:

The faculty plays an important role in formulating and administering the policies of the University. Recognition should therefore be given to scholars who prove themselves to be able administrators and who participate effectively in faculty government and the formulation of departmental, school or college, and university policies. Services by members of the faculty to the University, community, state, and nation, both in their special capacities as scholars and in areas beyond those special capacities, should likewise be recognized.

Similarly, the following should be given recognition: contributions to student welfare through service on student-faculty committees and as advisor to student organizations; extraordinary recruiting or fundraising activity; special lectures; public relations activities; other services to the university community, such as arranging cultural, social, and educational events for faculty and students (USD, 4.2.3, p.7).

    1. Support of the University of San Diego:

Faculty members support the spiritual and moral orientation of the University of San Diego through their respect for Catholic Christianity and their recognition that the spiritual and moral aspects of the students' lives are significant. They have a sense of responsibility and concern towards the entire University community (USD, 4.2.3, p.7).

  1. TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENT  (USD, 4.2.4, p.7)
  1. Termination by a Faculty Member:

Faculty members may terminate their appointments effective at the end of an academic year, provided that they give notice in writing of their intention to resign or of negotiations that may lead to their resignation. Notice should be given at the earliest possible opportunity, in no event by the later of (1) May 15 or (2) thirty days after receiving notification of the terms of the appointment for the coming year. The University will attempt to accommodate requests for waiver of the notice requirement in cases of hardship or of substantial professional advancement or other opportunity; its faculty members, however, should abide by the University's decision.

    1. Termination by the Institution:

The University may terminate a faculty member for reasons of retrenchment, medical or disability reasons, or serious cause.

  1. Retrenchment. The University may terminate a faculty member because of retrenchment: a reduction of faculty due to financial exigency or to discontinuance of a department or program for reasons of non-financial exigency. Retrenchment terminations (including appeal procedures) are covered in detail in the other university policies.
  2. Medical or Disability Reasons. Consistent with applicable laws, the University may terminate a faculty member because of a medical or disability condition that substantially precludes the faculty member from fulfilling the terms of his or her appointment.  Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a probationary or special appointment before the end of the period of appointment, for medical or disability reasons will be based on clear and convincing evidence that the faculty member cannot continue to fulfill the terms and conditions of his or her appointment in whole or in significant part. The University's decision to terminate will be reached only after:
  1. Any medical leave has been exhausted; and
  2. The University and faculty member have made efforts, appropriate to the faculty member's medical problem or disability, to explore alternatives to termination (such as retirement, transfer from full-time to part-time teaching, etc.) and to accommodate the faculty member's medical problem or disability.

The faculty member, or the representative or conservator of the faculty member, must be informed of the basis of the proposed termination and must be afforded the opportunity to present the faculty member’s position and to respond to the evidence on which the University bases the proposed termination.

If the faculty member so requests, the decision to terminate for medical reasons may be appealed in accordance with the procedures established for appeals of other matters in this Policy. (See Section II.D in USD policy)

  1. Serious Cause. The University may dismiss a faculty member for violation of professional ethics as described in the 1987 AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics [addendum 1 to this Policy]. Examples of such violations include gross professional incompetence, continued neglect of academic duties or responsibilities, exploitation of students for private advantage, dishonesty in scholarship, and conviction of a felony.

Dismissal for serious cause (including appeal procedures) is covered in detail in this document. Dismissal for serious cause will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom.

  1. Severance Pay or Termination Notice
  2. If the appointment is terminated, the faculty member will receive severance pay or termination notice in accordance with the following schedule:
    1. At least three months if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary service;
    2. At least six months if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to the expiration of eighteen months) of probationary service;
    3. At least one year if the decision is reached after eighteen months of probationary service or after the faculty member has tenure.

This provision for severance pay or termination notice need not apply in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude as described in paragraph 3 of Section 9, 1970 Interpretive Comments on the AAUP 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

  1. In accordance with the appeals procedure (see Section II.D) and/or on the recommendation of the President, the Board of Trustees may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal.

File Preparation Recommendations for Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion

The following is not SOLES policy but has been used as a guide for candidates putting together files for reappointment promotion and tenure. (Last Revised November 2, 2011)

General advice or recommendations:

 

  • It is recommended that you read the files of other faculty members, particularly if you have not prepared a file before.  This will enable you to see how others have presented their materials and help you determine which approach will work best for you in presenting your case.

 

  • Before submitting your file, you may want to consider having other faculty members review your file and give you feedback.  Since faculty members may have different perspectives on how to best prepare a file, you may want to obtain feedback from multiple faculty members.

 

  • When preparing the file, you should include all the categories in the table of contents unless it is clearly stated as being optional.  When the guide poses questions that the candidate may want to consider, you are not required to answer them.  They are simply posed to help guide you on how you might want to respond.

 

  • The overall length of the blue file should generally not exceed more than 75 pages by a significant amount.  The length of the file could be shorter, particularly if you are filing for an early reappointment.  You should strive to be as concise as possible in summarizing and presenting your file, yet provide sufficient evidence to support your case.  You always have the option of including additional materials in a supplemental binder, which might include your publications, teaching evaluations (e.g., student narratives), or other materials. However, these materials should supplement what is presented in the main file, and should not be a substitute for evidence that should be contained in the main file.

 

  • Although it is important that candidates document their strengths and accomplishments, a thoughtful and credible analysis of one’s performance may need to include a discussion of challenges or difficulties.  When discussing challenges or difficulties, provide a thoughtful analysis as to why they exist and discuss how they will be addressed in the future.

 

  • When preparing your ARRT file, we recommend that you consider the ultimate purpose and spirit in which you are preparing the document.  Although the file is important in documenting your accomplishments to others, it is also an opportunity to reflect upon your own work.  As you prepare your file, you may want to consider the following questions and how they might frame how you prepare your document:
    • What is your own orientation toward your work today as a faculty member in SOLES?  Has this orientation shifted over time or been influenced in particular ways that seem relevant for the reader to learn about or understand?
    • In reflecting on yourself and your work in the preparation of this review (as a scholar, colleague, and teacher), what has become clear to you professionally and/or personally?
    • What tone would you like to set for the reader in evaluating the materials you have included?  How can you go about setting that tone?
    • How might you frame this document to represent more than a mere cataloguing of efforts as limitations and achievements, successes and difficulties - to see it as in fact a documentation of your journey that encompasses something of your own humanity and your connection to the work you have done?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

General

  1. Opening Statement (Optional)
    • If desired, write an initial statement of whatever length seems appropriate to frame your ARRT file and orient your reader to your work.  The opening statement, for example, may answer in an explicit way one or more of the questions posed in the preamble of the guide.  The opening statement is not required, but can be added at the faculty member’s discretion.
  2. Curriculum Vitae
    • Include current CV.  When listing publications, separate refereed, non-refereed, manuscripts published, manuscripts in press, and manuscripts in progress.  Use of APA style is recommended.

Evaluation and Recommendation

  1. Dean’s Current Summary and Evaluation
    • Inserted by the Dean’s office after candidate’s submission of file. The Dean’s letter is inserted after the faculty have reviewed the file, but prior to ARRT deliberations. (The candidate will receive a copy of the Dean’s letter.)
  1. Department Chair’s Current Summary and Evaluation
    • Letters from the Department Chair are inserted by the Dean’s office after candidate’s submission of the file.  The Department Chair letter is inserted after the faculty have reviewed the file, but prior to ARRT deliberations. (The candidate will receive a copy of the letter.) Program directors can either write a confidential faculty letter (section 5) or a non-confidential letter (section 6).
  1. ARRT Committee’s Current Summary and Evaluation
    • Inserted by the Dean’s office after the ARRT review prior to forwarding the file to the President’s office. (Removed when file returned to candidate)
  1. Confidential Evaluations by SOLES faculty
    • Inserted by the Dean’s office after the faculty have reviewed the file, but prior to ARRT deliberations. (Removed when file returned to candidate)
  1. Non-Confidential Evaluations from Colleagues and Others
    • Inserted by the candidate before submission of file.  Evaluations by current students are not permitted.  Letters that speak specifically to the candidate being a good colleague may better fit under Criterion IV, item 25. (These letters remain in the file when returned to the candidate.)
  1. Confidential Evaluations from External Reviewers (Tenure & Promotion only)
    • Refer to policy on External Reviews
    • Inserted by the Dean’s office after candidate’s submission of file. (Removed when file returned to candidate)
  1. Previous ARRT Reviews
    • Inserted by the Dean’s Office after file submission. The ARRT reviews are inserted after the faculty have reviewed the file, but prior to ARRT deliberations.

First Criterion: Teaching (Revised by ARRT Committee 2/11/14)

  1. Statement on Teaching Accomplishments, Goals, Strengths, Weaknesses, and Notable Accomplishments.
    • Develop and present a cogent, reflective discussion of your approach to teaching.  Candidates are encouraged to consider the following questions in your statement:
  1. What are your major goals for teaching at USD?
  2. What principles and beliefs guide your approach to teaching?

iii.                  What new or redesigned courses or clinical supervision experiences have you developed at USD?  How have these courses or supervision experiences contributed to SOLES programs? Syllabi or curricular materials may be attached as appendices.

  1. What innovative approaches to instruction have you implemented (the use of technology, experiential learning, team teaching, projects)?
  2. How do you measure student performance and provide feedback to promote continued learning?
  3. How do you organize your classes, clinical supervision, and/or advising to promote transformational learning and/or increase students’ levels of self-awareness, knowledge and skills in working with individuals from diverse communities?

vii.                  What are your greatest successes as a teacher at USD?

viii.                  What challenges have you faced, and what might you change in future semesters?

  1. If concerns about teaching have been raised in previous ARRT reviews, this may be an appropriate place to demonstrate how they have been addressed or resolved.
  2. What professional development activities related to teaching have you ben involved in and/or plan to get involved with?
    • Student comments from evaluations may be woven into the narrative to support your points.
    • Describe teaching goals for the next two years (e.g. new course development, new course teaching, team teaching, interdisciplinary, global teaching, use of technology, use of experiential pedagogies)
  1. Record of Courses Taught by Semester
    • Include a table with the following information organized by semester: Name of course, units/course, and the number of students per course. Be sure to include clinical supervision and global study courses. A sample template is included below:

 

Fall 2014

MFTS 500      Research Methods in Family Therapy (3)       18 students

MFTS 524      Family Theories II (3)                                                 15 students

MFTS 546      Couples & Sex Therapy (3)                                        12 students

 

  1. Summary of Student Course Evaluations
    • If desired, write a narrative reflection on your course evaluations that expands upon your comments above in the item #10: Statement on Teaching Accomplishments, Goals, Strengths, Weaknesses, and Notable Accomplishments.
    • Include a table that summarizes your quantitative evaluations since you arrived at USD (see attached sample in Appendix I). Arrange the scores either by semester or by successive semesters of the same course, depending on your point – improvement over time in the same course or changes in the course in future semesters in response to feedback.
    • Include all quantitative evaluation sheets
    • Include all student comment narrative evaluations
    • NOTE: You might put some information in a separate binder. Make references in your text to where the reader will find information, if in a separate binder.  If you include all of your student comment narrative evaluations in a separate binder, you may want to consider putting one or more examples in the main document.
  1. Collegial Evaluation of Teaching
    • According to SOLES policy on Collegial Evaluation of Teaching, “The candidate should also include collegial evaluations of teaching that were conducted in the period since the last ARRT review.  Collegial evaluation might take many forms, including peer observation of teaching, peer evaluation of course materials, evaluation of instructional contributions including development of new courses and other program development activities, evaluation of student work artifacts, or other items”
  1. Supervisory Work on Action Research Projects, Masters or Doctoral Theses
    • Include a brief statement about your role as an advisor or committee member on student action research projects, masters or doctoral theses if it is not addressed in the narrative for the statement above (10).
    • List the projects or theses you have participated in, including the following information: 1) Student name, 2) project title, 3) type of project (e.g., masters thesis, doctoral thesis), 4) role as advisor (e.g. chair, methodologist), and 5) date of completion.
  1. Other Evidence of Excellence in Teaching

Additional evidence of excellence in teaching may include, but is not limited to, the following:

    • Include awards, nominations for awards, grants related to instructional innovations, other
    • Evidence of teaching excellence through publications including academic journal articles on teaching practices or authored textbooks used for course instruction.
    • Feedback on courses from alumni who can speak to the quality of the preparation they received.
    • Evaluations by employees or field supervisors of our current students that specifically respond to the preparation they are receiving through your teaching.
    • Portfolio advising and reading, preparing and assessing comprehensive exams, doctoral exams, mid-point interview and teaching events in the credential, others.
    • Include evidence of excellence in teaching from other universities.
  1. Evidence of Contribution to Student Advising
    • Include a brief statement about your contribution as an academic advisor if it is not addressed in the narrative for point 9.
    • Provide number and type of student advisees.
    • Include description of independent studies.
    • Describe committee work related to advisement forms and/or guidelines

Second Criterion:  Scholarship

 

When describing your achievements in the area of scholarship, please refer to the USD and SOLES tenure and promotion policies, specifically the SOLES definition of scholarship, which can be found in the SOLES Faculty Handbook.

 

  1. Statement on Current Status and Future Development of Scholarship
    • Describe your past, present and future work, including your major areas of research, writing, and conference presentations.   Demonstrate a coherent trajectory of your work, showing the growth and development of your ideas. You may want to consider the following questions in your statement:
  1. What theories and bodies of research inform your scholarship?
  2. What are you major goals for your scholarship?

iii.                  What are the themes of your work?  What are the major goals and outcomes of each theme?

  1. What projects are you currently pursuing?
  2. What has been your role on collaborative projects?
  3. What are the linkages between your scholarship, teaching, service and mission?

vii.                  If concerns of scholarship have been raised in previous ARRT reviews, this may be an appropriate place to demonstrate how they have been addressed or resolved.

viii.                  What direction will your work take in the future? Why?

    • Provide examples of publications and conference presentations
  1. Statement on Quality of Scholarship and Selectivity of Journals
    • Provide a statement that addresses the quality of your scholarship.  You want to point to a number of different indicators to build your argument.

You might want to consider the following questions in your statement:

  1. How many of your journal articles or other forms of scholarship are refereed?
  2. How selective are the journals in which you have published (e.g., acceptance rates)?

iii.                  What is the reputation or prestige of the journal or book press?  For journals, you can discuss the impact index.

  1. How often has your work been cited by others?
  2. For books, how well have they sold?  For textbooks, to what extent have they been adopted?
  3. What other measures might be used to demonstrate your scholarship is of high-quality or has had a significant impact (e.g., number of downloads for electronic articles, peer review of your scholarship)?
  1. External Funding and Its Contribution to Scholarship
    • Discuss grants you have received and/or are pursuing.  If possible, include information on how competitive the funding is for each grant.
  1. Internal Funding and Its Contribution to Scholarship
    • Discuss grants you have received and/or are pursuing through USD, such as Faculty Research Grants. If possible, include information on how competitive the funding is for each grant.

Third Criterion:  Service

 

  1. Statement on Service
    • Write a reflective statement about your approach and contributions to service.
    • Candidates may want to consider the following questions in your statement:
  1. What role do you see service playing in your professional life?
  2. How does your service relate to the other three criteria?

iii.                  What factors have impacted your choices with regards to service?

  1. If concerns about service have been raised in previous ARRT reviews, this may be an appropriate place to demonstrate how they have been addressed or resolved.
  2. What are your future goals with regards to service?
  3. How have you attempted to balance service with other demands such as scholarship and teaching?
  4. Evidence of Service to USD
    • List University wide committees (e.g., Senate, Budget, Calendar, Commencement), including length of time on committee and describe contributions to committee.
    • List SOLES committees, including length of time on committee and describe contributions to committee.  Program development and accreditation work can be described here.
    • List program/department committees and activities, including department/program coordination, conference organization, guest lecturing for colleagues, admissions, others.
  1. Evidence of Service to Profession
    • Describe or list activities in professional organizations, for example, service as an officer, director or committee chair, reviewer for conferences or journals, etc.
  1. Evidence of Service to the Community
    • Describe or list volunteer service given to local or national helping or civic organizations (e.g. volunteering in a soup kitchen, or providing free consulting services to a non-profit organization).

Fourth Criterion:  Support of the University of San Diego

  1. Support for the Spiritual and Moral Orientation of the University
    • Describe how your disposition and activities at work address the university’s elaboration of the fourth criterion:

“Faculty members support the spiritual and moral orientation of the University of San Diego through their respect for Catholic Christianity and their recognition that the spiritual and moral aspects of the students' lives are significant. They have a sense of responsibility and concern towards the entire University community.”

  1. Evidence of Good Colleagueship
    • Address the ways in which you participate in and support the development of community in SOLES and USD.  Letters from colleagues giving evidence of these contributions can be included.

Conclusion

 

  1. Concluding Statement by Candidate
    • Write a reflective statement about your overall body of work.  The concluding statement can be an opportunity to provide a holistic statement about your record, allowing you to articulate the interconnectedness between your teaching, scholarship, service, and support of the University of San Diego.

 

If desired, the concluding statement is also an opportunity to summarize what you have learned from evaluating your work.

 

Selection of External Reviewers

 

Candidates for tenure and promotion are required to submit a list of external reviewers to the Dean by August 1st.  Candidates may want to consider the following criteria when selecting which names to put forward.

  1. Avoid submitting names for individuals with whom you have a friendship or other personal relationship.  These individuals are unlikely to be approved since their ability to provide an objective evaluation will be questioned.
  2. Avoid submitting names for individuals with whom you have had a close professional relationship.  These individuals are unlikely to be approved since their ability to provide an objective evaluation will be questioned.  Examples of close professional relationships might include faculty who have trained you, former colleagues, or individuals with whom you have done an extensive amount of collaboration (e.g., co-authored publications, co-presenter).
  3. Ideally you should identify at least one and, if possible, two or more reviewers for each of your areas of scholarship you identify in your statement on research.
  4. Reviewers with a strong reputation in the field will generally offer reviews with the greatest weight or credibility.
  5. If you select a potential reviewer that is not a faculty member within higher education, be sure to provide a clear rationale for the selection.  Also, articulate why they have the necessary expertise to critically evaluate your scholarship.

