Computer Information Systems Program Standards
STOCKTON UNIVERSITY
University Standards for Faculty with School Standards for Business (in bold) and Computer Information Systems Program Standards (in italics)
Preamble
The School of Business faculty recognizes the need for a uniform set of standards for the evaluation of teaching, scholarship, and service that is fair and flexible, and provides reasonable goals and expectations for those who seek tenure and promotion in the School. School Standards need to be broad enough and flexible enough to support a range of teaching methodologies, service, and scholarly activity. bu
The School of Business adopts the University Faculty Evaluation Standards. The School Standards occasionally elaborate upon the University Standards to reflect the unique efforts of faculty in the School of Business. Individual Program guidelines within the School may be more specific.
This policy covers all members of the School of Business faculty including tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure track. It does not cover adjunct faculty.
Non-tenure-track teaching positions will be held to the same teaching and service standards outlined in sections 6.1 and 6.3 of this document.
The Computer Information Systems Program adopts the University and School of Business
Faculty Evaluation Standards. The Program Standards occasionally elaborate upon the
University and School Standards to reflect the unique efforts of faculty in the Computer
Information Systems Program.
This policy covers all members of the Computer Information Systems Program faculty,
including tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure track. It does not cover adjunct faculty.
Non-tenure-track teaching positions will be held to the same teaching and service
standards
outlined in sections 6.1 and 6.3 of this document.
6.0 ELABORATION OF UNIVERSITY STANDARDS FOR TEACHING FACULTY
6.1 Teaching
6.1.1 Educating students, both inside and outside the classroom, studio, or laboratory
is the University’s primary purpose. Therefore, performance in teaching carries the
greatest weight in the evaluation of faculty. All aspects of teaching, including preceptorial
teaching as applicable, will be evaluated in order to gain a clear understanding of
each faculty member’s performance.
6.1.2 In broad terms, excellence in teaching is characterized by:
6.1.2.1 A thorough and current command of the subject matter, teaching techniques,
and methodologies of the disciplines one teaches.
6.1.2.2 Sound course design and delivery in all teaching assignments–whether program
or General Studies, introductory or advanced offerings–as evident in clear learning
goals and expectations, content reflecting the best available scholarship or artistic
practices, and teaching techniques aimed at student learning.
6.1.2.3. The ability to organize course material and to communicate this information
effectively. The development of a comprehensive syllabus for each course taught, including
expectations, grading, and attendance policies, and the timely provision of copies
to students.
6.1.2.4 Demonstration of respect for students as members of the academic community
through timely feedback and responses to student communications
6.1.3 Where appropriate, additional measures of teaching excellence are:
6.1.3.1 Ability to use technology in teaching.
6.1.3.2 The capacity to relate the subject matter to other fields of knowledge.
6.1.3.3 Seeking opportunities outside the classroom to enhance student learning of
the subject matter.
6.1.3.4 The ability to lead, promote, and/or participate in successful credit-bearing
experiences in community engagement, service-learning, faculty-sponsored/mentored
research, and global education.
6.1.3.5 Ability to create an inclusive and respectful environment.
6.1.3.6 Fostering enthusiasm for the subject matter while challenging
and motivating students, and maintaining appropriate high
standards for student performance
6.1.4 The School of Business adopts the University Standards for teaching.
6.1.5 The Computer Information Systems Program adopts the University
Standards and School Standards for Business for teaching.
6.2 Scholarly and Creative Activity
6.2.1 The teacher-scholar model recognizes that a serious and continuing commitment
to engaging in scholarship or creative activity of one’s disciplinary and/or interdisciplinary
work consistent with rank and/or assigned responsibilities, enriches teaching and
is the foundation of sustained excellence within the classroom.
6.2.2 Publications and creative work in support of reappointment and tenure are those achieved during the tenure candidate’s probationary period. Activity in support of a post-tenure promotion or range adjustment is that work completed since the most recent promotion or range adjustment.
6.2.3 The University recognizes a wide variety of scholarly vehicles: disciplinary
or interdisciplinary research, pedagogical research, applied research, integrative
scholarship, community engagement and service-learning, artistic or creative activity,
and grant writing. Scholarly or creative activities may take many forms and use different
vehicles to communicate with the broader academic community.
6.2.3.1 The University recognizes that the time and effort required to complete scholarly
or artistic projects may vary markedly among disciplines and sub-disciplines. Such
variance is addressed in approved School and Program standards.
6.2.3.2 The CIS program encourages and recognizes research supporting one's General Studies
coursework or General Studies initiative of the college,
6.2.4 The burden is always on the candidate to document the excellence of one’s work.
In cases of shared or multiple authorship, clarification of the degree of one’s participation
is expected. In the case of conference presentations or proceedings, clarification
should be provided with regard to the selectivity of the review process. Typically,
central to judgments regarding scholarly and creative activity are:
6.2.4.1 The capacity to bring scholarly or creative projects to completion.
6.2.4.2 A mix of scholarly activities appropriate to one’s appointment e.g., in some
cases scholarly activity will be primary, in others creative activity.
