Psychology

Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor

In accordance with the Hamilton College Faculty Handbook, the Department of Psychology’s criteria for tenure and promotion to the rank of Associate Professor include three factors: teaching, research, and service. The tradition of the Department is to select and retain colleagues who are highly capable teaching scholars. Thus, those recommended for tenure and promotion are people who are effective teachers and active scientists.

Our criteria for evaluating the quality of professional activities reflect standards shared by our peer institutions (i.e., highly selective liberal arts colleges), and we interpret these standards with an understanding that the composition of produced work will differ from candidate to candidate. Nevertheless, we expect that the record of a viable candidate will provide clear evidence of a successful pattern of accomplishments in both teaching and research, coupled with high motivation to sustain this activity throughout the candidate’s professional life. Teaching is the most heavily weighted criterion for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Scholarship is almost equally important.

The Senior Project is a central part of the curriculum in Psychology at Hamilton, and often it provides an opportunity for students to conduct collaborative research with the faculty advisor. Thus, aspects of this experience might in certain circumstances be evidence of accomplishment in either teaching or scholarship. Similarly, the supervision of students in summer research might provide evidence of successful teaching, whereas the final product might reasonably be considered in the category of scholarship.

Teaching

The Department expects its faculty to be excellent teachers. Effective teaching, which includes the candidate’s ability to communicate effectively in the classroom and to motivate students to think deeply about course material, may be demonstrated in several ways:

1. A personal statement demonstrating continued growth in teaching, as evidenced by reflection about pedagogical approaches, course modifications, and commitment to student learning;
2. Course materials (e.g., exams, assignments, syllabi) that indicate creative, rigorous, and pedagogically valuable approaches;
3. Teaching at multiple levels of the curriculum, from introductory courses through the Senior Project. Teaching may also include supervising independent study and research students, which may result in extramural presentation and/or joint publication (when appropriate);
4. Faculty observations, based on classroom visitations by all voting members of the department. Such observations will be described in the departmental letter. Candidates can choose which, if any, faculty observation letters to include in their file;
5. Student teaching evaluations, both numerical and narrative, as well as select and random student letters.

Scholarship

The Department expects its faculty to be productive scholars who have demonstrated a commitment to research and the ability to initiate and maintain an active and independent program of scholarship that goes beyond dissertation or postdoctoral work. Evaluations of the candidate’s program of research will include the number of publications, the quality of individual publications, and the importance of the journals in which the candidate has published. Because the criteria for evaluating the quality of one’s professional activities reflect standards shared by our colleagues at other institutions, and in order to have an independent, objective assessment, the Department’s judgment will incorporate the evaluations of colleagues at other institutions in order to take into account the broader, shared standards in the academic community.

The Department considers publication with student coauthors to be evidence of effective integration of teaching and scholarship at Hamilton. We encourage but do not require faculty-student collaboration in research. Although we recognize the positive features of a research program that incorporates students, the absence of such a program does not count against a candidate upon the evaluation of the scholarly record. Furthermore, student involvement in research weighs at least as heavily in the evaluation of teaching as it does in scholarship.

1. The primary indicator of a successful program of scholarship is the publication of peer-reviewed journal articles reporting original research. Meta-analyses, literature reviews, and theoretical papers are also highly valued.
2. Methodological papers, as well as book chapters and edited books, will also be considered as evidence of scholarly activity, although the weight given to these accomplishments will not be as great as that given to peer-reviewed empirical journal articles, meta-analyses, literature reviews, and theoretical papers. In some cases (e.g., for clinical psychologists), active involvement in clinical work may be counted towards evidence of scholarly activity.
3. Conference presentations, particularly those given at national and international conferences, will also be considered.
4. Grant proposals, conference organization, and journal editing in the area of the candidate’s specialty will also provide evidence of active engagement in scholarship.

Service

According to the Faculty Handbook, “members of the Faculty are expected to participate in the intellectual and academic life of the College outside of class by advising students, by participating in departmental or program activities, by attending meetings of the Faculty, and by serving on faculty and College committees.” The Department expects that its faculty will engage regularly in service to the College in a variety of ways, including the following:

1. Regular attendance at faculty and departmental meetings, college functions (e.g., Convocation, Class and Charter Day, and Commencement ceremonies), and other events sponsored by the Psychology Department;
2. Serving as an academic advisor to students;
3. Departmental service, which may consist of organizing departmental events (e.g., information sessions, Senior Project presentations, invited lectures); contributing to curriculum and pedagogical development; and performing a variety of departmental tasks (e.g., administering the human subjects pool, serving as advisor to Psi Chi);
4. College service, by serving on committees and by organizing and participating in college events;
5. Professional service, which may involve serving as an ad hoc reviewer for one or more scholarly journals; participating as a reviewer for granting agencies; and community service (e.g., outreach programs) of a professional nature;
6. Being constructive and courteous in serving the needs of the Department, contributing positively to the work environment, and promoting the professional development of departmental and college colleagues.