ARRT Expedited Guide Template

The ARRT Guide Template (AGT) is a tool that candidates may use to structure an overview document for the ARRT committee for an expedited review. It is suggested that the overview document be no longer than two-single spaced pages (12 font).  You should attach a copy of your CV to this document.

 

Identifying Information

 

Name of candidate:

Academic Rank:

Type or year review:

Department or program:

Date:

 

Criterion I - Teaching

 

  1. List the courses you taught by semester since the last review, including courses that you are currently teaching.  Please list the course number, title, and number of students.
  2. Summarize the teaching evaluations you received for each course since the last review. (Items 1 and 2 can be summarized into a table like the example below.)
  3. Briefly describe any other teaching accomplishments (e.g., rewards) since your last ARRT review.
  4. Provide a brief commentary (one paragraph) on the changes you have made to teaching since your last ARRT evaluation.  Where applicable, please indicate where you made changes as a result of the feedback you received in the past.
  5. Provide a brief narrative (one paragraph) on what your teaching goals will be prior to your next review.

Course #

Title

# Students

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3

Item 4

Criterion II – Scholarship

  1. List all the books or books chapters you have published or had accepted (in press) since your last ARRT review.
  2. List all the refereed journal articles that you have published or have had accepted (in press) since your last ARRT review.
  3. List all the non-refereed journal articles that you have published or have had accepted (in press) since your last ARRT review.
  4. List all of your refereed presentations since your last ARRT review.
  5. List all of your non-refereed presentations since your last ARRT review.
  6. List all of your other scholarship works since your last ARRT review that do not fall into the above categories.  (Please specify the nature of the scholarship if it is not obvious.)
  7. Provide a brief commentary (one paragraph) on your scholarship record since your last evaluation.  Where applicable, please indicate where you made changes as a result of the feedback you received in the past.
  8. Provide a brief narrative (one paragraph) on what your scholarship goals will be prior to your next review.  Include a list of manuscripts or research currently in progress.

Criterion III – Service

  1. List all of your SOLES and department/program committee assignments since your last review, including the semester(s) of service.
  2. List all of your University committee assignments since your last review, including the semester(s) of service.
  3. List all of your professional service activities since your last review, including the dates of service.
  4. List all of your community service activities since your last review, including the dates of service.
  5. Provide a brief commentary (one paragraph) on your service record.  Where applicable, please indicate where you made changes as a result of the feedback you received in the past.
  6. Provide a brief narrative (one paragraph) on what your goals will be prior to your next review.

Criterion IV – Mission

 

Provide a brief narrative on how your work supports the mission and values of the University.

Additional Reflections of the Candidate (optional):

 

If desired, the candidate can write a concluding summary.  This may be the appropriate place to discuss the synergisms or relationships across the four criteria for tenure and reappointment (e.g., How does your research inform or transfer to teaching?).

Criteria for Promotion to Full Professor

Approved by Faculty on May 13, 2009

 

Advancing from Associate Professor to Full Professor is never automatic or based solely on years of service.  Rather, it represents a significant promotion that requires that the candidate meet challenging criteria in the areas of scholarship, teaching, service, and mission, the same areas that are used throughout the promotion and tenure process. The ARRT committee will review applications for promotion to the rank of full professor holistically; it is expected, however, that the candidate’s file will include the following types of evidence:

 

Teaching

 

  1. Evidence that the candidate has an exemplary teaching record.   The evidence here most likely would be evaluation data from students and written commentaries by peers who observed and reviewed the candidate’s teaching.
  2. Evidence that the candidate has strived to improve her or his teaching and has been committed to on-going professional growth in the area of teaching.   This evidence might include syllabi that illustrate major modifications that incorporate new research/scholarship and/or respond to student feedback, as well as reflective essays that describe changes in teaching strategies and the reasons why changes were made.
  3. Evidence that the candidate has contributed to the changing needs of SOLES at a department and/or program level. The evidence here could include syllabi for new courses developed by the candidate; descriptions of the candidate’s role in developing entirely new programs or programmatic initiatives within existing programs; or materials the candidate prepared for an accreditation team visit.

Scholarship:

 

  1. Evidence that the candidate has made a significant professional contribution to her or his field of study at a national and/or international level. This might include such things as service on editorial boards, as peer-reviews, as dissertation committee members at other national and international institutions.
  2. Evidence that the candidate has an extensive record of scholarly publications that illustrates sustained and focused contributions to his or her field.  Typically, this would include a published book; articles in peer-reviewed journals; presentations at major academic conferences; and an identifiable line of scholarly inquiry that is likely to be pursued and extended after the candidate has become a full professor.

Service:

 

  1. Evidence that the candidate engages in service-related activities nationally and internationally.  This evidence might include lists of service in leadership positions or on committees in research and/or professional associations and, ideally, essays or letters that provide accounts of the contributions that the candidate made while serving in at least some of the listed positions.
  2. Evidence that the candidate has contributed in significant ways to the program area or department, SOLES and the University.  The evidence here might include descriptions (written by both the candidate and others) of contributions made in a variety of SOLES positions and on different committees on which the candidate has served.
  3. Evidence that the candidate mentors junior faculty.  The evidence here could include letters from junior faculty members or such things as jointly authored publications.

Mission:

 

  1. Evidence that the candidate has worked in a manner that has been consistent with the stated mission of the university and has contributed in some way to achieving that mission. The evidence here might be a personal essay detailing, in specific terms, some of the things the candidate has done and how they link to the university’s stated mission.
  2. Evidence that the candidate consistently has acted in a professional and collegial manner. The evidence, here, most likely would be letters from colleagues both within and outside of the candidate’s department or program.

Professor Emeritus Designation and Eligibility Criteria

Approved by Faculty 5/13/09

The emeritus designation for retiring SOLES faculty members can be considered for individuals who have served USD and the School of Leadership and Education Sciences at the rank of professor with distinction for an extended time.  Emeritus status recognizes tenured faculty who have excelled in the areas of teaching, research, service, and support of USD throughout their careers at the University. The award is intended as special recognition for individuals who have made outstanding career contributions to SOLES and who have a record of professional conduct that indicates support of the mission and values of the University of San Diego.

 

SOLES Procedure:

 

A recommendation for the rank of professor emeritus for an eligible candidate is submitted by the relevant department or program for initial consideration. A positive recommendation from the program or department is then forwarded to the Dean.  This recommendation should include a brief summary of the candidate’s distinguished record and qualifications for emeritus status.  Nominations must be made no sooner than one year before and no later than one year after the date of retirement.

 

After nomination, the Dean will inform the ARRT committee and the candidate will be asked to provide a current CV and a statement summarizing his or her qualifications in support of the nomination for emeritus status. Qualifications should be summarized in relationship to the SOLES ARRT criteria for promotion and tenure.  The ARRT committee shall have the right to request any additional information that is deemed necessary to make an appropriate decision, and will solicit input from the SOLES faculty.  The ARRT committee will review the request and all input and will make a recommendation to the Dean.

 

The Dean will forward positive recommendations to the University Cabinet through the appropriate university process.  The Dean will communicate the ARRT committee recommendation to the nominee.  A candidate who is awarded emeritus status will be recognized at an appropriate SOLES event.

 

Eligibility requirements:

  • The individual must have been tenured at USD and have attained the rank of Professor.
  • The individual must have had at least ten years of full-time service at USD.
  • The individual must be fully retired from USD before the title of emeritus can be bestowed.
  • Posthumous awards may be considered.

ARRT Appeals Process

*Taken from USD Policies and Procedure Manual: http://www.sandiego.edu/legal/upolicies.php

SECTION NO.

 

HUMAN RESOURCES 2.4.6 FACULTY RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

(As of July 16, 2010, this policy is effective for decisions made on or after September 1, 2010. To obtain a copy of the policy governing decisions made prior to September 1, 2010, please contact the Office of the General Counsel.)

 

4.6       Appeals from ARRT Decisions

These rules govern faculty grievances that relate to the University's decisions concerning faculty reappointment, promotion, tenure, and dismissal. These rules are to be interpreted in light of the University's policy to resolve such grievances whenever possible within the school or college participating in the process by which the University's decision is made

 

  1. ARRT Decision Defined

For purposes of these rules, an ARRT decision is a final decision made by the President of the

University with respect to:

A faculty member's reappointment, rank, or tenure;

A faculty member's dismissal from and/or termination of employment, the criteria and procedures for which are governed at least in part by (a) the Policy for Reappointment, Rank and Tenure of the University of San Diego College of Arts and Sciences, School of Business Administration, School of Leadership and Education Sciences, School of Nursing and Health Science, and School of Peace Studies ("Rank and Tenure Policy"), (b) the University's policy governing dismissal for serious cause for schools or colleges other than the School of Law, or (c) the University's retrenchment policy.

If an ARRT decision denying tenure or promotion is meant to be final for the year for which the decision is made, then it is a "final decision" for purposes of these rules. An ARRT decision denying a promotion without denial of reappointment will only be reviewed in exceptional cases, since the normal recourse for the affected faculty member is to reapply.

When an ARRT decision is made, the President and/or the dean of the school or college in question will apprise the affected faculty member, promptly and in writing, of the decision, of the reasons for the decision, and of these appeals rules and procedures.

  1. ARRT Appeals Panel and Committee

Faculty grievances with respect to ARRT decisions, the resolution of which are governed by these rules, are determined by an ARRT Appeals Committee acting in an advisory fact-finding and recommending capacity. An ARRT Appeals Committee is selected from the University's ARRT Appeals Panel.

  1. ARRT Appeals Panel. The ARRT Appeals Panel ("Panel") consists of two members of the University's tenured faculty from each of the University's schools or college covered by the Rank and Tenure Policy.
  2. Selection of ARRT Appeals Panel Members. Before April 1 of each year, the full-time faculty of each school or college covered by the Rank and Tenure Policy will elect two of its members and alternate(s) to serve one- year terms on the Panel.
  3. To the extent possible, no member of the Panel may also be a member of a school's or college's ARRT Committee in the calendar year in which the ARRT decision was made.
  4. No member of the Panel who has a conflict of interest or believes himself or herself to be biased with respect to a grievance or faculty grievant may be a member of the ARRT Appeals Committee that is to determine that grievance. The faculty grievant [see Section E of these rules, second paragraph] may challenge an ARRT Appeals Committee member or members to the Provost for cause.
  5. If a Panel member of a school or college is disqualified from serving on an ARRT Appeals Committee, then the other Panel member from the disqualified member's school or college will be a member of that Committee.
  6. If the disqualified Panel member is from the faculty grievant’ s school or college, or if both Panel members of a school or college are disqualified from serving on an ARRT Appeals Committee, then an alternate will be selected; and, if all alternates are disqualified, then the faculty grievant and the dean of the pertinent school or college will select, by agreement, another tenured member or members of that school or college to serve as a member of the Committee that will determine the grievance in question.
  7. Composition of the ARRT Appeals Committee. The ARRT Appeals Committee has five members. Two of its members will come from the faculty grievant’ s school or college; the other members will come one each from other schools or colleges covered by the Rank and Tenure Policy.

 .               Except as provided in Section B.1.c, the Provost will select by lot the members of the ARRT Appeals Committee who are not from the faculty grievant's school or college.

  1. In the case of an appeal from a decision to terminate a faculty member for serious cause, no member of the ARRT Appeals Committee may also have been a member of the committee that conducted the hearing in the dismissal for serious cause proceeding.
  2. An ARRT Appeals Committee member may not be absent or abstain from any of the Committee's proceedings or determinations. If illness or other unforeseen event prevents a Committee member from participating fully in the Committee's proceedings, then he or she will be deemed disqualified and replaced as provided in Section B.1.c.
  3. Advisory Nature of ARRT Appeals Committee Decisions. Findings and decisions of the ARRT Appeals Committee are advisory only, and are made in the form of a recommendation to the President in a determination to (a) the President and Provost, (b) the program, department, school, or college that has participated in the ARRT decision in question, and/or (c) the faculty grievant who has appealed the ARRT decision.
  4. Confidentiality of ARRT Appeals Committee Proceedings. Proceedings before the ARRT Appeals Committee are not public in character. To the extent permitted by law, every effort must be made by the Provost, by the ARRT Appeals Committee and its members, and by participants in proceedings before the ARRT Appeals Committee to maintain the non- public character and confidentiality of those proceedings and their resolutions.
  5. School of Peace Studies. When the School of Peace Studies has at least five tenured faculty members: (a) the ARRT Appeals Panel will include two members of the tenured faculty from the School of Peace Studies; and (b) an ARRT Appeals Committee will be comprised of five members. Two of its members will come from the faculty grievant’s school or College, and the other three members will be chosen by lot by the Provost, with no more than one committee member being from each of the other schools or the College.

 

While the School of Peace Studies has fewer than five tenured faculty members: (a) the ARRT Appeals Panel will not include members of the University’s tenured faculty from the School of Peace Studies; and (b) if an ARRT Appeals Committee considers an appeal by a faculty grievant from the School of Peace Studies, all five members of the ARRT Appeals committee shall be chosen by lot by the Provost, and each of the other schools and the College shall be represented on the ARRT Appeals Committee.

  1. Who May Appeal; When to Appeal
  1. The following persons are entitled to appeal ARRT decisions as defined in Section A of these rules:
  2. Reappointment and Tenure: by the faculty member who has finally been denied reappointment, or who has been offered reappointment on conditions other than those on which his or her original appointment was made.
  3. Promotion: by the faculty member who has been denied a promotion.
  4. Dismissal: by the faculty member who has been dismissed due to retrenchment or for serious cause.
  5. Time within which to appeal: All appeals must be commenced [see Section E.1] within 45 days of the date on which the last of the materials identified in the final paragraph of Section A of this policy are sent to the faculty member.
  1. Grounds for Appeal; Burden of Proof

The ARRT Appeals Committee's advisory jurisdiction over ARRT decisions is limited to the determination whether or not the ARRT decision was properly made. The ARRT Appeals Committee’s authority does not extend to, and it shall not consider, evidence of the grievant’s activities (teaching, scholarship, etc.) that originated after the ARRT decision was made. The ARRT Appeals Committee will deem an ARRT decision to have been improperly made if, and only if, either of the following grounds is proved:

  1. The procedure that, according to the applicable rules, should have been followed for the ARRT decision in question was not in fact followed, and the procedural violation had a material effect on the decision made.
  2. The ARRT decision does not reasonably follow from the evidence presented to the person or body (generally the rank and tenure committee and/or the dean of the grievant’s college or school) whose recommendation formed the basis of the ARRT decision as defined in Section A, first paragraph of these rules.

The ARRT Appeals Committee is to presume that the contested ARRT decision was properly made, and the faculty member(s) bringing the appeal must prove at least one of these grounds in order to prevail. The ARRT Appeals Committee should not consider evidence that the college or school’s rank and tenure committee did not receive, whether created or produced prior to or after the latter committee’s recommendation was made. Instead, the ARRT Appeals Committee should either ignore the additional evidence or suspend the appeal and return the matter to the latter committee for reconsideration of its decision in light of additional evidence.

  1. Appeals Procedures

Faculty members who are entitled to appeal according to Section C of these rules are responsible for commencing these appeals procedures after a final ARRT decision. A "faculty grievant" for purposes of these rules is the faculty member who commences these appeals procedures. In commencing an appeal, the faculty grievant waives, in relation to the Provost, President, and ARRT Appeals Panel, any entitlement to the confidentiality of a prior ARRT decision and its underlying proceedings.

  1. Commencement of Appeal. The faculty grievant commences an appeal when the faculty member communicates in writing to the Provost the grounds for the appeal (Section “D”) and the related rationale or rationales for reversing the ARRT recommendation.
  2. The Provost forms the Appeals Committee, convenes its first meeting, and provides the Committee with a copy of the grievant’s appeal and the documents of the ARRT Committee on the case. The Provost also transmits a copy of the grievant’s appeal to the dean, the chair of the ARRT Committee that made the recommendation, and to the grievant’s immediate supervisor, if not the dean.
  3. The Appeals Committee selects its Chair, reviews materials supplied to it by the Provost, and decides by majority vote whether to:
  4. recommend to the Provost that the grievant’s appeal appears to lack sufficient merit to proceed with further Appeals Committee deliberations; or
  5. gather more information in writing in a timely manner from one or more of the following: dean, chair of the ARRT Committee, grievant, or other parties who may have perspective of utility to the Appeals Committee.
  6. If ‘3.b’ is engaged, the Appeals Committee will re-convene to deliberate and decide to recommend one of the following:

 .               The appeal lacks sufficient merit to require reconsideration;

  1. The appeal may have sufficient merit and should be directed to the original ARRT Committee for reconsideration;
  2. The appeal is convincing in that the negative decision may have been improperly made, and the President and Provost should create an ad hoc faculty panel to review the merits of the case which will include faculty who are from the academic unit or units represented in the ARRT Committee but not necessarily from the ARRT Committee which made the original recommendation.
  3. The ARRT Appeals Committee will forward its recommendation to the President and Provost with copies to the grievant, ARRT Committee members who made the original recommendation, and to the dean of the academic unit. The recommendation may include separate statements from ARRT Appeals Committee members.
  4. The President will make a decision within 45 days of receipt of the Appeals Committee recommendation; and
  5. If a negative decision ensues from engaging options ‘4.b.’ or ‘4.c.’ above, this Appeals policy and procedure will not be available for further appeals.

Appointment, Support, and Evaluation of Part-Time Faculty

Appointment of Part-time Faculty

Part-time faculty members are identified in a variety of ways.

 

  1. Professionals contact the dean’s office and inquire about part-time opportunities.  Part-time opportunities are listed on the SOLES website (homepage: “Positions”).  Applicants are encouraged to submit paperwork electronically to the attention of the person listed in the announcement.

