East Asian Languages and Literatures

According to Hamilton College’s Faculty Handbook, decisions regarding reappointment, promotion and tenure are based on accomplishments and promise in teaching, scholarship, and professional service. EALL faculty members are urged to examine the¹ relevant sections of the current version of the Handbook as well as these specific EALL Departmental guidelines, which are meant to provide clarification to (1) members who will stand for reappointment, promotion, and tenure; and (2) department members, deans, and outside evaluators who will evaluate members who are standing for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Candidates should use the guidelines to help assemble their files for reappointment, promotion, and tenure; department members and others should use the guidelines to assess candidacies. 

This page contains two main sections, the first pertaining to candidacy for the granting of tenure, and the second pertaining to candidacy for promotion to the rank of professor. 

Candidacy for Granting of Tenure 

Teaching 

The Faculty Handbook states (p. 30)“Teaching is a complex task. Its evaluation requires consideration of several characteristics that should be reflected in an instructor’s performance: commitment to teaching; knowledge and mastery of the discipline; and the ability to communicate with, stimulate, and evaluate students.”² 

1. The EALL Department takes “commitment to teaching” to mean a desire to build and develop programs (Chinese and/or Japanese) and to offer language, linguistics, literature, film, and/or culture courses. A commitment to teaching includes efforts to engage and challenge students. A member’s commitment to teaching can be demonstrated by activities such as: 

• Participation in curricular planning 
• Participation in team-taught language courses, small sessions, language tables, and related activities if applicable 
• Participation in courses required for the program’s concentration, including the senior project 
• Regular evaluation of pedagogy Via revisions of syllabi; Via participation at pedagogical conferences; Via conversations with colleagues 
• New course design 

2. “Knowledge and mastery of the discipline” (case by case referring to Chinese and/or Japanese language and literature) are demonstrated by creating course content that is closely informed by research and development in the respective field (language, linguistics, literature, film, or culture). This will be assessed by the course syllabi as well as by the personal statement and chair's reviews. 
3. “The ability to communicate with, stimulate, and evaluate students” is most directly evaluated through assessments made by students and faculty in such forms as course evaluations, solicited letters, and peer observation. 

A candidate’s self-evaluation of teaching should consider the criteria outlined above. The personal evaluation should not only include a statement about their teaching philosophy but also provide evidence of the implementation of that philosophy in specific courses (e.g., teaching strategies and activities, syllabi, assignments, and projects). 

Scholarship 

In line with the scholarship criteria stated in the Faculty Handbook, the Department views³ sound and developing scholarship as necessary for promotion to Associate Professor because such scholarship is a sign of sustained learning, creativity, and professional growth. The Department expects to see publication of research in peer-reviewed articles, books and/or digital scholarship. Note that the EALL members work in diverse disciplines (e.g., film, literature, linguistics, and language pedagogy) and the numbers of articles and other publications differ. In film/literary studies and linguistics/language pedagogy, the nature and specifics of collaboration also differ. Therefore, the candidate must clarify the role/contributions of the collaborative works in the candidate’s personal statement. For scholarly journal publications in a foreign country, the department also recognizes the journal evaluation system commonly used in the academia of that country (e.g., the Core Journal List in China). It is the candidate’s responsibility to provide accurate ranking information of the journal in the academia of the country. 

If a candidate expects to have a large portion of their peer-reviewed output consist of digital scholarship then they should communicate early with the department chair to be sure that such work falls within the department’s definition of serious peer-reviewed scholarship. 

Digital media and scholarship have expanded the objects and forms of inquiry of modern language departments to include images, sounds, data, kinetic attributes like animation, and new kinds of engagement with textual representation and analysis. Here we set forth criteria for assessing scholarly work in digital media by members of the department. 

