Religious Studies

View as a PDF

The Religious Studies Department at Hamilton College expects candidates for reappointment, tenure, and promotion to demonstrate excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service.

Teaching

Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor

The Department views effective teaching to be essential to a successful candidacy.

In keeping with the multidisciplinary nature of Religious Studies and its commitment to diversity, it is understood that effective teaching may take a variety of forms. The Department recognizes that teaching may include but is not restricted to, classroom instruction, curricular innovation, the fostering of diversity in the College community, engagement with concentrators and minors, and the academic mentoring of individual students.

While effective teaching will look different for every instructor, we expect to see candidates for reappointment developing the following characteristics, and candidates for tenure should regularly demonstrate the following characteristics in their teaching. Similarly, faculty in non-tenure-track positions should demonstrate these characteristics in their teaching:

• Engages the current state of knowledge and disciplinary or interdisciplinary practice and pedagogy into courses.  Indicators of this can be found in the way syllabi and assignments that are included in peer review incorporate recent scholarship and issues of contemporary relevance, particularly those that address historical inequities and marginalization in the discipline.  Classroom observation can reveal how, and to what extent, current disciplinary or interdisciplinary discussions shape course content, assignment design, and pedagogy. Indicators can also be found in self-evaluation that describes the way a faculty member has revised a course or developed a new course based on developments in the field.
• Uses inclusive pedagogical approaches and practices. Indicators can be found in assignments and syllabi that allow students to demonstrate their learning and development in the course in multiple modes.  Classroom observation can assess the extent to which there is broad engagement and interaction with all students. Self-evaluation can reveal efforts to adapt pedagogy to be more inclusive of the students in the class. Systematically-collected student feedback may also provide some evidence on the extent to which students are impacted by efforts of the faculty member.
• Challenges students intellectually.  Indicators of this can be found in syllabi and assignments that are included in peer review and in systematically-collected student feedback, which demonstrate that courses are designed to challenge students appropriately, attentive to the diversity of preparation and experiences among students.
• Provides reasonable assistance to students outside of class.  Indicators of this can be found in systematically-collected student feedback and in self-evaluation. We note, however, that students may make significantly higher demands for assistance from women, faculty of color, and those from other minoritized groups. We emphasize the word “reasonable” here to indicate that not every request for assistance outside of class need be accommodated. This characteristic may include the academic mentoring of individual students, as well as intellectual engagement with concentrators and minors.
• Involves reflective and ongoing growth.  Indicators of this can be found in self-evaluation which could report on experimentation with different pedagogical approaches, development of new courses, and/or revision of existing ones. Evidence for these might be found in course syllabi and from peer evaluations. It may also be evident in participation in faculty development activities such as attending workshops about teaching or participating in voluntary formative peer review that would be reported in self-evaluation.

Promotion to Rank of Professor

The Department expects that candidates for promotion to Professor will have demonstrated the characteristics described above and will document further growth as teachers, incorporating and going beyond these characteristics. New emphases in teaching and experimentation in the classroom are valued. We understand that students benefit from professors exploring new material in the classroom and that professors benefit from developing new strategies to engage students.

Scholarship

Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor

The scholarship of candidates for tenure should show ongoing engagement with the field that moves beyond the dissertation.

The normal expectation for scholarship is that a successful candidate for tenure will have a completed manuscript of an original scholarly book accepted for publication with no further revisions by a scholarly publisher; or several articles published in peer-reviewed disciplinary, interdisciplinary, or area studies journals or other equivalent venues for peer-reviewed multimodal or digital scholarship. Religious Studies is a multidisciplinary field so forms of scholarship can diverge significantly from the standard formats of books and articles. At reappointment, the candidate should inform the department of their plans for publication. In the interest of clarifying expectations for the tenure review, the tenured members of the department should then offer feedback on their colleague’s proposal for publication. This feedback will be included in the department’s reappointment letter. Regardless of the form it takes, the quality of the candidate’s scholarship should be judged to be high by evaluators in the field. We also value products of the candidate’s scholarship that take alternate forms (for example, digital and/or other field-relevant collaborative projects, whether online or museum-based; or civic-related and in the public interest) and that may not be peer-reviewed, though this work cannot replace peer-reviewed scholarship.

In addition to the publications described above, a successful candidate for tenure will provide clear evidence of a strong and enduring commitment to research and scholarship. This can take many forms, but we are most concerned that the candidates give evidence of active participation in the field. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, giving talks; contributing to panels; organizing conferences, panels and workshops; being invited to give talks and contribute to volumes; writing books and articles; reviewing books; and receiving grants.

Promotion to to the Rank of Professor

Promotion to full professor will require clear evidence of a strong and enduring commitment to research and scholarship that goes significantly beyond the requirements for tenure. In addition to the publication, after tenure, of a peer-reviewed, original scholarly book or several articles in peer-reviewed disciplinary, interdisciplinary, or area studies journals or other equivalent venues for peer-reviewed multimodal or digital scholarship, such evidence may include, but is not limited to, giving talks; contributing to panels; organizing conferences, panels and workshops; being invited to give talks and contribute to volumes; serving as editor for a peer-reviewed journal, a journal special issue, or a collection of essays; reviewing books; and receiving grants.