Once a person’s application packet has been received, it is routed to the appropriate chair/director. It then becomes the responsibility of the director/chair to follow up with the applicant.  Although efforts are made to respond to all inquiries, due to the volume of inquiries received, unsolicited requests may not receive an immediate response.

  1. A second avenue for identifying part-time faculty is through nomination by full time faculty.  The chair/director will inform faculty of courses needing a part-time professor and faculty will be encouraged to make nominations.

Each director/chair maintains copies of the vitae of qualified potential part-time faculty.  When the director/chair needs to employ a part-time person, an interview is arranged.  Once the faculty is selected, the department informs the Budget and Operations Manager and a background check is initiated. Once the background check is cleared, the dept. requests that a contract be processed. The Budget and Operations Office is responsible for sending the contract, a copy of the Part-time Faculty Handbook (also available on the SOLES website “Faculty Resources” page, and other materials as required by Human Resources.

 

Orientation and Support for Part-Time Faculty

 

Orientation procedures for new, part-time faculty vary by program.  Once a part-time faculty member is hired, the chair/director either provides a small group or individualized orientation.  Or, the part-time faculty member is assigned to a full time faculty member.  Either method of orientation includes a review of the Part-time Faculty Handbook.  Either the chair/director or a faculty member serves as a mentor to any new part-time faculty.  This means that the person meets with, and orients the new instructor, and is available to support this part-time person throughout the semester.  The chair/director or his/her designee will attend one class of each new part-time faculty in order to evaluate his/her teaching during the first semester in SOLES.  The chair/director will create an action plan if any areas needing attention are identified.

Most part-time faculty members have been with SOLES for several years and are kept informed of events in the following ways:  1) included in the electronic newsletter updates from the dean’s office; and/or, 2) included in the department/program list serv.

 

Evaluation and Feedback

All part-time faculty are evaluated by students at the end of each course.  Copies of evaluations are summarized by the Office of Assessment.  The director/chair reviews all part-time faculty evaluations each semester.  Once the evaluations have been reviewed, one copy is placed in the chair/director’s files and instructors can access their evaluations via the my.sandiego.edu portal.  If assistance and further support are needed, it is the responsibility of the director/chair to ensure that feedback is given and support is provided.

 

Dean’s Cabinet Revised and Approved April 2006

 

NCATE Accreditation 10/04

Attendance at SOLES and Department/Program Meetings

Faculty attendance at SOLES and department or program meetings is required. Faculty who must miss a SOLES meeting are requested to notify the Dean’s office in advance of the meeting.  Faculty who must miss a departmental or program meeting should notify the department chair or program director in advance of the meeting.

Budget Process

The decision-making period for budget preparation occurs from September--December each year. Department Chairs consult with faculty regarding staffing, facilities and technology needs and submit a program area recommendation, which is clearly prioritized and with rationales. The need for new faculty in particular must be well documented, and directors typically consult with the Dean informally prior to submission of new faculty requests. Special expenses increases (e.g., telephones and supplies) must have strong rationales with particular attention to needs that support instruction. Renovation requests must be discussed with the Dean early, and directors submit these proposals in early-September. Department Chairs and Directors receive instructions on budget preparation in August with an early September due date to the Dean. The Dean reviews the recommendations and makes decanal recommendations to the Provost in mid- September.

 

The Dean and a faculty representative represent the School of Leadership and Education Sciences at University Budget Committee (UBC) meetings. The UBC is co- chaired by the Provost and Vice President, and Vice President for Finance and is comprised of a variety of administrative, faculty, staff, and student representatives. The UBC rarely examines program specific expenditures but rather gives direction to the Vice Presidents and Deans regarding parameters (e.g., should new personnel or financial aid be more or less important than merit pay?).  Decisions on renovations and capital expenditures frequently occur after the beginning of the Spring semester since these recommendations substantially depend on the health of the current year budget.

 

Program areas are informed of new personnel additions by no later than November, but advertising of new and replacement faculty can begin earlier with the Dean's approval. The university faculty recruitment policy must be adhered to in each instance. Department Chairs learn about other budget increases during January and February and should consult the Dean regarding reasons for unsuccessful requests and suggestions for future recommendations.

 

Budgetary requests outside of the normal budgetary process:

Sometimes expenditures or opportunities may arise that had not been considered during the budget process such as special software, computer accessories, and instructional supplies.  As programs are allotted limited discretionary monies, any non-budgeted item must be requested through the Department Chair.  The chairs may approve the request if funding allows or they may bring the request to the faculty in the department to ensure that the expense benefits the department as a whole. If there is no funding available and the departments deem the expense beneficial, the chair may bring the request to the Dean for review and support. These requests should be infrequent and will only be approved if the expense is deemed valuable and if funding allows.

SOLES Committee Assignments 2017-2018

Committee members are appointed and/or voted upon. Service commitments are generally 1-3 years.  

 

Specific committee assignments can be found on our SOLES webpage: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/faculty-and-staff/handbooks-policies-forms.php

SOLES Committee Descriptions

Appointment, Reappointment Rank and Tenure Committee

The University of San Diego maintains the quality of its faculty through objective and thorough appraisal by competent faculty members of each candidate for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. The Rank and Tenure Committee of each school or college is given primary responsibility for this appraisal. Each Committee will include the school or college Dean as a voting member. The Committee's functions include the recognition and encouragement of each candidate's achievements (USD, 4.2.1, p.1).

Faculty Status Committee

The purpose of the SOLES Faculty Status Committee is to support the work of tenure-line faculty by: (a) collecting data on faculty issues, analyzing, and proposing options back to the faculty for further consideration; (b) facilitating faculty discussions of existing and proposed SOLES or university policies that directly or indirectly impact the work and status of SOLES faculty members; (c) communicating faculty thinking to the dean and other administrators (or, when appropriate, the SOLES representatives to the university senate) in a variety of ways (e.g., transmitting resolutions passed by faculty members, providing faculty poll results); (d) reviewing and providing a rank-ordered list of faculty research grant proposals to the dean; and (e) organizing (or helping to organize) celebrations of faculty members’ accomplishments. Membership The Faculty Status Committee is composed of one member from each of the 3 departments in SOLES and one at-large member from any of the 3 departments. All tenure-line faculty members are eligible to serve on the committee. Each year, new members are nominated, voted for, and confirmed by SOLES tenure-line faculty members. Each member of the committee serves a 2-year term. Terms are staggered so, each year, there are continuing members on the committee.

Curriculum Committee

As a committee of the faculty of the School of Leadership and Education Sciences, the Curriculum Committee's charge is to make recommendations to the faculty for action on issues regarding curriculum matters. The committee will also provide a formalized body that supports the development of curriculum and instruction.

 

University Professorship- The University Professorship Committee is responsible for organizing the nominations and selections for the bi-annual University Professorship award https://www.sandiego.edu/provost/awards/professorships/.

SOLES Leadership Council

The Leadership Council is comprised of the leadership teams from each of SOLES’ units including departments, institutes, and centers.

SOLES Global Committee

The SOLES Global Committee is made up of faculty and staff. It is charged with reviewing and subsequently approving faculty proposals related to SOLES’ globalization efforts.

Remarkable Leaders (SOLES Advisory Board Sub-committee)

Members of the Remarkable Leaders Committee coordinate the nomination and selection of distinguished educators for the annual Remarkable Leaders Awards.

Structure and Responsibilities of the Curriculum Committee

University of San Diego

School of Leadership and Education Sciences

Revised August 2016

As a committee of the faculty of the School of Leadership and Education Sciences, the Curriculum Committee's charge is to make recommendations to the faculty for action on issues regarding curriculum matters. The committee will also provide a formalized body that supports the development of curriculum and instruction.

 

Membership of the Curriculum Committee

 

  1.         Membership of the Curriculum Committee shall include the Associate Dean and a

faculty member representing each department.

  1.         Faculty members are elected during the spring semester.
  2.         Faculty members will serve a two-year term.
  3.         The Associate Dean is the Chair of the Committee.

General Functions of the Curriculum Committee

 

  1.         Support communication, coordination and development of curriculum and

instruction across the School of Leadership and Education Sciences (e. g.

reviews and disseminate information that impacts more than one program within the School of Leadership and Education Sciences).

  1.         Review and evaluate proposals for curriculum changes.
  2.         Consider curriculum-related matters, which the Dean and/or faculty asks the

committee to study (e. g., developing SOLES draft policy regarding curriculum

and instruction.)

Duties of the Curriculum Committee

 

  1.         Review and evaluate proposals for new courses.
  2.         Review and evaluate proposals for course revisions.   A course revision will be

reviewed only if the intent is to substantially change the description of a course.

  1.         Review and evaluate proposals to eliminate courses and/or programs.
  2.         Review and evaluate proposals for new programs.
  3.         Make recommendations to the faculty for approval.
  4.         Participate in special curriculum-related projects at the request of the faculty

and/or Dean.

The Duties and Responsibilities of the Chair are to

 

  1.         Convene the committee for meetings.
  2.         Ensure minutes are taken each meeting.
  3.         Ensure that the composition of the committee is correct according to the

membership guidelines.

  1.         Announce committee meeting dates and submission deadlines to the full faculty.
  2.         Communicate actions taken by the committee and the reasons for such actions

to Department Chairs and the Dean.  If problems arise relative to program course

requests, these should be explained to the chair and resolved.

  1.         Communicate the committee's recommendations to the full faculty.
  2.         Report actions taken by the full faculty to the Office of the Registrar.

Role of the Members of the Curriculum Committee

The Curriculum Committee holds two face-to-face meetings per semester to discuss proposals and address other curriculum issues as needed. Meeting times will be announced by October 1 for the fall semester and December 15 for the spring semester.

Department proposals should be submitted a week prior to the curriculum committee meeting so that there is time for the committee to review and discuss proposals.

The responsibilities of the members are:

 

  1.         Attend all scheduled meetings.
  2.         Communicate with faculty concerning curricular matters.
  3.         Make professional judgments and informed decisions that are in the best interest

of the faculty and students of SOLES.

 

Procedures for the Submission of Course/Program Proposals

Course and program proposals must be completed and forwarded electronically, along with supporting materials, to the curriculum committee. Prefered submission dates which coincide with scheduled Curriculum Committee meetings will be posted by the curriculum committee at the beginning of each school year. However, the committee will accept materials outside of these dates on an as needed basis. All revisions to existing courses or programs, and submissions of a new course or program for review must be submitted by the school through the USD Course Information Management (CIM) tool via the Teach/Advise tab in the MySanDiego portal.

Course Proposals

Please follow the procedures listed below for proposing an experimental or new course; revising existing courses; or deactivating a course.

  1. Experimental Topics Courses – Courses numbered X79 are to be used by programs for experimental purposes. These courses allow programs to 1) assess student interest in a particular area before instituting formal course application, and 2) offer courses that are of a non-recurring nature or which have somewhat transient relevance. The list below outlines policies and procedures for proposing experimental topics courses.

 

  1. Experimental courses must be approved by program/department faculty and Chair. (Program faculty should discuss student needs, faculty load issues, and impact on other course enrollments, etc.)
  2. Experimental courses are submitted to the committee for review using SOLES Experimental Topics Course Proposal Form located at: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/faculty-and-staff/handbooks-policies-forms.php
  3. The proposed course will be circulated to the curriculum committee as an information item. At this time questions and concerns can be raised and addressed between the curriculum committee and department/department chair.
  4. These proposals are then forwarded to the Dean and Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration for budgetary review.
  5. Pending approval by the Dean and Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration, the Associate Dean will approve the proposal.
  6. Once approved the experimental course proposal will be forwarded to SOLES Academic Scheduler for implementation.

Experimental courses with the same content may be offered twice only under the X79 rubric. After two offerings, the course must be submitted to the program/department faculty as a permanent course, in order to be offered again. Department Chair re-submits the course to the curriculum committee using the procedure for new course proposals below.

  1. New Course Proposals and Revisions to Existing Courses – Departments actively propose new courses and revise existing ones. The list below outlines                   policies and procedures for proposing new courses and revising existing ones.
  2. New course proposals and existing ones must be approved by program/department faculty and Chair. (Program faculty should discuss student needs, faculty load issues, and impact on other course enrollments, etc.)
  3. Once approved course information must be submitted through the USD Course Information Management (CIM) tool via the TEACH/Advise tab.
  4. These proposals will be forwarded electronically to the Curriculum Committee. Following review of the proposal, the committee may decide to (1) approve or (2) send the proposal back to the program director/chair with requests for modifications and/or additional information.
  5. Approved proposals are forwarded to the Dean and Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration for budgetary review.
  6. Pending approval by the Dean and Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration, the Associate Dean will approve the proposal in CIM.

III.   Course Deactivation – From time to time programs and departments deactivate    existing courses. Programs affected by the deactivation should be consulted since it          may be necessary for them to revise their program.

Deactivate courses through the USD Course Information Management (CIM) tool via the TEACH/Advise tab. The link to deactivate a course is provided below for              your convenience: https://nextcatalog.sandiego.edu/courseadmin/

 

Program Proposals

 

Departments can develop, modify or deactivate programs. All new programs, specialization changes, and/or substantive changes within the program/department (such as degree change, or new credential or program area) must be approved by program/department faculty, curriculum committee, Dean and appropriate university and accrediting bodies (Vice Provost) where applicable. Resources for new academic programs can be found at: http://www.sandiego.edu/provost/docs-forms/academic-initiatives-procedures.php

The list below outlines policies and procedures to add, significantly change, or deactivate a program.

  1. New program proposals and existing ones must be approved by program/department faculty and Chair. (Program faculty should discuss student needs, faculty load issues, and impact on other course enrollments, etc.) If the proposal has significant budgetary implications, it should be discussed with the Dean prior to approval by the program.
  2. Once approved program information must be submitted through the USD Course Information Management (CIM) tool via the TEACH/Advise tab.

III.                  These proposals will be forwarded electronically to the Curriculum Committee. Following review of the proposal, the committee may decide to (1) approve or (2) send the proposal back to the program director/chair with requests for modifications and/or additional information.

  1. Approved proposals are forwarded to the Dean and Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration for budgetary review.
  2. Pending approval by the Dean and Assistant Dean for Finance & Administration, the Associate Dean will approve the proposal in CIM.

 

Evaluation of Supervisors

All University personnel involved in the supervision of student teachers, practica, field placements, and internships shall be formally evaluated by the student(s) at the conclusion of the experience provided they meet the minimum number of respondents required to insure anonymity. These evaluations shall be submitted to the appropriate Department Chair, and shared with the faculty member in the same manner as regular course evaluations.

 

University personnel who serve as supervisors for student teaching, practica, field placements and internships, will informally evaluate the students’ site supervisors (non-University personnel).  Such evaluations, which may include student feedback, shall be reported to the appropriate Program Director/Department Chair.  Reports need not be in writing, and are to be used solely for the purpose of future student placement.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

http://www.sandiego.edu/legal/policies/community/institutional/privacy.pdf

 

General Privacy Provisions

 

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.  As a general rule, a student must consent to the release of his or her education records unless the disclosure is permitted under FERPA.  For more information, see http://www.sandiego.edu/registrar/ferpa/.

 

Posting of Grades and Distribution of Graded Material

 

Faculty may not post grades in any manner that could reveal the grade of a particular student. Thus grades may not be posted by name, ID number, or social security number, unless written consent to do so is obtained from the student.  Faculty may post grades by codes known only to each student provided that the grades are not posted in alphabetical order.  Faculty may not leave graded materials in places where they are accessible to students. This includes leaving stacks of laboratory reports or student papers outside one’s door for student pick-up, passing back a homework assignment by sending out all the papers in one stack for the students to look through, or any other method where a student sorts through other students’ work in order to find his or her own materials.

 

FERPA Training & Certification

 

All SOLES employees must become familiar with FERPA and must demonstrate that they have such familiarity. To aid employees in gaining this familiarity, all SOLES employees are to complete the FERPA tutorial available on the Registrar’s website at: http://www.sandiego.edu/registrar/ferpa/

 

At the end of the Tutorial there is a form which you will need to complete. Once you have passed and completed the Tutorial, you will be automatically registered as having successfully completed the necessary training in matters relating to FERPA as amended. You may print out a copy of your completion certificate for your records if you wish.

 

USD Email Address

 

Employees must have a current USD email address which must be used for all student and university-related correspondence. (To create a USD email address & account please see the following website: http://www.sandiego.edu/its/usdone.php.)

Grants

The SOLES Dean’s office, in cooperation with the Office of Sponsored Programs, is committed to supporting SOLES faculty and administrators in seeking and obtaining external funds for research and development.  Support includes consultation regarding possible projects, the identification of potential sources of funding, the development and submission of proposals, and the implementation and monitoring of grants that are funded.   To ensure the proper tracking and timely routing of grant proposals please:

 

  • Notify the Associate Dean when you begin to work on a grant proposal.  It is her/his responsibility to track and support your effort and to assure coordination with the Budget and Operations Manager and the Office of Sponsored Programs.
  • Allow sufficient time (at least a couple of days) for the review and/or signing off on your proposal by the Dean, Budget and Operations Manager, Provost, Office of Sponsored Programs, and Chair (for faculty in departments). Because USD has a routing system for submission of grant proposals that requires the participation of several offices, grants cannot be turned in at the last moment in the expectation that they can be immediately sent out.

If you are interested in federal and state grant information contact the office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) or visit:  www.sandiego.edu/sponsored-programs/.  You can be added to an electronic list serve that notifies you of grant opportunities in your areas of interest.

 

Annette Ketner, Office of Foundation Relations, can provide assistance in identifying possible grant opportunities with private foundations.  Please note that university policy requires that you first contact the Office of Foundation Relations before applying to a private foundation. Similarly, if you are applying for a state or federal grant, then OSP will assist in writing the grant and obtaining the appropriate signatures (department chair, dean, and provost).