Digital scholarship includes, but is not limited to, the following undertakings: 

• Digital preservation and/or annotation of historical materials 
• Digital recreation/restoration of historical materials 
• Digital curation of contemporary materials 
• Creation of digital instructional materials and environments 
• Creation online databases resulting from digital research 

Digital scholarship will be evaluated according to the following criteria and principles: 

• Scholarly impact as demonstrated by presentation and/or discussion in conference presentations, published articles, and other vehicles of scholarly communication, as well as citations in other projects, blogs, tweets, social media, reports, and media coverage · Pedagogical impact or effectiveness as judged by peers 
• Creativity in the application of existing digital tools for designing pedagogical and scholarly resources 
• Intellectual contribution and substantive research contribution in the humanities · Evidence of platform/tool use by communities of practice 
• Peer-review of the project including internal or external funding, pre-publication review, and post-publication review 

Other kinds of scholarship, such as invited scholarly talks, publications in popular venues, development of language teaching materials (including textbooks and digital resources), and curation of public humanities events or other outreach efforts, are also highly valued scholarly outputs. Work-in-progress, such as progress reports (e.g., to agency sponsors, grant reports), papers delivered at professional conferences, grant and research proposals, papers circulated among colleagues for review, or unpublished teaching materials, indicate progress in a faculty member’s research projects and also form part of a member’s scholarly portfolio. In the absence of peer-reviewed publications, however, these kinds of scholarship do not constitute an adequate record of scholarly activity. 

A candidate should offer a self-evaluation of their scholarship using the criteria outlined above. For the purposes of evaluation, the candidate should separate published from unpublished works (including ongoing projects). Candidates should present scholarly output as follows: 

Published works: 

• List publications in reverse chronological order, with clear and complete bibliographic information 
• Indicate whether or not the publication is peer-reviewed 
• Give a brief description of the work and its contribution to the field 
• The candidate must clarify the role/contributions of the collaborative work in the personal statement 

Unpublished works and ongoing projects: 

• Give the context and/or setting for its presentation or anticipated presentation · If the work is destined for publication, indicate whether or not it will be peer-reviewed and give a brief description of the work and its contribution to the field; add an expected publication date if one can be reasonably stated 

Service 

Service takes several forms including contributions to the department, to the College, to the community, and to one’s profession. The Department expects that during a faculty member’s first years at Hamilton (prior to the third-year review) the greatest effort will be devoted to course development, the refinement of teaching skills, and research and scholarship. During this time, the Department encourages service on the departmental level (such as participation in departmental activities, including serving as a language program coordinator); service on an interdisciplinary program, if appropriate; and, starting in the second year on the faculty, participation as an academic advisor. 

The Department encourages, but does not require, that a member stand for election, or accept an appointment to a College committee following their third-year review. Contributions to the Department or interdisciplinary programs, such as serving on a hiring committee, may⁴ constitute departmental service. 

Members of the Department should be mindful of the importance of service responsibilities to Hamilton’s traditions of shared governance. Nonetheless, as much as the Department and the College need the dedicated service of its faculty, a member’s contribution to service, as indicated above, no matter how substantial, will not substitute for continuing achievement in teaching and scholarship. 

Candidacy for Promotion to Professor 

Teaching 

Distinguished teaching, the foremost requirement for tenure, should continue to remain at a high level of effectiveness, reflecting the growing maturity and scholarly imagination necessary to challenge all types of students. The candidate’s self-evaluation of teaching should be written using the same criteria and format as outlined in the tenure section above. Such maturity can be demonstrated through the creation and/or refinement of new and existing courses, or other pedagogical efforts that involve the development of innovative teaching materials, including digital resources, that reflect the latest insights from particular fields relevant to the departmental mission. 

Scholarship 

In line with the scholarship criteria stated in the Faculty Handbook, the Department views 4 sound and developing scholarship as necessary for promotion to Professor because such scholarship is a sign of sustained learning, creativity, and professional growth. The Department expects to see publication of research in peer-reviewed articles, books and/or digital scholarship. Note that the EALL members work in diverse disciplines (e.g., film, literature, linguistics, and language pedagogy) and the numbers of articles and other publications differ. In film/literary studies and linguistics/language pedagogy, the nature and specifics of collaboration also differ. Therefore, the candidate must clarify the role/contributions of the collaborative works in the candidate’s personal statement. For scholarly journal publications in a foreign country, the department also recognizes the journal evaluation system commonly used in the academia of that country (e.g., the Core Journal List in China). It is the candidate’s responsibility to provide accurate ranking information of the journal in the academia of the country. 