Service

Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor

Before reappointment, the Department expects tenure-track faculty members to be focused on accelerating their scholarship and refining their teaching. Their service should be limited to advising students (starting in their second year) and taking an active role in the Department’s work. The faculty member should also be laying the groundwork for active citizenship in the College by attending Faculty Meetings. After reappointment, the Department expects that the faculty member’s service profile will expand to reflect active citizenship in the College community, including membership on no more than one light College-wide committee or the program committee of an interdisciplinary program, if appropriate. This is also an appropriate career stage to be taking on service roles in regional, national, and international professional organizations. This service may supplement, but should not fully replace, the College service described above. Before tenure, a faculty member may also perform valuable service to the profession by serving as a reviewer for journal articles, book proposals, and book manuscripts; and to society more broadly by, for example, serving on boards and/or commissions related to their expertise. The Department encourages this work and recognizes it as an indication of the faculty member’s growing reputation, but this work is not required for tenure or promotion to associate professor.

Promotion to the Rank of Professor

As an associate professor, a faculty member in Religious Studies should cultivate an active service profile that models good citizenship in the College community. This includes taking on more expansive service roles at the College level, such as membership on one major committee or a few minor committees, whether elected or appointed, each year. At this career stage, the faculty member also benefits from holding service roles in regional, national, and international professional organizations, and the profession benefits from the faculty member’s willingness to do this work. This service may supplement, but should not fully replace, the College service described above. The faculty member may also be called upon to serve the profession as a reviewer for journal articles, book proposals, book manuscripts, and tenure cases; and society more broadly by, for example, serving on boards and/or commissions related to their expertise. The Department encourages this work as a service to the profession and recognizes it as an indication of the faculty member’s growing reputation, though this work is not required for promotion to full professor.

Peer Review Guidelines

Because peer review of teaching supports the development of faculty at all stages of their careers, the Religious Studies Department encourages all faculty to engage in peer review—both as observer and observed—on a regular basis, regardless of rank or status.

Peer review of teaching in Religious Studies will include a pre-observation meeting, review of available course materials by the observer, an in-class observation of a single class session, a post-observation meeting between the observer and the instructor, and written documentation of the observation that is shared with the instructor in a timely manner.

The department chair (or designated senior faculty member) will make peer review assignments at the beginning of each semester, the reviewer will take responsibility for scheduling on a mutually convenient date, and the department chair (or designated senior faculty member) will ensure that the review occurs by the end of the semester.

Normally, faculty in their first semester of teaching will be reviewed for formative purposes only; no written documentation of the first semester review will be retained. For faculty in short-term contracts (e.g., one-semester or one-year positions), it may be appropriate to conduct an observation sooner in order to facilitate the writing of recommendation letters. This possibility should be discussed with the faculty member in question.

Each faculty member will be observed no more than twice per semester, and each classroom observation will be conducted by one colleague only. Each faculty member, including those in non-tenure-track positions, will normally be observed once each year. Tenure-track faculty may be observed more frequently to ensure adequate preparation for reappointment and tenure decisions.

All voting members of the department will have firsthand knowledge of teaching through this peer observation process before voting on reappointment, tenure, or promotion.

The department will submit the written documentation of review with tenure, reappointment, and promotion letters.

Faculty in non-tenurable positions will be reviewed using the same processes as those in tenure lines.

The following guidelines provided by the Committee on Evaluating Teaching must be followed:

1. The instructor to be observed (hereafter “the instructor”) should share class materials with the observer well in advance of a pre-observation meeting.
2. Before the observation itself, the instructor and observer should meet in person or via video conference to discuss the instructor’s goals for class session/unit and course to be observed; the instructor’s teaching philosophy and how it informs the class session/unit and course to be observed; and specific things the instructor wants feedback on and/or areas on which the observer should focus.
3. A post-observation meeting including the instructor and the observer should take place in-person or by video conference fairly soon after the observation (within 1 week, preferably sooner).
   1. Post-observation conversation should center around the specific observation areas (see “Classroom Observation Report,” below) and should include discussion of the reflection questions.
   2. The observer should strive for a balance between praise, constructive criticism, and self-reflection.
4. The observer should complete a draft of the observation report (see “Classroom Observation Report,” below) and share it with the instructor before the post-observation meeting. The report may be edited after the post-observation meeting, based on the conversation with the instructor being observed.
5.  The observer should show up on time, if not early, stay for the whole class, and take detailed notes, but not participate in the class. Observer should follow rules established for students in the class regarding use of technology, eating/drinking, and so on.
6. Department chairs will make assignments for observations at the beginning of the semester and ensure that observations are completed by the end of the semester.
   1. For observations by colleagues outside the department, the department chair and the instructor should consult to determine appropriate observers. The department chair should then contact the agreed-upon colleagues to request their participation and facilitate the scheduling of observations.
   2. The instructor should have some choice for dates of observation and/or indicate dates that are not ideal. The day of observation should be scheduled at least a week in advance.
   3. When observations are scheduled, pre- and post-observation meetings should also be set up at the same time.
   4. Annual department reports should verify that observations were performed for all non-tenurable and untenured faculty. When the peer observation system is extended to all faculty, annual department reports should reflect this expansion.
7. Observations of tenure track faculty should be spread out over the time preceding major personnel decisions (reappointment, tenure, and promotion). Normally, tenure-track faculty should not be observed in their first semester. Some circumstances (e.g., an experienced instructor on a shortened tenure clock) may require a different schedule.