 

Resources for Researchers including access to forms and training opportunities may be found at http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/faculty-and-staff/resources-for-researchers/

 

Grant Preparation, Pre-Award

The USD Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) is not only a source for obtaining institutional forms, but also for identifying funding sources; assisting with proposal preparation; and reviewing proposals as well as obtaining signatures for signing off on proposal submittal. Please visit the OSP website (http://www.sandiego.edu/sponsored-programs/). If there is additional information needed in regards to submitting grants, please to contact the OSP office at 619-260-6825.

 

Importance of Early Coordination

 

It is very important for Principal Investigators to recognize the advantages of early feasibility discussions with the appropriate Chair/Dean to ascertain initial information as to whether a proposed program is consistent with the University’s mission, size and resources. This is particularly true for proposed programs that will require any costs, space, equipment or other services to be provided by USD.

 

The Dean’s Office and the Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) can assist in budget preparation and review guidelines with Principal Investigators to point out any obstacles to be dealt with early in the process (cost sharing requirements, consortia or subcontract documentation, etc.). Where appropriate, the OSP will provide applicable Facilities and Administration rates, Fringe Benefit rates, or other applicable rates as well as other basic information needed in the proposal.

 

As a further note, Principal Investigators should be aware that if other individuals, including those employed at USD, and/or outside organizations will be included in the proposed research, it is the Principal Investigator’s responsibility to obtain their agreement to participate as well as the approval of their respective departments or organizations. Doing this as early in the process as appropriate, and communicating these requirements  to  the  OSP  from  the  beginning,  will  better  enable  the proposal submission deadlines to be met in a timely manner.

 

Department Chairs

 

The Department Chair reviews and approves the proposal being submitted to verify that the Principal Investigator can effectively manage the program given other academic and administrative commitments, as well as to confirm  that proposals  and programs  are in accord  with department/school objectives. The Chair assesses the adequacy of the budget and how it will impact departmental finances and reviews for any additional space or cost sharing requirements given the scale of the program. In signing a grant routing form, the Chair also accepts financial responsibility for the department for any eventual overruns and/or cost disallowances. The Chair also approves certain expenses or actions related to the program such as stipend payments, tuition, new hires, and cost sharing commitments. Where possible, the Chair provides departmental assistance in preparing and submitting appropriate documentation for financial and other administrative transactions.

 

Dean

 

The Dean’s Office reviews the proposal to verify that the faculty member is eligible to be a Principal Investigator and can effectively manage and properly conduct the proposed program. The Dean’s Office also reviews budgets, gives official approval to any cost-sharing commitments or provisions for additional resources, and confirms that proposals and programs are in accord with department/school objectives. The Dean’s Office will accept financial responsibility for any eventual overruns and/or cost disallowances, and will often provide local administrative support for the program once funded.

 

Routing of preliminary grant documents and proposals:

 

Letter of inquiry

 

A “Letter of Inquiry” is a general presentation of a program idea designed to elicit feedback from a potential sponsor.  No commitment should be made in the letter. Letters of inquiry do not require Dean’s office and OSP review and no formal routing is required, providing that no commitments are made.

 

Concept papers

 

The prospective sponsor may request concept papers. Concept papers tend to be approximately two- to-four pages in length, and they highlight key features of the anticipated proposal. Normally, these are  sent  to  the  program  officer  after  telephone  conversation  requesting  permission  to  submit  a concept paper. The program officer may comment on areas to highlight, what should be avoided, and activities that should be included. Generally, in shortened form, these would include:

 

Project title; Statement of need - with relevance to sponsor's mission; Goals and objectives – overall goal, specific objectives, quantifiable; Methodology - related to objects, anticipates questions, objections, snags; Resources and personnel; Generalized budget - with cost sharing (if required), which should be coordinated with OSP to verify that it does not commit the University and the information is accurate.

 

Letter of intent

 

A “Letter of Intent” expresses the intention to submit a proposal in response to a particular program announcement or request for proposals. Letters of Intent to form a consortium are often required for submissions to NIH where USD will be a partner with the lead university. Agencies generally require that such letters present only a general statement of the intended program theme. If the letter of intent contains budget estimates or representations, it must be reviewed and approved by the Dean’s office and OSP prior to submission. The Provost will sign the letter as an indication of the institution’s concurrence with the planned submission.

 

Preliminary proposals (pre-proposals)

 

Preliminary proposals, like letters of intent, are generally solicited by the sponsor.  A preliminary proposal usually includes a one- to five-page program description. It may also require a draft budget and some indication of USD’s willingness to support the program through a commitment of resources.  Any document that mentions budget figures or commits USD personnel, facilities, and/or other resources requires Dean’s office,  OSP review and institutional signature approval before the proposal is submitted.

 

Calculation of Faculty Replacement Teaching Costs:

 

Some grants may include a proposal for course buy-out for the PI or other faculty members to facilitate their participation in grant-related activities.   The amount budgeted to facilitate course release should be equivalent to 10% of the individual faculty member’s salary for every three units of course release.  This amount shall be calculated for every faculty member participating in the grant through course release, including the PI.  This cost serves to offset the cost of hiring replacement faculty to teach courses.  This policy was approved by Provost Julie Sullivan on March 22, 2010.

Faculty Research Grants

  1. PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Under the FRG program, Assistant, Associate and Full Professors may apply for the FRG. Proposals are read and ranked by the Faculty Status Committee based upon the Rubric provided in Part VI. The proposals of Assistant Professors are awarded first followed by the proposals of Associate and Full Professors. Assistant Faculty applicants are guaranteed FRG funds during their second, third, and fourth years via the following process:

Assistant Professors in their second, third, or fourth years, whose proposals are deemed deficient via the Faculty Status Committee rubric are provided with feedback and assigned a mentor from the Faculty Status Committee. The mentor then works with the Assistant Professor in improving and resubmitting their proposal. (The Faculty Status Committee will provide specific information to Assistant Professors early in the Fall Semester regarding the scoring procedures for their proposals.) After the FRG is awarded, the mentor will continue to support the faculty throughout the grant distribution. Mentorship support can include but is not limited to reading and providing feedback on manuscript drafts, giving advice and assistance with conference proposals, and/or providing insight on appropriate publishing venues and opportunities. Assistant Professors in their second, third, or fourth years must submit an FRG proposal to receive the award.

All FRG proposals should include language expressing how the project supports SOLES’ mission, vision and/or strategic priorities. In accordance with university policies, a summary of activities related to the FRG must be submitted to the Provost’s office.

  1. PURPOSE/GOAL
  1. To recruit and retain faculty in SOLES
  2. To support Assistant Professors in developing their scholarship/research agenda and trajectory
  3. To support Assistant Faculty in their bid for tenure given the University’s new policy that gives equal emphasis to scholarship and teaching
  4. To provide research mentorship opportunities for Assistant Professors
  5. To support Associate and Full Professors in the continued development of their scholarship including the publication of books, book chapters and other scholarly works
  6. To support scholarly activities that meet SOLES’ mission, vision, and/or SOLES’ strategic priorities
  1. DEFINITION
  1. For the purpose of awarding faculty research grants, the sine qua non of research/scholarship is the creation of a substantial scholarly product that is intended for dissemination beyond the School of Leadership and Education Sciences.  Therefore, publication is understood to be the aim of research/scholarship.  However, “to publish” is understood in the very broad sense of “to make publicly or generally known.”  The School of Leadership and Education Sciences recognizes that faculty members may legitimately choose to disseminate their work through any number of traditional or non-traditional channels, depending upon the audience with whom they wish to communicate.
  2. Examples of activities that, in themselves, do not qualify for faculty research grant awards include writing or rewriting program documents for credentialing, working to obtain licenses or credentials, revising course syllabi, developing new courses, preparing documents for accreditation agencies, or any other activities that do not culminate in a substantial scholarly product that is imbued with intellectual ambition and intended for an audience beyond the School of Leadership and Education Sciences.
  3. ELIGIBILITY

 .               Only tenured and tenure-track faculty members in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences shall be eligible for faculty research grant awards. Priority is given to Assistant Professors.

  1. Each faculty member may only submit one proposal per year.
  2. PROPOSAL GUIDELINES

 .               Coversheet: The cover sheet must contain your name; title of proposal, running heading that reflects the intent of the project (in the upper right corner on this page and on every subsequent page, as well). Also include on the cover page the amount of assigned time and/or funds requested and the semester in which you plan to do the research.

  1. Previous FRG Award Status Sheet: On a second sheet that is to be submitted in the same file as the cover sheet, list the semester and year of your last two FRGs. Describe the results of each of your last two research awards (this can be the one page report required under Section V. Reporting/Disseminating). If less than two FRGs have been received, so indicate on the sheet. This information, along with the cover sheet, is kept with the Dean’s Administrative Assistant and it is not included with the proposal disseminated to the Faculty Status Committee during the review process. The cover sheet and previous FRG status sheets are used as part of the oversight process after the recommendations for rank order of proposals have been forwarded to the Dean.
  2. Content of Proposal: The proposal itself should not be more than 3000 words (excluding the abstract and references). Proposals that exceed specified lengths will not be considered for awards. Proposals should be double-spaced and a clear and consistent formatting style should be used throughout the proposal. Because proposals will be blindly reviewed, no identifying information should be included in the body of the proposal. The body of the proposal should consist of the following:
      1. Title of proposed faculty research grant proposal
      2. Is your FRG Proposal
  1. ___A New Project or Initiative          
  2. ___A work in progress not previously funded by a FRG
  3. ___A work in progress or continuation of a project previously funded by an FRG
      1. What is the word count of your proposal (excluding the abstract and references)?
      2. Abstract (not to exceed 150 words)
      3. Statement of the Problem and its Significance: This section should establish a need for the project that is being proposed. The need could be practical and/or theoretical. Appropriate citations should be used in framing the problem that the project will address and in demonstrating its significance.
      4. Purpose of the Project (and, if the project is a research study, the research questions): In this section, the proposal writer should indicate how the project relates to the problem articulated in the prior section.
      5. Procedures: This section should describe in specific terms the procedures – qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods—that will be used in the proposed study along with a rationale for using these procedures. If the proposal is for funding to write about an already completed study, both the procedures that were used to generate the research findings to be reported should be detailed and detailed discussion of (a) the organization of the proposed paper and (b) the process that will be used to write the paper should be presented. Proposals for books, book chapters, and articles that will not report the results of a particular research study also should detail (a) the organizational structures of the material to be produced and (b) the procedures that will be used to complete the writing task. If what is being proposed is part of a larger and longer-term initiative, this section should provide an overview of the overall procedures that have been or will be employed and a more in-depth discussion of the procedures that will be used in the portion of the project for which support is requested. If the proposal writer has received other Faculty Research Grants to support work on other aspects of the larger initiative, copies of the proposals for these initiatives (minus any information that would reveal the identity of the faculty member) should be appended to this proposal.
      6. Tentative Timeline for Project Completion.
      7. A Dissemination Plan
      8. A Discussion of Human Subject Issues
      9. A List of References
  1. Submission of FRG Proposal: All FRG proposals are to be submitted electronically to the staff person designated by the dean by noon on March 1st. If March 1st is on a weekend, the due date is the Monday after March 1st. Two files should be submitted. One should include the cover page and the Previous FRG Awards Status Sheet along with the proposal. The second file should contain only the proposal that does not reveal the identity of the author.  Only the proposal will be forwarded to the Faculty Status Committee for evaluation.
  2. CRITERIA FOR SELECTING BETWEEN COMPETING FACULTY REQUESTS FOR RESEARCH GRANTS

 .               Fidelity to SOLES’ definition of research and scholarship.

  1. Demonstration that the project requires the amount of reassigned time or funding that is requested.
  2. Scope and significance of the project.
  3. Appropriateness of plans for completing the project.
  4. Evidence that completion of the project is likely.

 

Within a month after the Spring cutoff date, proposals will be blindly and separately reviewed and ranked by each committee member. Following discussion and after the Faculty Status Committee examines the inter-reliability of scores, the committee will jointly rank all proposals and submit their ranked list to the dean. Ultimate discretion for awarding FRGs rests with the dean.

 

RUBRIC TO BE USED IN ASSESSING FACULTY RESEARCH GRANT PROPOSALS

The Problem and its Significance

  • 10 Points: The author clearly articulates a problem and establishes its significance by developing a convincing argument and citing appropriate literature.
  • 6 Points: The author attempts to identify a problem and demonstrate its significance, but either the description of the problem is not as clear as it should be or the argument about its significance is not as convincing as it could have been.
  • 2 Points: The author attempts to identify a problem and demonstrate its significance, but the description of the problem is not as clear as it should be and the argument about its significance is not as convincing as it could have been.
  • 0 Points: It is virtually impossible to understand the author’s problem and/or the author’s argument about its significance.

The Purpose (and, if Appropriate, the Research Questions)

  • 10 Points: The author clearly articulates a purpose for the project that is (and, in the case of research studies, articulates research questions that are) consistent with and respond to the problem that was identified.
  • 6 Points: The author attempts to articulate a purpose (and, when appropriate, research questions), but the discussion of the purpose either is not as clear as it should be or the purpose articulated does not directly respond to the problem identified.
  • 2 Points: The author attempts to articulate a purpose (and, if appropriate, research questions) but the discussion is neither clear nor directly responsive to the problem that was identified.
  • 0 Points: The purpose section of the proposal is virtually impossible to understand.

The Procedures

  • 10 Points: The author clearly articulates procedures to be used in executing the project and also presents a convincing rationale for using the identified procedures, a rationale that, among other things, links the procedures with the identified purpose.
  • 6 Points: The author attempts to articulate procedures but either there is not enough detail for the reviewer to picture what the author will actually do or the rationale for using the identified procedures is not adequate.
  • 2 Points: The author attempts to articulate inquiry procedures, but there is not enough detail for the reviewer to picture what the proposal will do and the rationale for using the identified procedures is inadequate.
  • 0 Points: It is virtually impossible for the reviewer to even imagine what the proposal writer intends to do, much less to understand the rationale that supports the procedures.

Language and Formatting Issues

 

  • 10 Points: The proposal is written in the format specified, is easy to understand and generally free of technical errors (e.g., typos).
  • 6 Points: The proposal is mostly easy to understand, but sometimes less than precise language and/or other technical errors require(s) the reader to reread sentences and/or whole sections of the proposal.
  • 2 Points: The proposal is often difficult to understand because of the author’s less than precise language and/or other technical errors.
  • 0 Points: The proposal is often incomprehensible because of problematic writing.

The Scope of Work

 

  • 10 Points: The scope of work is consistent with the resources requested. In other words, the work described is clearly executable within the amount of time requested (e.g., 3 unit release equivalent to 51 hours of actual time spent on named project)
  • 6 Points: The scope of work seems either too large or too small for the resources requested.
  • 2 Point: The scope of work is totally unrealistic, given the resources that have been asked requested.
  • 0 Points: It is virtually impossible to determine the scope of work from the proposal.

Dissemination Plan

  • 10 Points: The dissemination plans described are comprehensive, specific and realistic.
  • 6 Points: Either the dissemination plans are not specific or they do not appear to be realistic.
  • 2 Points: The dissemination plans are neither specific nor realistic.
  • 0 Points: Dissemination plans are not discussed in the proposal.
  1. REPORTING/DISSEMINATING

 

The faculty member is to file a one-page report (see appendix) no later than October 1 of the subsequent year with the Associate Provost and one copy with the Dean. If the project has not been completed by the end of the fiscal year, the faculty member will file a progress report by October 1st; this report will include a section on the use of the funds allocated.

At the beginning of each academic year, the chair of the Faculty Status Committee will be given a list of the previous year’s grantees. The committee will then decide upon an appropriate forum to allow award recipients to share their work with colleagues. Such a forum will be held at a faculty meeting sometime each fall and spring semesters and will be convened by the Faculty Status Committee.  Each award recipient is responsible for committing to and presenting the results and or progress of the work they completed with the FRG they were awarded.  Failure to make this presentation may impact future grant awards to faculty members.

 

  1. LETTERS OF AWARD

 

When awards are made, an award letter will be issued by the Dean with a copy to the Provost, specifying the amount and nature of the award (or incorporating by reference the proposal which has been approved), and notifying faculty of the procedures and time deadlines. Non-expendable equipment remains the property of the University.  Requests for funds, purchase requisitions, etc., should be finalized by June 1st, so as to be processed before the close of the fiscal year. There may be June payments, but these will have been authorized in advance. If special circumstances require June check requests, purchase requisitions, or the like, specific arrangements with the Dean must be made in advance.

Faculty Grant Initiative

PURPOSE

The purpose of the Faculty Grant Initiative is:

  • To support scholarly trajectory of tenured (Full and Associate Professors) and Assistant Professors in their 5th and 6th years
  • To encourage scholarship; deepened engagement within the scholar’s selected field; and to promote growth, visibility, and scholarly influence of the faculty member and of SOLES
  • To develop faculty members’ readiness for external funding through research support and professional development opportunities
  • To support scholarly activities that meet SOLES’ mission, vision, and/or SOLES’ strategic priorities:

 

SOLES’ Mission: The mission of SOLES is to engage with students and our communities to         continuously learn through inquiry and practice that supports social justice and effects            meaningful change in our diverse society.

 

SOLES’ Vision: We shape the future by providing inclusive education as the foundation of            social justice and the means to enhance human dignity and improve the quality of life.

 

SOLES’ Strategic Priorities:

1) Expand SOLES’ Commitment to Multiculturalism and Social Justice

2) Strengthen, Develop, and Grow Academic Programs in SOLES

3) Increase SOLES’ Engagement with K-12 Catholic, Public and       

            Charter/Community-Based Schools

4) Enhance SOLES’ International and Local Presence

External grants are broadly defined to include, but are not limited to national, state and city-wide grants (e.g. NIH and NSF); Fulbright research grants; grants from foundations (Johnson Family, Spencer, Longview), etc.

ELIGIBILITY

Open to all Tenured Professors (Full and Associate) & to Assistant Professors in their 5th and 6th years

 

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Grant Proposals are submitted to a committee consisting of the Associate Dean and one representative from each of SOLES’ three departments.  Only those who have not submitted a proposal in the current competition are eligible to serve on the committee.  The grant proposal should include language expressing how the project supports SOLES’ mission, vision and/or strategic priorities. FGI awards are granted in one of three categories: Course Release, Faculty Development, or Pilot/Seed Funding.  