If a candidate expects to have a large portion of their peer-reviewed output consist of digital scholarship, then they should communicate early with the department chair to be sure that such work falls within the department’s definition of serious peer-reviewed scholarship. 

Digital media and scholarship have expanded the objects and forms of inquiry of modern language departments to include images, sounds, data, kinetic attributes like animation, and new kinds of engagement with textual representation and analysis. Here we set forth criteria for assessing scholarly work in digital media by members of the department. 

Digital scholarship includes, but is not limited to, the following undertakings: 

• Digital preservation and/or annotation of historical materials 
• Digital recreation/restoration of historical materials 
• Digital curation of contemporary materials 
• Creation of digital instructional materials and environments 
• Creation online databases resulting from digital research 

Digital scholarship will be evaluated according to the following criteria and principles: 

• Scholarly impact as demonstrated by presentation and/or discussion in conference presentations, published articles, and other vehicles of scholarly communication, as well as citations in other projects, blogs, tweets, social media, reports, and media coverage · Pedagogical impact or effectiveness as judged by peers 
• Creativity in the application of existing digital tools for designing pedagogical and scholarly resources 
• Intellectual contribution and substantive research contribution in the humanities · Evidence of platform/tool use by communities of practice 
• Peer-review of the project including internal or external funding, pre-publication review, and post-publication review 

Other kinds of scholarship, such as invited scholarly talks, publications in popular venues, development of language teaching materials (including textbooks and digital resources), and curation of public humanities events or other outreach efforts, are also highly valued scholarly outputs. Work-in-progress, such as progress reports (e.g., to agency sponsors, grant reports), papers delivered at professional conferences, grant and research proposals, papers circulated among colleagues for review, or unpublished teaching materials, indicate progress in a faculty member’s research projects and also form part of a member’s scholarly portfolio. In the absence of peer-reviewed publications, however, these kinds of scholarship do not constitute an adequate record of scholarly activity. 

A candidate should offer a self-evaluation of their scholarship using the criteria outlined above. For the purposes of evaluation, the candidate should separate published from unpublished works (including ongoing projects). Candidates should present scholarly output as follows: 

Published works: 

• List publications in reverse chronological order, with clear and complete bibliographic information 
• Indicate whether or not the publication is peer-reviewed 
• Give a brief description of the work and its contribution to the field 
• The candidate must clarify the role/contributions of the collaborative work in the personal statement 

Unpublished works and ongoing projects: 

• Give the context and/or setting for its presentation or anticipated presentation · If the work is destined for publication, indicate whether or not it will be peer-reviewed and give a brief description of the work and its contribution to the field; add an expected publication date if one can be reasonably stated 

Service 

The Department expects service responsibilities of all faculty members to increase following the granting of tenure. A faculty member should contribute at least one significant service commitment to the College on an annual basis. Examples of such include (1) participation on a standing committee, an ad hoc curricular committee, or a College-wide search committee; or (2) acting as department chair. The Department also recognizes the value of service to the profession, including officer or chair duties in professional organizations. The candidate’s self-evaluation of service should be written using the same criteria and format outlined in the tenure section above.

---

1 Hamilton College Faculty Handbook, July 2019 edition, accessed May 4, 2020. Sections regarding reappointment, tenure, and promotion criteria, and principles of evaluation for teaching, scholarship, and service are on pages 27-29 of this version. 

2 Hamilton College Faculty Handbook, pg. 27, July 2019 edition, accessed May 4, 2020.

3 Hamilton College Faculty Handbook, pg. 28, July 2019 edition, accessed May 4, 2020.

4 Hamilton College Faculty Handbook, pg. 28, July 2019 edition, accessed May 4, 2020.

Revised Fall 2021