Guidelines for Promotion to Full Professor

In accordance with the Hamilton College Faculty Handbook, the Department of Psychology’s criteria for promotion to the rank of Professor include three factors: teaching, research, and service. The tradition of the Department is to select and retain colleagues who are highly capable teaching scholars. Consistent with the Faculty Handbook (2019), candidates for promotion to the rank of Professor “are expected to provide distinction to the Faculty as teachers, to have demonstrated sound, continuing growth as scholars, and to serve as leaders of the academic community.”

Our criteria for evaluating the quality of professional activities reflect standards shared by our peer institutions (i.e., highly selective liberal arts colleges), and we interpret these standards with an understanding that the composition of produced work will differ from candidate to candidate. Nevertheless, we expect that the record of a viable candidate will provide clear evidence of distinction as a teaching scholar.

The Senior Project is a central part of the curriculum in Psychology at Hamilton, and often it provides an opportunity for students to conduct collaborative research with the faculty advisor. Thus, aspects of this experience might in certain circumstances be evidence of accomplishment in either teaching or scholarship. Similarly, the supervision of students in summer research might provide evidence of successful teaching, whereas the final product might reasonably be considered in the category of scholarship.

Teaching

The Department expects its faculty to be excellent teachers. Effective teaching, which includes the candidate’s ability to communicate effectively in the classroom and to motivate students to think deeply about course material, may be demonstrated in several ways:

1. A personal statement demonstrating continued growth in teaching and commitment to student learning, which may include revision of existing courses, development of new courses, and innovation in pedagogical strategies or approaches to course content;
2. Course materials (e.g., exams, assignments, syllabi) that indicate creative, rigorous, and pedagogically valuable approaches;
3. Teaching at multiple levels of the curriculum, from introductory courses through the Senior Project. Teaching may also include supervising independent study and research students, which may result in extramural presentation and/or joint publication (when appropriate);
4. Faculty observations, based on classroom visitations by all voting members of the department. Such observations will be described in the departmental letter. Candidates can choose which, if any, faculty observation letters to include in their file;
5. Student teaching evaluations, both numerical and narrative, as well as select and random student letters.

Scholarship

The Department expects its faculty to be productive scholars who have demonstrated a commitment to research, and the ability to initiate and maintain an active program of scholarship. Evaluations of the candidate’s program of research will include the number of publications, the quality of individual publications, and the importance of the journals in which the candidate has published. Because the criteria for evaluating the quality of one’s professional activities reflect standards shared by our colleagues at other institutions, and in order to have an independent, objective assessment, the Department’s judgment will incorporate the evaluations of colleagues at other institutions in order to take into account the broader, shared standards in the academic community.

Publication with student coauthors is evidence of effective integration of teaching and scholarship at Hamilton. The Department encourages but does not require faculty-student collaboration in research. Although we recognize the positive features of a research program that incorporates students, the absence of such a program does not count against a candidate upon the evaluation of the scholarly record. Furthermore, student involvement in research weighs at least as heavily in the evaluation of teaching as it does in scholarship.

1. The primary indicator of a successful program of scholarship is the publication of peer-reviewed journal articles reporting original research; however, meta-analyses, literature reviews, and theoretical papers are also highly valued.
2. Methodological papers, as well as book chapters and edited books, will also be considered as evidence of scholarly activity, although the weight given to these accomplishments will not be as great as that given to peer-reviewed empirical journal articles, meta-analyses, literature reviews, and theoretical papers. In some cases (e.g., for clinical psychologists), active involvement in clinical work may be counted towards evidence of scholarly activity.
3. Conference presentations, particularly those given at national and international conferences, will also be considered.
4. Grant proposals, conference organization, journal editing, and serving in a leadership role in a professional organization in the area of the candidate’s specialty will also provide evidence of active engagement in scholarship.

Service

According to the Faculty Handbook, “members of the Faculty are expected to participate in the intellectual and academic life of the College outside of class by advising students, by participating in departmental or program activities, by attending meetings of the Faculty, and by serving on faculty and College committees.” The Department expects that its faculty will engage regularly in service to the College in a variety of ways, including the following:

1. Regular attendance at faculty and departmental meetings, college functions (e.g., Convocation, Class and Charter Day, and Commencement ceremonies), and other events sponsored by the Psychology Department;
2. Serving as an academic advisor to students;
3. Departmental service, which may consist of organizing departmental events (e.g., information sessions, Senior Project presentations, invited lectures); contributing to curriculum and pedagogical development; mentoring junior faculty; and performing a variety of departmental tasks (e.g., administering the human subjects pool, serving as advisor to Psi Chi);
4. College service, by contributing to shared governance and by organizing and participating in college events;
5. Professional service, which may involve serving as an ad hoc reviewer for one or more scholarly journals; participating as a reviewer for granting agencies; and community service (e.g., outreach programs) of a professional nature;
6. Being constructive and courteous in serving the needs of the Department, contributing positively to the work environment, and promoting the professional development of departmental and college colleagues.

Revised 2020