Category A-Course Release

Release time should be used to develop the external grant/funding, which the faculty member is seeking. Faculty members should submit an electronic application consisting of the following information:  

  • Name & department of participating individual
  • Description of the potential research for which you will be seeking external grant funding (Note: This does not need to be a fully developed proposal but instead a description of the area(s) you are interested in exploring)
  • Discussion of how the potential research supports SOLES’ mission, vision, and/or strategic priorities
  • List of potential grant funders and/or areas of potential funding (This may include specific foundations or government funders but could also be ideas about sectors who may be interested in funding)
  • Estimate of anticipated budget request for grant
  • Estimated timeline for grant submission

Category B- Faculty Development (Up to $4,000)

Under this category, faculty applicants receive funding to support their research/scholarship, development and readiness for external grant funding. Examples of the kinds of projects Category B supports include: attendance at a grant-writing seminar; participation in an institute focused on a particular research database, methodology, theoretical lens, and/or technique; and/or research technology training (i.e. a qualitative coding package).

Category C- Pilot/Seed Funding (Up to $4,000)

Funding in this category is granted for direct research activities leading to improved preparation for external grant funding. A few examples of the kinds of projects Category C is designed to support include: consulting with a statistician; hiring a graduate/research assistant to develop a literature review, a survey, or to prepare data for analysis; transcription or other data analysis services; or the development of an app or other software for research purposes.

Proposals for Categories B and C should be submitted electronically and include the following information:

  • Name & department of participating individual
  • Category to which individual is applying
  • Description of the project and how it supports the individual’s research/scholarship development and readiness for external funding
  • Discussion of how the potential research supports SOLES’ mission, vision, and/or strategic priorities
  • Project cost(s)/budget request

 

SOLES Global Faculty Grants

The purpose of the SOLES Global Faculty Grants program is to help SOLES internationalize the curriculum by promoting collaborative research on international themes and/or by exposing faculty to different cultures and languages. The committee will evaluate proposals on the strength of their connection to SOLES’ internationalization goal and to the perceived benefit towards increasing faculty members' research programs or language fluency. The committee will consider how the proposed project will strengthen the faculty member’s scholarship and build a scholar's long-term international research agenda.

 

Selection Criteria

  • Quality and significance of the proposal;
  • Thoughtfulness given to its applicability to research and publication on international themes and/or from various cultural perspectives.
  • The proposal should show evidence that the faculty member will deepen his/her understanding of their field of study within other cultural contexts and/or about international and/or language and culture issues.

Guidelines for SOLES Global Faculty Grants

 

All proposals submitted must deal with either international topics in your field of teaching and scholarship, or language/culture learning.  International research implies that the scholarship you undertake will examine practices within that particular context or from the perspective of that context; this might mean research in another country or about another country

 

Priority is given to proposals for:

  • International research with colleagues in at least one other nation or culture;
  • International research with at least one SOLES student involved;
  • Travel to another nation with the primary purpose of supporting or developing course contacts and materials for future course offerings.

 

Possible Evidence to be submitted once the project is completed and before another grant is awarded (only one may be selected):

  • Refereed article accepted for publication ($5,000). If submitting an article with multiple authors from SOLES, proposal must indicate how funds are to be distributed.
  • Non-refereed article accepted for publication ($1,000)
  • Book contract with publisher ($2,500)
  • Book chapter accepted for publication ($1,500)
  • Editor of special issue of journal ($1,500)
  • Creation of a new syllabus or thoroughly revised existing course syllabus ($500)
  • Evidence of increased language fluency ($2,000)
  • Documented visits to organizations, universities, sites abroad as planning for future course offerings.  (up to $2,000)

 

Steps:

  1. Complete the application: “SOLES Global Grant Proposal Form” (page 2)
  2. Once the proposal is approved by the Global Grants Committee, be sure to keep the approved copy of the proposal form.
  3. Once the project is completed, submit appropriate evidence.
  4. Monetary award will be made.

SOLES Global Faculty Grant Proposal Form

 

If you plan to include student(s) in your project, your proposal can include how you will use the monetary award to support the student. Faculty Global Grant submission form may be found here: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/SOLESGlobalFacultyGrants2013.pdf

Please note the deadlines of October 1 and April 1, with only one proposal per fiscal year accepted.

 

Guidelines:

 

All tenure track and tenured SOLES faculty are eligible to apply. However, applicants can only be funded for one project per semester and the project cannot be tied to a Faculty Research Grant (FRG) Or International Opportunity Grant (IOG). Project cannot be retroactively awarded.

 

General Policies for Faculty Research Grant, Faculty Grant Initiative, and Global Grant Competitions

  • FRGs are distributed as course releases only.
  • The FGI Category A-Course Release is awarded prospectively to provide time to write the grant. Participation in subsequent FGIs will be contingent upon completed submission of prior proposal.
  • Faculty can participate in a maximum of 2 competitions per year.
  • Any remaining funds in the three categories (FRG, FGI, Global Grants) after the first round of awards can be distributed via a second round of competitions.
  • Faculty must submit different projects for different competitions.
  • No less than 2-2 teaching load is allowed via the FRG and FGI programs.

 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) Proposals

 

Any member of the SOLES community who is engaged in research is required to submit proposals and subsequently gain approval  from the University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). Proposals (including renewals, modifications, and summaries) are facilitated through the Vice Provost’s office and are submitted online via the IRB Cayuse System found at the my.sandiego.edu portal. Once submitted, one of four SOLES Faculty IRB Representatives will conduct the initial review of  your proposal. Subsequent reviews will occur at the Vice Provost office. Applicants will be notified of approval directly from the Provost’s office or via email.The University Institutional Review Board meets monthly to review proposals for full review.  

 

Please refer to the website,  https://www.sandiego.edu/irb/review/  for details regarding the IRB review process.  Please pay careful attention to the IRB requirements and the specific expectations of Exempt, Expedited, and Full proposals when writing your proposal. Please note that all persons conducting research at the university must show proof of IRB training. Please refer to the IRB Training page for information on online IRB training courses, https://www.sandiego.edu/irb/training.php.

International Course Proposals

 

For SOLES Global course proposals, please view the procedures on the SOLES Global Center Website:  http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/centers-and-research/global-center/resources/faculty/

Faculty Load Policy

It is the policy of the School of Leadership and Education Sciences that the normal full-time load for teaching faculty is nine semester units in the fall and six semester units in the spring, commonly referred to as a 3/2 teaching load or six semester units in the fall and nine semester units in the spring or a 2/3 teaching load (15 units during an academic year). Overload will be accumulated after the 15th semester unit during an academic year. Teaching load reductions may be granted for serving in specified administrative roles or for other reasons when approved in advance by the Dean. In addition to regular instruction, teaching faculty are also expected to be engaged in activities supporting the university mission, research, and professional development. For the purposes of calculating faculty load, online courses and residential courses are counted as equivalent.

 

Load Forms

At the beginning of each semester, you will be asked to complete a Faculty Load Form that can be found, with complete instructions, on the web at: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/forms/faculty-load/index.php

The form will be submitted electronically— please do not submit a hard copy.  The form should be completed by the end of the first week of the semester.

Merit Pay Process

The Dean makes recommendations to the Provost in February after reviewing the Annual Faculty Planning and Evaluation Reports and after examining relative School-wide performance of faculty members so that inequities do not arise among faculty members with similar historical patterns of achievement. A percentage system has been used in the School with an explicit, targeted range for each recommending category, (e.g. 2-3% for average/satisfactory and 3-4% for above average).  This is dependent on the university’s approved annual percentage increase.

 

The first criterion, teaching, is key to our mission and is prominent in support of a strong merit pay recommendation.  With regard to service to the program or department, the Dean will seek input from the Department Chairs.  Please note:  USD does not have an automatic cost of living increase.

 

A review of recommendations the last several years suggests the following profile for "typical" performance in the two following categories:

 

  1. Average/satisfactory: The faculty member was an organized and effective instructor, accessible to students, and continued to be current in teaching fields. The faculty member had an active research agenda. Service in the program was reliable, and attendance at program meetings was regular; the faculty member may have served on a School or University-wide committee or two or been involved in community service activities or professional associations. Support of the University mission and a sense of responsibility were in evidence.

 

  1. Above average: The faculty member was a demanding instructor with high intellectual standards, a demonstrated ability to motivate students, and a creative/adaptable pedagogy. The faculty member had one or more scholarly or research accomplishments that reached an audience of peers beyond the University. Service in the program was reliable, and attendance at program and department meetings was regular; the faculty member will have served at least one SOLES or University-wide committee or two, or been involved in community service activities. Leadership in faculty governance, program administration or professional associations was demonstrated; significant community service activities also may have been noted. Clear support of the University mission and a sense of responsibility were in evidence.

The above profiles were developed inductively.  Some faculty may receive no merit increase or well below average, below average or well above average recommendations, but no attempts are made to infer patterns from these smaller number of cases. The description above of "typical" performance is not designed to determine merit decision-making; there are a myriad of variations, and there are factors-such as being a new faculty member or on leave-that can affect substantially how judgments are made regarding annual performance. The above profiles have, then, mostly heuristic value. Of primary importance in the merit pay process is the development of recommendations which are fully cognizant of the four criteria and which are supported by rationales and evidence.

Practicum & Fieldwork Compensation

Counseling

 

COUN 588P (Sec. 01, 02) (3 units) (School practicum) (min. 3 / max 6 students per section)

COUN 590F (3 units) (Fieldwork in School Settings – limit 10 students)

COUN 587P (Clinical Mental Health Practicum) (3 Units)

COUN 597F, 598F (Clinical Mental Health Practicum II & III) (3 Units each)

Instructor for seminar 587, 597. 598 – 3 units (min 3 / max 7 students per section)

Individual Clinical Supervision: 1/2 instructional unit/student or.50 or 2 students = 1 unit

Department of Learning and Teaching

 

Practicum - $200 per student/per semester

EDUC 332P/532P (3 units)

EDUC 334P/534P (3 units)

EDUC 549P (3 units)

EDUC 375P/575P (3 units)

EDUC 383P/583P (3 units)

EDUC 385P/585P (3 units)

EDSP 375P/575P (3 units)

 

Extended Practicum - $300 per student/per semester

EDUC 551P(MCC MS, SS) (2 units)

EDSP 591P (SPED) (1 unit)

 

Full Time Student Teaching - $600 per student/per semester

EDUC 552P (MCC MS, SS) (6 units)

EDUC 490P/590P (MS Credential Only) (9 units)

EDUC 491P/591P (SS Credential Only) (9 units)

EDSP 590P (MCC SPED) (7 units)

Leadership Studies

 

LEAD 598 – Masters Internship

LEAD 698 - Doctoral internship

TBD

LEAD 597P, 598P (Practicum in School Administration I &II) (3 Units)

for supervision of students in their first three semesters 1/2 instructional unit/student or . 5 or 6 students = 3 units for supervision of students in their final semesters 3/5 instructional unit/student or . 6 or 5 students = 3 units

Marital and Family Therapy

 

MFTS 595P, 596P, 597P (5 units) (practicum)

Instructor for seminar (didactic) – 1 unit (for all full- and part-time faculty each semester); .5 unit during the summer

Small Group Instruction (max 6) – 2 units

Individual Supervision:

Full Time Faculty: 1/3 unit/student or .33 or 3 students = 1 unit

Part Time Faculty: 1/6 unit/student or .16 or 6 students = 1 unit

Sabbatical Leave

Please see the complete Sabbatical Leave Policy as it appears in Volume IV: Faculty Policies of the USD Policies and Procedures manual, available at http://www.sandiego.edu/legal/upolicies.php .

Disabilities

USD is committed to the fair and equal treatment of individuals with disabilities. To that end, USD will make reasonable accommodations for disabled persons in a manner consistent with applicable law.

 

Students who believe they have a need for accommodations due to a disability must request accommodations and provide appropriate documentation to USD’s Disability and Learning Difference Resource Center (DLDRC).  An employee should notify his or her supervisor or Human Resources of the need for a reasonable accommodation due to a disability.  For more information, please see the university’s Policy on Reasonable Accommodations for Disabled Persons (http://www.sandiego.edu/legal/policies/community/institutional/disabled.pdf).

Additional information is available through the DLDRC website: http://www.sandiego.edu/disability/.

Standards for Graduate Students

The standards below were drafted as part of a “Statement on Graduate Students” by a subcommittee of the Association’s Committee C on College and University Teaching, Research, and Publication and approved for publication by Committee C in October 1999.

 

  1. Graduate students have the right to academic freedom.  Like other students, “they should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course or study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion, but they are responsible for learning the content of any course of study for which they are enrolled.”1 Moreover, their advanced education particularly requires faculty to encourage their freedom of “discussion, inquiry and expression.”2   Further, they should be able to express their opinions freely about matters of institutional policy, and they should have the same freedom of action in the public political domain as faculty members.

Graduate students’ freedom of inquiry is necessarily qualified by their being learners in the profession; nonetheless, their faculty mentors should afford them latitude and respect as they decide in how they will engage in teaching and research.

  1. Graduate students have the right to be free from illegal or unconstitutional discrimination, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the job function involved, including, but not limited to, age, sex, disability, race, religion, national origin, marital status, or sexual orientation, in admissions and throughout their education, employment and placement.

They should be informed of the requirements of their degree programs.  When feasible, they should be told about acceptance, application, and attrition rates in their fields, but it is ntirealso their responsibility to keep themselves informed.  If requirements are altered, students admitted under previous rules should be able to continue under those rules.

Institutions should help students make progress toward their degrees in a timely fashion. They should provide diligent advisers, relevant course offerings, adequate dissertation or thesis supervision, and clear communication of their progress.  Students should understand that dissertation or thesis work may be constrained by the areas of interest and specialization of available faculty supervisors.

If a student’s dissertation or thesis adviser departs once the student’s work is underway, the responsible academic officers should endeavor to provide the student with alternative supervision, external to the institution if necessary.  If a degree program is to be discontinued, provisions must be made for students already in the program to complete their course of study.

  1. Graduate students are entitled to the recognition and protection of their intellectual property rights.  This includes recognition of their participation in supervised research and the research of faculty.  Standards of attribution and acknowledgement in collaborative settings should be made publicly available.
  2. Graduate students should have a voice in institutional governance at the program, department, college, graduate school, and university levels.
  3. The AAUP’s Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure protects graduate assistants and assures them of written terms of appointment, due process in the event of proposed dismissal, and the opportunity to invoke “access to the faculty grievance committee.”4   Graduate student employees with grievances, as individuals or as a group, should submit them in a timely fashion and should have access to an impartial hearing committee or, if provided under institutional policy, arbitration.  Clear guidelines and timelines for grievance procedures should be distributed to all interested parties.  Individuals or participants in a group grievance should not be subjected to reprisals.  Graduate student employees may choose a representative to speak for them at all stages of a grievance.
  4. Graduate student assistants should be informed in writing of the conditions of their employment.  Moreover, graduate student assistants should be informed of all academic or other institutional regulations affecting their roles as employees.

Good practices should include appropriate training in teaching, adequate office space, and a safe working environment.  Departments should endeavor to acquaint students with the norms and traditions of their academic discipline and to inform them of professional opportunities.  Graduate students should feel free to seek departmental assistance in obtaining future academic and nonacademic employment.  Departments are encouraged to provide support for the professional development of graduate students by such means as funding research expenses and conference travel.

  1. Graduate students should have access to their files and placement dossiers.  If access is denied, graduate students should feel free to request that a faculty member of their choice be given access to their files, so that he or she can provide the student with a redacted account at his or her discretion.  Graduate students should have the right to direct that items be added to or removed from their placement dossiers.
  2. Like all other campus employees, graduate student assistants should have the right to organize to bargain collectively without discrimination or reprisal from faculty or administrators, as the Association’s Council affirmed in November 1998.  Administrations should honor a majority request for union representation.  Graduate student assistants must not suffer retaliation because of their activity relating to collective bargaining.
  3. In order to ensure full-time students an opportunity for timely progress toward their degrees, the time spent in teaching or research assistantships or other graduate student employment provided by the institution should be limited in amount – a common maximum is twenty hours per week – and should afford sufficient compensation so as not to compel the student to obtain substantial additional employment elsewhere.
  4. Graduate student assistants, though they only work part-time, should receive essential fringe benefits, and especially health benefits.

Mileage Reimbursement

Faculty members who perform off-site supervision are eligible for mileage reimbursement.  Please go to the Accounts Payable Website to access the Expense Report form at: http://www.sandiego.edu/finance/accounts-payable/forms.php.  Along with the expense report form, you will also need to complete the mileage form  (Scroll down to the miscellaneous forms section).  Under “Travel Description,” note the names of the school visited and the student supervised.  Requests must be submitted no later than 60 days after the supervision was performed. To ensure compliance with this policy, reimbursement requests should be submitted at least twice a semester.

Travel Allotment Procedures

For the 2017-2018 academic year, all tenure line faculty are allotted up to $1500 for professional travel.

 

New tenure line faculty, (in their first three years of service), are eligible for additional support for up to two additional conferences in which they are presenting. Prior approval must be granted before the expenses are incurred. Travel expense forms, policies and procedures are available on USD’s website (http://www.sandiego.edu/finance/accounts-payable/).The budget year begins on July 1 and ends on June 30.

 

Department Chairs are eligible for additional travel monies due to their programmatic responsibilities. Additional travel support requires prior written permission from the dean.   Please send requests to the dean and he will respond to you and to the Assistant Dean for Finance and Administration.

 

Please submit your travel expense forms within 60 days of the completion of your travel. Submittals made after this time frame will not be processed.  If your travel is toward the end of the fiscal year, please be sure to turn in your expense form as quickly as possible and no later than the last week of June.  If the forms are submitted after the fiscal year closes, the upcoming year’s allocations will be used for reimbursement.

Faculty Presenting with Students at Conferences

Faculty should apply to the Enhanced Faculty Student Interaction grant (EFSI) in the Provost’s office for up to $500 to support student-faculty groups to present at a professional conference. Please see the Provost’s office website for details.

 

The SOLES Graduate Student Association (SGSA) also provides support for students to travel to conferences.  Before seeking support from the student’s home department or SOLES Dean’s office, students must first apply to SGSA for support.   Once this application is made, then a student or a group of students, may submit a request to the home department  to help support their expenses. The faculty member should be copied on this request.  Students should provide an itemized estimate that includes travel and conference expenses, as well as the names and email addresses of all students making the request. If funding is not available at the department level, then the request may be submitted to the Dean’s office for consideration. Funding is awarded as available and dependent upon level of student involvement. Please note that requests must be submitted and approved prior to conference attendance.  Funding requests submitted after an event will not be considered.

Travel Guidelines

(For Student Clubs and Groups)

General Guidelines:

  1. All events that involve student travel must be approved in writing by the Dean, or the Dean’s designated representative for travel issues.
  2. All vendors conducting business on behalf of the university must sign a contract and provide a certificate of insurance, with an attached endorsement naming USD as the additional insured.  There will be no exceptions to this requirement.  All certificates with the attached endorsements should be copied and sent to the Risk Manager in Human Resources.

III.                  All USD registered clubs and organizations planning to have an event off campus which involves providing transportation in USD vehicles for students must have those students sign a waiver releasing the University from any liability for the student off campus. Waiver forms are available in the Office of Student Affairs on Mondays – Fridays, 8:00am – 5:00pm.  Trip applicants may not leave campus unless a signed waiver is received.  The signed waivers are to be given to the Office of Student Affairs prior to departure from campus.

  1. Student waivers are only used for “voluntary” participants.  If the trip is a course requirement no waiver can be obtained.
  2. A list which includes the name, I.D. number, address and emergency phone number of each student traveling and a copy of the final trip itinerary must be given to the Office of Student Affairs and to Campus Security prior to departure from campus.
  3. All transportation companies used (chartered buses, rental cars, etc.) must carry insurance.  A certificate of insurance from the vendor’s carrier with an attached endorsement naming USD as additional insured must be given to the Office of Student Affairs prior to departure from campus.  If renting a vehicle for use with the United States, provide a copy of the rented vehicle proof of insurance form to the vendor and waive the insurance.  Form is found on the Risk Management website.  If renting a vehicle with plans to take it into Mexico, register the trip and print the proof of insurance for Mexico as well as following the above advice for the in U.S. travel.  The Mexico insurance link is also found on the Risk Management web site.  Certificates and endorsements should always be attached to vendor contracts, and copies of the certificates forwarded to the risk manager.
  4. State arrival and departure time clearly on all publicity and tickets sold.  Students should be made aware that they are responsible for their own transportation if they are late for the previously stated departure time.

VII.                  All contracts in relation to travel must be reviewed and approved by Kelly Douglas, General Counsel.

Automobile Transportation:

  1. Use of personal automobiles for transportation exposes the owner and driver to considerable liability.  For the protection of all involved, organizations and individuals contemplating auto travel should ensure:
  2. Existence of current auto insurance and its applicability if drivers are rotated.
  3. The proper licensing and eligibility of all drivers.
  4. Observance of all traffic laws, particularly in regards to speed limits.
  5. Availability and use of passenger restraints (seat belts).
  6. NO consumption of alcohol and drugs, or medicine that would impair the ability to operate a vehicle.
  7. The proper maintenance and operating condition of the vehicle, especially for long distances.
  8. Availability of basic safety and repair equipment.
  9. Operators of USD vehicles must possess a valid driver’s license applicable to the type of vehicle to be driven.

III.                  Faculty should never assign students to specific vehicles if carpools using private vehicles.

  1. When renting vehicles, it is preferred to use a USD corporate card.
  2. When renting vehicles fully inspect the vehicle before leaving the rental agency for visible damages.  Take pictures and note the damage on the rental form.  Have the agent initial and date your notes.  When turning in a vehicle, again inspect it for damage and have the receiving agent also inspect the vehicle and note the presence or absence of any damage before you leave the agency.  This will protect you from being charged for pre-existing damage or false reports of the vehicle being returned with unreported damage.

Air Travel:

When selecting an air carrier for organizational travel, student organizations should be aware that the University would like them to use carriers which possess $150 million of liability insurance.  Major United States airlines carry this insurance and verification is not necessary. In the event a travel agency proposes the services of a charter company, an insurance certificate of $150 million, with an attached endorsement naming USD as an additional insured is required.  It is recommended all travelers purchase travel accident insurance.  This will provide coverage if the individual’s trip is cancelled at the last moment for personal or family health issues and provides some coverage for lost luggage and other benefits.

 

Bus Travel:

Bus travel is often used by student organizations as a means of transportation to and from sponsored activities.   See the Risk Management website for instructions on accessing the safety rating for the company.  Only use firms with a satisfactory rating. Bus travel is permitted on commercial bus companies which possess $5 million of liability insurance and name USD as an additional insured.  A current list of bus companies carrying this insurance is available in the Office of Student Affairs.

 

Travel Agents:

The agent should be made fully aware of all air travel and bus travel guidelines prior to negotiating trip arrangements.

The travel agency that the student organization works with should be informed that lodging facilities must be provided by a travel industry rating service (i.e. AAA Travel Guides, etc.).

If this is not available, the lodging facility must possess $1 million of liability insurance, certification of which must be submitted to the Office of Student Affairs.

Under no circumstances should money be sent directly by the student participants to the travel agency.  All expenses must be paid by University check, which will be generated and sent to the travel agent once proper documentation and certification has been received and all necessary contracts have been signed.  As with all programs, ticket sales should not commence until contracts have been signed.

 

International Travel Guidelines (Faculty)

When traveling internationally for work related purposes (conferences, training, research, professional development, teaching, etc.), it is important to notify the Coordinator at the SOLES Global Center prior to your departure date. The SOLES Global Center Coordinator must notify the appropriate USD departments to set up your international travel insurance coverage, and to provide you with the appropriate documents (travel insurance card, summary of benefits, claim forms, etc.) to take with you on your international travel. Faculty members need to communicate the following travel information in writing to the Coordinator: Dates of Travel, Destination, Purpose of travel (conference, sabbatical, teaching, professional development, etc.), and your contact information while abroad. This information is also located at the Global Center Faculty

 

Resource website:

http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/centers/global_center/resources/index.php

 

International Travel Guidelines (For Student Groups Led by Faculty)

In addition to obtaining approval in writing by the Dean for student travel, it is MANDATORY that the students sign the USD Agreement and Release form. This form may be obtained from the SOLES Global Center in MRH 129 or via the website under Faculty Resources: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/centers/global_center/resources/index.php

 

Emergency Procedures:

 

Off Campus:

  1. When an accident occurs and involves injuries or major damage, it should be immediately reported to the police agency having jurisdiction in the area of the accident and obtain emergency medical assistance as needed.  Obtain information from the police as to how to obtain a copy of their report.  As soon thereafter as feasible, it should be reported the University Office of Public Safety and to the Risk Manager in Human Resources who will obtain the necessary information required by the insurance company.
  2. If an accident occurs involving minor damages with NO injuries, insurance information must be exchanged between vehicle operators and must include the following information:
  3. name
  4. address
  5. telephone number
  6. driver’s license number and expiration date
  7. name of insurance carrier and/or agent and policy number if known
  8. make, model and license number of vehicle
  9. date and location of accident
  10. names and contact information for all passengers in both vehicles
  11. names and contact information for any witnesses
  12. pictures of the damage to each vehicle

As soon as possible, forward all pertinent information regarding the accident to the Risk Manager in Human Resources.

  1. Upon receipt of information concerning an accident involving a USD vehicle, the Risk Manager will forward all information to the University’s insurance representative.

Accidents Involving Rental Vehicles:

In the event of an accident involving an uninsured loss with a rental vehicle, either locally or out of the area, the Risk Manager should be notified as soon as possible by telephone. Subsequently, a written report from the operator, as well as a report for the rental agency, including the amount of damages, should be sent to the Risk Manager. If the vehicle was rented using a USD credit card, notify the card company of the incident.  They will request information from the driver and handle the damage claim. The Risk Manager may also process the claim  if the damages exceed the card company’s coverage.

 

Publicity

All registered USD clubs and organizations must follow these travel guidelines.  Clubs and organizations that do not follow all scenarios of the guidelines will be subject to having publicly removed and/or scheduling privileges (which promote the event) revoked. Click here for USD’s Agreement and Release of Liability form: http://www.sandiego.edu/admissions/undergraduate/documents/liability-form.pdf

University Professorships

Additional Information about University Professorships can be found on the website:

http://www.sandiego.edu/provost/awards/professorships/

 

Historical Perspective:  The University Professorship was established by the Board of Trustees as a recommendation by Sister Sally Furay, Provost and Academic Vice President of USD.  The award was established to recognize outstanding, balanced cumulative career contributions by a tenured Associate or Full Professor who clearly demonstrates the mission and goals of USD.  The award carries both a certificate of recognition and a stipend (at present $20,000).  Besides peer recognition of cumulative service, the award was also meant to offset the reality that USD does not provide a salary increment to faculty who reach the associate or full professorship rank. The honor is formally announced by the President at the Fall Faculty Convocation.  University Professorships for eligible SOLES faculty are awarded every other year,

Present Award Composition:  Only faculty who have been awarded tenure are eligible for a University Professorship Award.  All SOLES tenure track faculty are eligible to vote for the SOLES Professorship Award recipient(s).

 

University Professorship:  Recognition for outstanding, balanced cumulative career contributions supporting the mission and goals of USD. (Candidate must be nominated by a tenure track member of the School of Leadership and Education Sciences.)

  • Process:  Nomination by peer(s) by closing date of nominations.  Peer provides a letter of rationale for the nomination based on the award criteria stated here.
    • Candidate may submit additional support material (maximum 5 pages) no later than the last working day prior to voting by the tenure faculty in SOLES.
  • Timing:  Professorship is held for one USD fiscal year (July 1-June 30).
  • Finances:  Flexible use of funds.  For example: stipend and/or release time (taxable and benefit charges at the present rate of 5.47%), or other professional expenditures [travel, supplies or equipment (if equipment is used outside of university it is taxable)].  The recipient presents a proposed expenditure budget to the Dean at the beginning of the fiscal year and the expenditures are handled by the Assistant Vice President for Academic Administration.

School of Leadership and Education Sciences Professorship Committee:  The Professorship Award Committee will consist of the recipients of the prior two years Professorship Awards and the current recipient; this is a committee of three.  The chair of the committee will be one of the committee members in his/her second year on the award committee.

 

Guidelines for Submission: A nomination for a Professorship Recognition Award (1 to 2 pages) must be presented to the Dean’s Executive Assistant.  A faculty member nominated for a professorship recognition award will be invited to submit additional support materials (maximum 5 pages).

 

Procedures for Review of Documentation & Voting Review: The documentation for all professorship recognition based awards will be made available by the Dean’s office.  Faculty members are expected to review all documentation to make an informed decision about voting for candidates.  Voting: The Assistant Dean for Accreditation and Assessment  will conduct the voting procedures electronically using Qualtrics survey software.  All Members of the Professorship Award Committee will jointly view the results of the survey.

 

Letters of Award:  When awards are made, an award letter will be issued by the Dean with a copy to the Provost, specifying the amount and nature of the award (or incorporating by reference the proposal which has been approved), and notifying faculty of the procedures and time deadlines.

 

Professorships held by faculty members in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences:

1994 – 1995:   Edward Kujawa – Recognition

1995 – 1996:   Susan Zgliczynski – Project-based*

1996 – 1997:   Robert Infantino – Recognition

JoEllen Patterson – Project-based*

1997 – 1998:   Steven Gelb – Recognition

1998 – 1999:   Kathryn Bishop-Smith – Recognition

Edward DeRoche – Project-based*

1999 – 2000:   Mary Woods Scherr – Recognition

2000 – 2001:   Steven Gelb – Project-based* Bobbi Hansen – Project-based*

2001 – 2002:   Jerry Ammer – Recognition

2002 – 2003:   Lee Williams – Recognition

Mary Williams – Project-based*

2003 – 2004:   Viviana Alexandrowicz – Project-based*

2004 – 2005:   Kenneth Gonzalez – Project-based* Bobbi Hansen – Recognition

2005 – 2006:   Kathleen Collins – Project-based*

2006 – 2007:   Lonnie Rowell – Recognition

JoEllen Patterson – Recognition

2007 – 2008:   Reyes Quezada – Project-based*

2008 – 2009:   Robert Donmoyer – Recognition

2009 – 2010:   No Awards in SOLES (Alternate Year with SON)

2010 – 2011:   Lea Hubbard – Recognition

2011 – 2012:   No Awards in SOLES (Alternate Year with SON)

2012 – 2013:   Fred Galloway – Recognition

2013 – 2014:   No Awards in SOLES (Alternate Year with SON)

2014 – 2015:   Noriyuki Inoue – Recognition

2015 - 2016:   No Awards in SOLES (Alternate Year with SON)

2016 - 2017:   Ann Garland – Recognition

2017 - 2018:  No Awards in SOLES (Alternate Year with SON)

*Project-Based Professorships are no longer awarded by the University.

University Senate

The University Senate Bylaws and Policies can be found in the Policies and Procedures Manual on the University website: http://www.sandiego.edu/legal/policies/

Smoking and Tobacco Free Campus

The university’s policy is located here: http://www.sandiego.edu/smokefree

Effective August 18, 2015, the university’s Smoking and Tobacco-Free Campus policy was implemented to promote a healthful environment and a “Culture of Care” for all students, faculty, staff and visitors. Smoking and tobacco use is prohibited on all University of San Diego property. The university is also providing resources to support those students, faculty and staff who are interested in smoking cessation programs.

University Policies

The University of San Diego maintains a number of other policies that are applicable to SOLES employees. You may access those policies through the following link: http://www.sandiego.edu/legal/policies.

SECTION 4: Course and Student Policies & Information

 

Course Information

Classrooms

There is no guarantee that your classroom will be assigned to MRH.  Many factors are taken into account when scheduling classrooms like class size, class times, meeting pattern, and back-to-back scheduling.  Classrooms are not final until roughly the second week of the semester, however, please check your class schedule well in advance to see what has tentatively been assigned to you.  Please make sure to scout out the classroom to ensure requirements are met.

If a change in classrooms is deemed necessary, please submit your request to your executive assistant explaining why you need to change rooms, as well as your course name, number, and enrollment. The executive assistant will then coordinate with Academic Scheduling, solesacademics@sandiego.edu at 619-260-2201.  If you will not be in class and/or have a speaker or substitute, the Program Director or Department Chair should be notified.  If for any reason your class is not meeting in the scheduled classroom, your Program Director, or Department Chair, and executive assistant must be notified.  This includes finals.

 

If you are assigned to a classroom located in the Shiley Center for Science and Technology, please contact their Building Manager for your building and classroom access.

Canceled Classes

  1. If you foresee the necessity of canceling a class, please notify the students the week before. Notify by phone or e-mail any student not present at the time you notify the class of the expected cancellation.  These classes should be rescheduled for another date.  The cancellation of one class may amount to the loss of a full week of instruction for the students who are paying considerable tuition.
  2. If an emergency arises so that you unexpectedly must cancel a class, ask your program area administrative assistant to contact the students.  It is a great inconvenience to those who travel a considerable distance to arrive only to learn that the class has been cancelled.
  3. Whenever a class is to be cancelled or has been cancelled, please notify your Department Chair, indicating what arrangements have been made for the make-up of the class.

Changes in Assigned Classrooms

If a change in classrooms is deemed necessary, please submit your request to your program assistant explaining why you need to change rooms, as well as your course name, number, and enrollment. Program assistants will then coordinate with the Academic Scheduler.  If you will not be in class and/or have a speaker or substitute, the Department Chair should be notified.  If for any reason your class is not meeting in the scheduled classroom, your Department Chair, and program assistant must be notified.  This includes finals.

Children of Faculty in Classes

Because faculty members’ first responsibility when teaching is to students, children of faculty are not permitted to attend class or course activities except in the case of a last-minute, unforeseen emergency.

Children of Students in Classes

SOLES provides a supportive environment for parents attending SOLES programs and classes. However, children of students are not permitted to attend class or course activities except in the case of a last-minute, unforeseen emergency.

 

SOLES and USD offer family-oriented activities throughout the school year and encourage students to participate with children in these extra-curricular events.

Off Campus Visits

A part-time faculty member must get the approval of his or her Program Director or Department Chair before requiring students to participate in any mandatory off campus excursions.  If the Program Director/Department Chair grants approval, he or she will need to submit the necessary documentation to the Director of Risk Management in Human Resources.

Part-time faculty may provide optional off-campus excursions without the approval of the Program Director.  Students participating in voluntary extra-curricular activities are required to sign a waiver/disclaimer and consent for treatment form. Some activities may require that students provide evidence of medical insurance.

Early Final Examinations

There can be no changes from the examination schedule published by the university without the prior written authorization of the Department Chair.

Obtaining Course Information Online

Semester Course Listing

A listing of courses, instructors and classrooms for the current semester can be found by logging into your MySandiego account (http://my.sandiego.edu) and conducting a “Course Search” through the Teach/Advise page. You may look up classes using any number of criteria, including program, instructor, course title, or course number (please see your program assistant for questions on using this system). Please be aware that changes are occasionally made to the schedule that might not be posted. It is advisable to check with your Program Director or Department Chair the week prior to the start of your class for changes in times or classroom assignment.

Class Roster

For information regarding your courses, including course rosters, log into your MySandiego account with your USD username and password (http://my.sandiego.edu).  The Faculty Dashboard located on the “Teach/Advise” tab will list all the courses you are scheduled to teach in the current and/or coming semester(s). Click on each course to view information such as meeting time, location, units, etc. To view the roster of students who have enrolled in the course, click on “Enrollment” under “Enrollment Counts.”

Blackboard

Blackboard is an integrated set of course management tools that enable faculty members to easily design, develop and manage web based enhanced courses. Faculty are strongly encouraged to make use of the Blackboard system. Once you have created a new course through Blackboard, students who register for the class and have a valid USD email address will be given access to Blackboard within 24-48 hours of registering (you do NOT have to upload your roster).

 

For more information about Blackboard including training schedules and course activation requests, visit http://www.sandiego.edu/its/teaching/blackboard/.

Remember: A valid USD student email account is required before students can be given access to

 

Blackboard course via the roster upload process.  Students may create a USD email account by following the prompts on the following website: https://iam.sandiego.edu/pls/apex/f?p=ACCTPROV

For questions regarding use of My.Sandiego.edu or setting up an e-mail account contact the ITS Help Desk at iteam@sandiego.edu or  x7900.

 

* If a student does not appear on the roster or if the registrar has indicated there is a problem with a student, please notify the student and ask him/her to contact the appropriate administrative offices immediately.  If, after three weeks in the course, a student does not appear on the class roster, please advise the student not to return to class until the matter is taken care of.  If he/she has concerns, the student can contact the SOLES Assistant Dean.

Student Assessment

Evaluation of student work is an important component of teaching and learning.  When preparing and teaching your course it will be important to understand and respond to the norms of assessment in the program area.  Please contact your Program Director or Department Chair if you have questions regarding appropriate methods of assessing students (i.e., exams, research papers, quizzes, homework or participation).

Final Examination Policy

Please be aware that during exam week, classrooms, times and days will differ from the regular semester schedule. There can be no changes from the exam schedule without the prior written authorization from the Dean’s office.  The exam schedule for each semester can be found on the teach/advise tab on the my.sandiego.edu site.

Student Course Evaluation Procedures

  • All SOLES courses - traditional, online, weekend, condensed, fieldwork, and student teaching supervision - as well as non-traditional courses,  will be evaluated by students each semester. Exceptions are independent study, thesis, and dissertation courses.
  • Because the end-of-term date determines the course evaluation window, the scheduler of courses must be notified if courses start or end on dates different from the University term start or end dates.
  • Course evaluations for students in the M.Ed. Online program are administered via a Qualtrics web link posted on the course’s Blackboard website during the final two weeks of the course.
  • Course evaluations for Continuing Education students can be offered via a Qualtrics web link if arrangements are made with the Office of Accreditation & Assessment in advance.
  • Each semester, Department Executive Assistants send a reminder email to faculty regarding the course evaluation period, so that faculty can direct students to complete the course evaluations. Evaluations become available two weeks prior to the end-of-term date recorded for the course.  Department Executive Assistants will provide  faculty with the link to the Student Course Evaluation Instructions: https://www.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/Student%20Instructions%20for%20Accessing%20Course%20Evaluations%208.3.15.pdf
  • Faculty should provide students with the step by step student course evaluation instructions (please see link above). To ensure higher response rates, faculty may provide students with a specified date to complete the evaluation or take students to a computer lab for 10 minutes to complete the evaluation (labs must be booked in advance).
  • Please note that once instructors have submitted grades, students can no longer complete the evaluation (the grade replaces the evaluation link).

Faculty Access to Course Evaluation Data

  • Faculty can access completed course evaluations via their MySanDiego accounts after grades are posted (please see link below for instructions).
  • Department Executive Assistants are responsible for sending instructions to faculty members for how to access course evaluation results. The link to Faculty Instructions for Accessing Course Evaluations is: https://www.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/Faculty%20Instructions%20for%20Accessing%20Course%20Evaluations%208.3.15.pdf
  • For M.Ed. online courses or Continuing Education courses, Department Executive Assistants should request course evaluation reports from the SOLES Office of Accreditation and Assessment.

Syllabi

All faculty are required to file a syllabus within the first two weeks of each semester for every course he/she teaches. You must submit your syllabi by e-mail to the administrative assistant for your program. Please refer to the sample course templates below. The following should be included in the syllabus:

  • Instructor contact information (phone and email address)
  • Office Hours
  • Date/Term of Course    
  • Course description
  • Course Objectives and Student Learning Outcomes– Aligned with SOLES, department/ program learning objectives
  • Course Outline of topics
  • Assignments and methods of evaluation
  • Required and recommended readings and websites.
  • SOLES Statements (see required text below):
  • Request for Accommodation
  • Grade of Incomplete
  • Online Course Evaluation
  • Plagiarism
  • Sustainability (Optional)

All syllabi must include the elements listed on the SOLES syllabus template located at:

http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/Course%20Syllabus%20Template%2008.06.15.doc

The template for online courses is located at: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/M.Ed_Syllabus_Template_Rev_08.13.15.docx

 

All syllabi should include the following:

 

Requests for Accommodation:

Reasonable accommodations in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act will be made for course participants with disabilities who require specific instructional and testing modifications.  Students with such requirements must identify themselves to the University of San Diego Disability Services Office (619.260.4655) before the beginning of the course.  Every effort will be made to accommodate students’ needs, however, performance standards for the course will not be modified in considering specific accommodations.

 

Grade of Incomplete:

The grade of Incomplete (“I”) may be recorded to indicate (1) that the requirements of a course have been substantially completed but, for a legitimate reason, a small fraction of the work remains to be completed, and, (2) that the record of the student in the course justifies the expectation that he or she will complete the work and obtain the passing grade by the deadline.  It is the student’s responsibility to explain to the instructor the reasons for non-completion of work and to request an incomplete grade prior to the posting of final grades.  Students who receive a grade of incomplete must submit all missing work no later than the end of the tenth week of the next regular semester, otherwise the “I” grade will become a permanent “F.”

A Petition for a grade of incomplete must accompany all requests for an incomplete at the end of the course term. Criteria for changing a grade of incomplete to a letter grade must be negotiated with the instructor before the final class. The criteria must be outlined on the signed Incomplete Request Form. A completed form with both the instructor and student signature must be turned in by the last session of the class. Without a student signed form the registrar requires assignment of a grade of F. A student must complete an incomplete by the 10th week of the next session or a grade of F is permanently calculated in the overall grade point average. Any attempts to complete an incomplete after the 10-week deadline requires the approval of the Associate Dean of the School of Education.

 

SOLES On-line Course Evaluation

SOLES Course Evaluations are collected via an on-line system that maintains student anonymity. SOLES uses these evaluations for continuous improvement of course content and instruction and as a component of its regular performance review of faculty members, so please take them seriously.  Course evaluations are available to students in their MySanDiego accounts via the Torero Hub drop down menu: 1) My Academics, 2) Registration Tools, and 3) Registration History.  The course evaluation window opens two weeks prior to the end-of-term date for the course. Instructions for accessing course evaluations can be found at: https://www.sandiego.edu/soles/documents/Student%20Instructions%20for%20Accessing%20Course%20Evaluations%208.3.15.pdf

 

Statement on Plagiarism

 

The complete plagiarism policy is available for your review at: http://www.sandiego.edu/associatedstudents/branches/vice-president/academics/honor-council/integrity-policy.php

 

All members of the University community share the responsibility for maintaining an environment of academic integrity since academic dishonesty is a threat to the University.

Acts of academic dishonesty include: a) unauthorized assistance on an examination; b) falsification or invention of data; c) unauthorized collaboration on an academic exercise; d) plagiarism; e) misappropriation of resource materials; f) any unauthorized access of an instructor’s files or computer account; or g) any other serious violation of academic integrity as established by the instructor.

 

It is the responsibility of the instructor to determine whether a violation has occurred. An act of academic dishonesty may be either a serious violation, or, if unintentional, an infraction (a non-serious violation of course rules). If the instructor determines that an infraction (as opposed to a serious violation) has occurred, the instructor can impose penalties that may include: a) reduction in grade; b) withdrawal from the course; c) requirement that all or part of the course be retaken; and d) a requirement that additional work be undertaken in connection with the course or exercise. Students may formally challenge the instructor’s determination of infraction (see below).

 

Instructors shall report all violations, whether, infractions or serious violations, both to the Dean’s office and the student using the Academic Integrity Violation Preliminary Worksheet. The Associate Dean will contact the student and ensure she or he is aware of the Academic Integrity policy. The Associate Dean will appoint a hearing committee only when: 1) the instructor reports that a serious violation occurred, or 2) the instructor reports that an infraction occurred and the student wishes to appeal the determination of infraction.

 

The hearing committee will include, in addition to the Associate Dean, a faculty member and two students from the School of Leadership and Education Sciences, and a faculty member from outside the School of Leadership and Education Sciences. If the hearing committee determines that a serious violation has occurred it also will determine sanctions to be applied which may include: a) expulsion from the University; b) suspension from the University for up to one year; c) a letter of censure; and d) imposition of a period of probation. If the hearing committee determines an infraction has occurred the penalty imposed by the faculty member will be upheld. If the hearing committee determines that no serious violation or infraction has occurred, it will request the instructor to take action consistent with that determination. If the hearing committee determines that expulsion is the appropriate sanction the student may appeal to the Provost.

 

Sustainability (optional)

 

As higher education professionals, it is our responsibility to advance sustainable practices in our business operations and the education of our students.  In collaboration with the University-wide sustainability efforts, we are committed to developing sustainable practices. Copies of this syllabus will not be printed for distribution by the instructor and handouts will be avoided whenever possible. Recycling is always encouraged.

Student Information

Communication with Students

It is the policy of the University of San Diego to use only the official @sandiego.edu email address for correspondence. Faculty are directed to use their @sandiego.edu account for corresponding with students and require students to do the same.

 

All USD students are required to have a MySanDiego email account. The university may conduct official business by sending notices or other information to the student’s USD email address. It is the student’s responsibility to check regularly his or her account and to respond to any notices or information in a timely manner. Failure to do so will not be considered a legitimate reason for a policy exception.

Returning Student Work

Student work (i.e. papers, exams, projects, etc.) should be returned to students in a timely manner throughout the semester.  Please do not leave student papers for pick-up in a public area as this is a serious violation of FERPA policy (see FERPA Policy guidelines).  Instead, it is preferred that student work be returned electronically through email or the learning management system or during class.  If this is not feasible, then you can give student work to your program assistant who can hold them and give out to students on an individual basis.   A student can drop by the administrative assistant office and ask to pick up his/her materials between the hours of 8:30 am– 5:00 pm.  All materials not picked up within three weeks of the end of the semester will be discarded.

School of Leadership and Education Sciences (SOLES) Graduate Student Life

More information on SOLES Graduate Student life and resources can be found here: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/current-students/student-life/

 

Student Progress

Academic Progress – Graduate

To be in good academic standing and to be eligible to graduate, graduate students in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences must maintain a semester and overall GPA of at least 3.0.

 

It is the responsibility of each faculty member, including part-time faculty members, to inform the appropriate Department Chair about graduate students whose academic performance is below expectation and whose progress should be reviewed.

Academic Progress - Undergraduates

A student will be placed on scholastic probation if:

Academic Review

If, for any reason, an instructor has serious concerns about a student, he/she should contact the Program Director and/or Department Chair to discuss the situation.  In most instances, the student should receive feedback that is timely and instructive.  In instances where the situation continues, written notification to the student may be necessary.  A copy of any written notification should be given to the Program Director or Department Chair to be placed in the student’s file.

Graduate Student Policy Handbook

All SOLES Graduate Students must adhere to the policies and procedures in the Graduate Student Policies handbook found on the SOLES Website: http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/current-students/handbooks-forms-policies

*Please Note: All forms related to the policies listed below can be found on the SOLES Faculty Forms and Policies Page:  http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/faculty-and-staff/handbooks-policies-forms.php

Add/Drop Procedures 

Students who wish to change their registration must do so on the appropriate form http://www.sandiego.edu/registrar/documents/ADD-DROPform2014.pdf

within the stipulated time period.

                                                           

Students are allowed to add and/or drop courses during the pre-registration period at the One-Stop Student Center.

                                                           

Online Students:                                 

For students in the Online M.Ed. Program, courses must be dropped prior to the first day of the term to receive a 100% refund and within the first three days of the term to receive a 95% refund. No refund will be provided after the third day of the term.

 

Courses officially dropped between the third day of class and the start of Week 5 will receive a grade of “W” (not included in GPA).

                                                           

Students who wish to withdraw from the University can access the Notice of Withdrawal E- Form through the SOLES website at http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/gateways/current-students/handbooks-forms-policies/.

                                                           

During the fall and spring semesters, courses may be added during the first eight days of class (adviser's signature required), dropped until the tenth week of the semester (adviser’s signature not required), and withdrawn until the tenth week of the semester (adviser’s signature not required). Courses officially dropped between the last day to add classes and the last day to withdraw from classes will receive a grade of “W” (not included in GPA). After the withdrawal deadline the student will receive a grade for the course. Withdrawal after the deadline (with a “W”) is only granted when there is written documentation of a major injury, serious illness or similar factor beyond the student’s control which precludes her or his continuing in the class.

                                                           

Students who discontinue class attendance and neglect to withdraw (“drop”) officially from the course are subject to failing the class. Registered students who withdraw from the University (i.e. terminate all courses in progress) must officially drop their courses by filing a Notice of Withdrawal E-Form. The same drop policies and deadlines apply to students who withdraw from the University as for those who drop only one course.

                                                           

Tuition is fully or partially refundable only when a student officially withdraws. The student must file a Notice of Withdrawal E-Form with the One Stop Student Center. Dates and Deadlines for the tuition refund schedule is located on the Student Financial Services website at http://www.sandiego.edu/finance/student-financial-services/student-accounts/dates-deadlines.php. No refund will be made for withdrawal after the final deadline has passed.

                                                           

Withdrawal is effective on the date that the completed form is received by the Graduate Records Office.

                                                           

For deadlines and tuition refund policies during Summer and Intersession, see the relevant Summer and Intersession course catalogs or go to http://www.sandiego.edu/sio/. Condensed or abbreviated sessions (e.g. five week, one week, weekend, online, etc.) also require that students register and/or withdraw by the posted deadlines in the relevant summer or intersession bulletin. Read semester course schedules carefully. Posted deadlines may differ for undergraduate and graduate students. For details please contact the One Stop Student Center, Hahn University Center, Room 126, (619) 260-2700.

                                                           

Students who receive any form of financial aid must consult with the Office of Financial Aid if their registered units drop below the required number of units for continuation of aid.

                                                           

Students withdrawing from their current classes will lose eligibility for Federal financial aid, and depending on the time of their withdrawal, will be required to return either all, or part, of the Federal financial aid they received for that semester.                                

Change of Program

Graduate students who have been admitted into a specific SOLES program, or area of specialization within a program, who wish to transfer to another program or specialization within the same department must complete the USD graduate students’ “Petition for Change of Program or Emphasis”. Departments reserve the right to require additional documentation for internal transfers, such as a statement of purpose addressing the student's intended program, or they may require students to complete a full application using standard admissions deadlines.

Students wishing to transfer to a program in a different SOLES department must complete a full graduate admissions application for the program they wish to transfer to. They must use the standard application deadlines required of all new applicants.

 

Admission to one program in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences does not guarantee admission to another program area in the department or school. The online application for graduate admission may be found at www.sandiego.edu/admissions/graduate

Grade Grievance Procedure

Grading criteria, course content, assignments and other requirements are set by instructors and provided to students in writing. The presumption is that students have been given ample opportunity for clarification of class requirements, including assessment, at the beginning of a given course. The instructor's judgment regarding assessment and grading is presumed to be correct. Therefore, the burden of qualifying a grievance rests with the student. At every level in the grievance procedures all participants should understand this presumption.

 

A student has the right to question a final grade given by a faculty member.

 

  1. Any student may at any time consult her or his instructor about a grade.  The exercise of this right does not require a fixed procedure nor is it subject to procedural conditions.
  2. If a student feels that she or he has been given an unjust grade, the student should first approach her or his instructor to resolve the difficulty.  However, if the student believes she or he has reason not to approach the instructor, the Department Chair (or her or his delegate) shall be the judge of the advisability or inadvisability of making this first step.

III.                  In cases where the dispute cannot be resolved in direct consultation with the instructor, the student may take her or his concerns, along with any graded work, to the Department Chair. The student may request that the instructor provide the student with a copy of the work in question. The Chair shall review the disputed grade in consultation with the instructor.  After this review, the instructor may decide to change the original grade or not.  The Chair will communicate the instructor’s decision to the student.

  1. If the matter is not satisfactorily settled at number “3” above, the student may present his/her case to the Associate Dean for review.
  2. If the efforts described in steps “2” through “4” do not resolve the dispute, the student may formally challenge the assigned grade.  The policy regarding a formal challenge of a grade in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences is as follows:
  3. An academic grade may only be formally challenged on grounds that it reflects other than appropriate criteria as stated on the course syllabus.
  4. Students may only challenge grades when they claim to have earned a grade at least one full letter higher than the grade assigned by the instructor (e.g., the student is assigned a grade of C+ and alleges that the actual grade should have been B+ or higher).
  5. A written petition presenting evidence concerning step “5.a.” must be submitted to the School of Leadership and Education Sciences Associate Dean no later than the end of the seventh full week of instruction in the semester following that in which the grade was given.
  6. The procedure following submission of the petition by the student is as follows:

 .               On receipt of the petition, the Associate Dean will promptly appoint a committee consisting of two faculty members and one student.  The student and at least one of the faculty members will be associated with the student’s program.  The committee’s membership is privileged information.

  1. The committee will promptly decide whether the evidence presented by the student warrants an investigation.  If it does not so find, the committee will take no further action on the case and the student will be so notified.  If the committee so finds, it will conduct an investigation.
  2. During the investigation, the committee must provide a fair proceeding for instructor and student, including information as to the character and object of the proceedings, knowledge of the allegations and evidence produced by the student in making out her or his case, and an opportunity for both parties to respond in writing and/or orally.
  3. If, during the course of this investigation, the instructor voluntarily decides to change the original grade assigned, the instructor will report this decision to the student and the Associate Dean, and the committee will take no further action.
  4. If no agreement is reached, the committee must decide whether the grade reflected criteria other than those stated on the syllabus, and if so, the criteria that were reflected.
  5. Their conclusions shall be made in the form of a preliminary written report, copies of which are to be sent to the Associate Dean, the instructor and the student.  The instructor and the student will have the opportunity of submitting written responses to the committee within ten days of receipt of the preliminary report.  The committee will review the written responses, if any, before issuing its final report to the Associate Dean.
  6. Submission of the final written report to the Associate Dean will be the final action taken by the committee.

NOTE:  All other student academic appeals in SOLES will follow a similar process.

Incompletes, Withdrawals, Change of Grades

  • The grade of Incomplete is available only when the requirements for the course have been substantially completed; the reason for an Incomplete is legitimate only if a small fraction of work remains, and the progress of the student in the course gives promise of a passing grade upon completion.
  • The Incomplete grade is not counted in the computation of GPA for the semester for which the Incomplete grade was authorized.
  • A student who receives a grade of Incomplete must complete all missing work by the end of the tenth week of the next regular semester; otherwise, the Incomplete grade remains in the record permanently, with the same effect on the grade point average as if it were an F.
  • W for Withdrawal is the allowable designation until the end of the tenth week of a semester; after that date, there is no possibility of withdrawal; the student will receive a grade for the course.
  • A faculty member assigning a grade of Incomplete must file a “Removal of Incomplete or Change of Grade” notice using the Teach and Advise tab located in the My.SanDiego.edu portal.
  • The student is ineligible for honors or awards until the work for the semester in question is completed, at which time “honors” may be applied retroactively.
  • When the work is completed, a Removal of Incomplete or Change of Grade form must be completed online via the instructor’s teach/advise tab in their my.sandiego.edu account. This form is located at:

Pass/Fail Grading

Graduate Program Policy

Graduate students may not elect the Pass/Fail grade for regularly graded courses. A grade of Pass or Fail is assigned, however, in specifically designated courses. A grade of "C-" or better is required for a grade of "Pass." For a "Pass," credit is awarded, but units do not enter into the

computation of the GPA. A "Fail" grade will be computed as a grade of "F".

Undergraduate Program Policy

Students in good academic standing, that is, with a grade point average of 2.0 at the University of San Diego, may elect to enroll for courses on the pass/fail plan. All students who wish to exercise the pass/fail option must have prior authorization from their advisor. Courses taken at other institutions and transferred to USD for unit credit only are not considered to fall under the pass/fail option. Note the deadline announced in the Academic Calendar for changing a course to the pass/fail option or vice-versa. No changes will be made after this date. More information on the undergraduate pass/fail grading option may be found in the undergraduate course catalog. Please read carefully prior to authorizing the pass/fail grade option - http://catalogs.sandiego.edu/undergraduate/academic-regulations/credit-grading-system/

Midterm and Final Grades

If you have undergraduate students in any of your classes you will need to submit these grades via WebGrades on My.Sandiego.edu at midterm.  You can access WebGrades by logging into My.Sandiego and clicking on the “WebGrades” link on the Teach/Advise tab.

 

The Registrar’s office sets the due date for Final Grades (usually four working days after the end of finals).  For Fall 2015, final grades must be submitted by January 4, 2016.  For Spring 2016, final grades must be submitted by May 24, 2016.  Please read the instructions for the exact due date and details about submission.  PLEASE SUBMIT GRADES ON TIME. The University’s academic calendar can be found here: http://www.sandiego.edu/academic-calendars/

International Requirement

All SOLES degree students are required to complete an international experience as defined by their respective programs.  Please see student handbooks for details and click here to view the SOLES International Experience Requirement Application Form.

Leave of Absence

Upon matriculation, students are expected to register in at least 1 unit of coursework every fall and spring semester until all degree requirements have been completed. Doctoral students who have advanced to candidacy must continue to enroll in at least one unit of dissertation every fall and spring semester until the dissertation is completed.  Master degree candidates working on a thesis must also enroll in one unit of thesis each fall and spring semester.  Students are not required to enroll during intersession or summer, although some courses may only be taught during those sessions.

 

Students who are unable to maintain continuous enrollment need to complete a Petition for Leave of Absence form. The advisor, Department Chair, and the School of Leadership and Education Sciences Dean must approve the leave of absence. Failure to maintain continuous enrollment may result in suspension from the program and students must apply for readmission unless this form is on file and current.  Leaves may be granted for up to one year, and only under extreme circumstances will a student be granted a second leave of absence.  Students in the dissertation or thesis stage are not eligible to take a leave of absence. In extreme cases, students may need to withdraw from current classes by completing a Notice of Withdrawal E-form.  If they wish to remain in the program, they must also file a Leave of Absence form. Students withdrawing from their current classes will lose eligibility for federal financial aid, and depending on the time of their withdrawal, will be required to return either all, or part, of the federal aid they received for the semester.

Participation in Commencement Ceremonies

Commencement participation and program listing at the annual May ceremony are limited to graduates who have completed the degree in the previous summer, fall, or Intersession and to May candidates who met the graduation petition deadline and have completed all work for the degree prior to Commencement. There is the following exception: Graduate students scheduled to receive their degree in the following August who have 9 units or fewer of remaining work may participate if their work falls in the category of coursework, portfolio, practicum, fieldwork or student teaching, or internship. Such August graduates must take the remaining summer work at USD and they must register and pay for their remaining units in the One Stop Student Center by May 1.

 

Students scheduled to graduate in August whose remaining program requirements include any of the following will not be allowed to participate in the preceding May Commencement: foreign language or comprehensive exam; final project or integration paper; master’s thesis; or doctoral dissertation. August graduates whose work falls into the latter categories and all students who finish in the subsequent fall semester and Intersession may participate in Commencement the following May, at which time their names will be listed in the program. In every case, all necessary papers and petitions must be filed prior to the deadlines specified in the Academic Calendar.

Probationary Graduate Students

The following are the procedures for dealing with probationary students each semester:

 

  1. The Registrar determines which students are to be considered for probation and which students could be dismissed.
  2. The Office of the Registrar sends to the School of Leadership and Education Sciences a list of probationary students and their grade reports.
  3. Once the Associate Dean receives this list and the grade reports, she may consult with the appropriate Department Chair to discuss an appropriate course of action.
  4. The Associate Dean, upon consultation, determines whether probationary status is appropriate.  If the case is clearly a probationary one, she informs the student, the advisor, the Department Chair, the Registrar’s office, and the Graduate Records office by letter, placing a copy in the student’s file.   Consideration will be given to GPA, unusual circumstances, recommendations from instructors, and the influence of the “I” grade.
  5. Students who remain on probation for more than one semester may be dismissed from the School of Leadership and Education Sciences.

SOLES Student Disciplinary Procedures

The majority of our students are fine people, and discipline is not something that normally requires our attention.  However, there are situations when students exhibit behavior that is problematic.  This seems to be more of an issue with our undergraduate students, but we have had similar problems with graduate students.  In these situations, we recommend the following action be taken to avoid more severe problems in the future:

 

  1. At the beginning of class, communicate with all your students what you expect of them.  Be very clear about your expectations for student conduct in your classroom.
  2. If there is a problem, communicate privately with the student what your concerns are regarding his or her behavior.  Work with the student to assist in modifying his or her behavior, if possible.
  3. If the behavior does not change, meet with the student outside of class and document (in writing) the behavior that you feel is inappropriate.  Let the student know that your written observation of his or her behavior will be placed in his or her student file.  Send a copy to the Department Chair of any written documentation placed in the student’s file.

If the behavior still does not change, notify your Department Chair.  He or she will work with you to solve the problem.  He or she may do one of the following (depending on the particular events surrounding the situation):

  • Meet with the student to discuss the nature of the concern.
  • Have a meeting with you and the student to discuss the behavior.
  • Have a meeting with the student and the Dean to discuss the situation and future action.

The Department Chair or Dean will communicate with you following any meeting in which you are not present. At this point, if there is no change, the Dean’s office will be notified, and the situation will be handled accordingly.

Student Complaint Process

The University’s policy is located here: http://catalogs.sandiego.edu/graduate/about-university-san-diego/policies/

SOLES encourages students to give voice to concerns that arise in the course of their programs of study.

 

When individual student complaints are governed by specific University or SOLES policy, the complaint should be handled in a manner consistent with that policy.  Examples include but are not limited to grade grievances, complaints of harassment, discrimination, or research misconduct.

 

Complaints about courses, other than grade grievances, should be brought directly to the instructor of the class in question to seek resolution through a face-to-face discussion.  If this meeting does not resolve the student’s concern he or she should meet with the appropriate program director or department chair to seek assistance.  If, after taking this step, the student’s concern is still unresolved, he or she should contact the associate dean of SOLES who will work to resolve the issue in conformance with the policies of USD, SOLES, and the student’s program.   There is no appeal beyond this level.

 

Complaints of a non-academic nature, as well as personal issues that are interfering with academic progress should be brought directly to the SOLES assistant dean of student affairs.

The SOLES Graduate Student Association (SGSA), consisting of elected student representatives, is an additional vehicle for raising issues of general concern to students.  The SGSA President’s report of student activities and issues is a standing agenda item at monthly SOLES faculty/administrator meetings.

Summary on Academic Integrity

The complete University of San Diego Integrity Policy is located here:  http://www.sandiego.edu/associatedstudents/branches/vice-president/academics/honor-council/integrity-policy.php

 

All members of the University community share the responsibility for maintaining an environment of academic integrity since academic dishonesty is a threat to the University.  Acts of academic dishonesty include:  a) unauthorized assistance on an examination; b) falsification or invention of data; c) unauthorized collaboration on an academic exercise; d) plagiarism; e) misappropriation of resource materials; f) any unauthorized access of an instructor’s files or computer account; or g) any other serious violation of academic integrity as established by the instructor.

 

It is the responsibility of the instructor to determine whether a violation has occurred.  An act of academic dishonesty may be either a serious violation, or, if unintentional, an infraction (a non-serious violation of course rules).  If the instructor determines that an infraction (as opposed to a serious violation) has occurred, the instructor can impose penalties that may include:  a) reduction in grade; b) withdrawal from the course; c) requirement that all or part of the course be retaken; and d) a requirement that additional work be undertaken in connection with the course or exercise. Students may formally challenge the instructor’s determination of infraction (see below).

 

Instructors shall report all violations, whether, infractions or serious violations, both to the Dean’s office and the student using the Academic Integrity Violation Preliminary Worksheet.  The Associate Dean will contact the student and ensure she or he is aware of the Academic Integrity policy.   The Associate Dean will appoint a hearing committee only when: 1) the instructor reports that a serious violation occurred, or 2) the instructor reports that an infraction occurred and the student wishes to appeal the determination of infraction.

 

The hearing committee will include, in addition to the Associate Dean, a faculty member and two students from the School of Leadership and Education Sciences, and a faculty member from outside the School of Leadership and Education Sciences.  If the hearing committee determines that a serious violation has occurred it also will determine sanctions to be applied which may include:  a) expulsion from the University; b) suspension from the University for up to one year; c) a letter of censure; and d) imposition of a period of probation. If the hearing committee determines an infraction has occurred the penalty imposed by the faculty member will be upheld. If the hearing committee determines that no serious violation or infraction has occurred, it will request the instructor to take action consistent with that determination.  If the hearing committee determines that expulsion is the appropriate sanction the student may appeal to the Provost.

Cheating on Examinations

Cheating on examinations is treated as a serious offense, usually resulting in a failing grade on that examination.

 

Techniques for Minimizing Cheating:  The administration believes that implementation of the following techniques should discourage cheating.  Therefore, each instructor should:

 

  • Include a statement about cheating in the course syllabus or any other handouts provided students during the first days of class.
  • Announce in class that cheating is a serious offense carrying with it serious consequences.
  • Vary course examinations from semester/year to semester/year.
  • Not use the same examinations for sections of the same course if the examinations are separated in time.
  • Not use the same examination for make-up tests.
  • Use a checking system when students complete the examination and hand them to the proctor.
  • Use two versions of a standardized test when such an examination is given in large classes and crowded classrooms.
  • Use blue books or other forms of examination paper provided by the University.
  • On final examinations, require that the students include this statement: "I have neither given nor received unauthorized aid in this examination," followed by the student's signature.

Transfer of Graduate Credit

The University’s policy is located here: http://www.sandiego.edu/graduaterecords/forms/transfer-credit.php

 

It is recommended that students petition during their first semester in order to plan their academic program accurately.  Transfer petitions for previous work will not be accepted in the student’s final term unless the transfer course is being taken in the final term.  Upon matriculation at USD, students must receive approval prior to taking course work outside USD if they plan to transfer it into a degree program.  Immediately upon completion of the course, the student must request that an official transcript be sent to the USD Graduate Records Office.

Students may petition the associate dean in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences for an exception to these regulations, but should do so only after consulting with the adviser and department chair or director of the graduate program, whose recommendations must appear on the Petition for Transfer of Graduate Credit.  The student must also request that an official transcript of the course be sent to the Graduate Records Office if the transcript was not included among the admissions documents.  When both the petition and transcript are on file they will be reviewed in the Graduate Records Office for conformity to USD policies.  Grade(s) awarded by the issuing institution will not be calculated in the student’s overall grade point average or taken into account during probationary review.

 

Students may petition to transfer credit from another university under the following conditions:

  1. Credit must be from an accredited, USD-approved university.
  2. Credit must be at the graduate-level at the university of origin. The student is responsible for submitting acceptable supporting documentation.
  3. Credit must be relevant to the USD degree program and be approved by the department chair or program director.
  4. Transfer courses cannot repeat essentially the same content of work taken at USD.
  5. Credit may not be used (or have been used) toward any other degree.
  6. Credit earned more than five (5) years prior to matriculation at USD will not be accepted.
  7. A grade of “B” or higher must have been earned (grade of “pass” or “satisfactory” ordinarily is not acceptable).
  8. Students must supply satisfactory documentation regarding course content for independent study or self-directed courses.
  9. The number of credit hours transferred will be based on USD’s semester credit system rounded down to the nearest full or half unit (multiply the number of quarter hours by .67 and round down). For example, four (4) quarter-hours x .67 = 2.68 which will be recorded as 2.5 USD semester-hour units). It is the student’s responsibility to make up the difference if the total number of degree credits falls short of the requirement for the degree. The amount of USD credit awarded may not exceed the equivalent amount on the originating transcript.
  10. Although transfer credit from other universities will be posted on the USD transcript, grades will not be posted or computed in the USD grade point average for probation/disqualification review.
  11. See table below for the maximum number of non-USD credits allowed:

Maximum Number of

Semester Units Transferable

Program

6

30-44 unit Master’s

9

45-53 unit Master’s

12

  54-63 unit Doctorate

Exceptions to these limits require written permission of the Associate Dean.

Procedure for Transfer of Credit

Courses Taken Prior to Enrollment at USD

Prospective students should discuss the possibility of credit transfer with the SOLES Office of Admissions and Outreach. If a student has already matriculated at USD then the student should discuss the possibility with their advisor or department chair. The number of prior units allowable for transfer varies from program to program. The student must apply to a SOLES graduate student as a new graduate student and be accepted prior to formally requesting a transfer of graduate credit. Once accepted, the student should secure the appropriate signatures on the Petition for Transfer of Graduate Credit and submit it to the One Stop Student Center. The  official transcript of the course(s) must be included among the admission documents when the student applied. When both the petition and transcript are on file they will be reviewed for conformity to USD policies and posted appropriately.

 

Courses Taken After Enrollment at USD

USD students planning to take a degree requirement or elective at another university must process the transfer petition as described above prior to taking the course. Immediately upon completion of the course, the student must request that an official transcript be sent to the USD Office of the Registrar. A grade of “B” or better is required in order to receive credit (units only) when transferring a course from another institution. Grade(s) awarded by the issuing institution will not be calculated in the student’s overall grade point average. After the petition and transcript are on file they will be reviewed by the Registrar’s Office for conformity to USD policies.

Procedure for Transfer of Credit

Courses Taken Prior to Enrollment at USD

Prospective students should discuss the possibility of credit transfer with the SOLES Office of Admissions and Outreach. If a student has already matriculated at USD then the student should discuss the possibility with their advisor or department chair. The number of prior units allowable for transfer varies from program to program. The student must apply to a SOLES graduate student as a new graduate student and be accepted prior to formally requesting a transfer of graduate credit. Once accepted, the student should secure the appropriate signatures on the Petition for Transfer of Graduate Credit and submit it to the One Stop Student Center. The  official transcript of the course(s) must be included among the admission documents when the student applied. When both the petition and transcript are on file they will be reviewed for conformity to USD policies and posted appropriately.

 

Courses Taken After Enrollment at USD

USD students planning to take a degree requirement or elective at another university must process the transfer petition as described above prior to taking the course. Immediately upon completion of the course, the student must request that an official transcript be sent to the USD Office of the Registrar. A grade of “B” or better is required in order to receive credit (units only) when transferring a course from another institution. Grade(s) awarded by the issuing institution will not be calculated in the student’s overall grade point average. After the petition and transcript are on file they will be reviewed by the Registrar’s Office for conformity to USD policies.

Waiver of Requirements

Students who have taken an equivalent course prior to enrollment at USD may petition to waive a course requirement; however, the total number of required program units will remain the same. Consequently, if a waiver petition is approved, students must enroll in course work approved by their advisor and/or program director to make up the difference in the total number of units required. USD has discretion to approve or deny course waivers based on the content of the course and when or where it was taken.  The administrative coordinator for your program can provide you with a Request for Substitution/Waiver of Graduation Requirements form (http://www.sandiego.edu/graduaterecords/documents/GR2014-substitution-waiver.pdf).  The completed form with appropriate signatures from the department chair or program director and the SOLES associate dean must be submitted to the One Stop Student Center.