6.2.4.3 Judgments of the worth and significance of the work by those qualified to
make such judgments. These may include disciplinary peers, professional organizations,
ad hoc groups, such as evaluation, judging, or refereeing panels.
6.2.4.4 Documentation of the impact of one’s work
• with students
• within the scholarly area
• within higher education generally
• on documented standards of best practices in pedagogy
• in the application of one’s work
• as evident in citations of one’s work
• on public policy or institutions
• in the artistic/cultural realm
• or in an educational setting
6.2.4.5 Just as in the case of traditional scholarship involving the discovery of
new knowledge, when one’s work consists of pedagogical, integrative, or applied scholarship,
its significance may be documented by demonstration of clear goals, adequate preparation,
appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation, and reflective critique.
Presentation before peers and colleagues and advancing the discipline are also expectations
of alternate forms of scholarship.
6.2.4.6 The University understands excellence in a variety of scholarly or creative
activities to embody the following:
6.2.4.6.1 Books should be published by reputable academic or trade presses and reviewed
in appropriate journals.
6.2.4.6.2 Articles, essays, reviews, and creative writing should be published in appropriate
scholarly/creative journals or venues, whether print or electronic. Some assessment
should be made as to the quality of the journal in which the piece appears, in particular,
its scholarly/creative reputation and whether or not the journal or proceedings are
peer reviewed.
6.2.4.6.2.1 A unique aspect of scholarly publication within computer information systems
is the importance and prominence of refereed conference proceedings. Full papers published
in the proceedings of a refereed conference should be weighed similarly to refereed
journal articles.
6.2.4.6.2.2 Examples of evidence to help in assessing a journal, conference, or other
publication venue include a copy of the “Information for Contributors” or other similar
pages for a journal or conference outlining the review process and submission standards,
a copy of the preface or other page of proceedings indicating the acceptance rate,
information as to where a journal is indexed or how it ranks for the field.
6.2.4.6.2.3 Publications in top-tier or highly prestigious journals or conferences
may be weighed more heavily during an evaluation. It is the responsibility of the
applicant to substantiate the rank of the journal/conference or its reputation in
the field.
6.2.4.6.3 Scholarly and creative activity that involves students as co-presenters,
co-participants, or coauthors.
6.2.4.6.4 A presentation should be evaluated on the quality of its content and on
the prestige of the meeting where it was delivered. Qualitative judgments are best
made when copies of presentations are made available. National and regional meetings
should rank higher than local meetings in most instances. Scholarly presentations
should be ranked more highly than non-scholarly ones. Competitive selections as well
as presentations receiving disciplinary acknowledgement for excellence should be noted.
In most disciplines a record of scholarship based on presentations alone will not
be evaluated as highly as one including refereed publications.
6.2.4.6.4.1 A Peer-reviewed or refereed full paper in conference proceedings is considered
a publication as defined in 6.2.4.6.2 and its sub-bullets above. Such publications
nearly always involve a presentation; however, the corresponding presentation is not
considered an additional contribution. Presentations, as defined here, refer specifically
to presentations that do not accompany a refereed/peer-reviewed publication (i.e.,
cases where the presentation itself is the scholarly contribution).
6.2.4.6.5 Work in the arts may be evaluated by a number of different measures: assessment
of its quality by peers or professional critics; the reputation of the gallery, museum,
or other artistic venue where it is shown or presented; the respect afforded the organization
for which it is performed or under contract; or some other measure of its success
or impact (e.g. royalties, awards, or impact on public debate or on other artists).
6.2.4.6.6 Other forms of scholarly or creative activity that may appear in emerging
scholarly or artistic media may be included as well, provided that comparable standards
of peer review can be applied to them.
6.2.4.6.7 Where reviews are included in a file as evidence of the worth of a candidate’s
scholarly or artistic work, attention should be given to the professional credentials
of the reviewer and the reputation of the journal or publication as specified in School
and/or Program standards.
6.2.4.6.8 Professional activities undertaken as a practitioner or consultant are considered
scholarly activity when they go beyond the routine application of knowledge to the
creation of new knowledge and the development of new standards for practice. Such
qualities distinguish between scholarship and professional service. Those making the
judgments regarding the standards for applied research necessarily involve more than
clients and include academic peers familiar with the area of practice under consideration.
6.2.4.6.9 In those disciplines with strong expectations of practice to maintain current
competency, appropriate standards for determining the significance of this work will
be developed at the Program level and approved through the standard procedure.
6.2.4.6.9.1 In a field that changes as rapidly as computer information systems, maintaining
current competency is critical. Participation in activities that advance one's knowledge
and skills and enhance one's teaching abilities is an essential part of a CIST faculty
member's scholarly activity. Such activities include but are not limited to, attendance
in professional and academic organization presentations, workshops, and seminars.
6.2.4.6.10 Grants or monetary awards that are funded or reviewed as fundable from
governmental or nongovernmental organizations are considered examples of scholarship
if those grants and awards are subject to external peer review.
6.2.4.6.10.1 Actively pursuing external grants is encouraged even if not funded or
reviewed as fundable. Candidates should document the reputation of the funding agency,
the effort of the application process, and the review process
6.2.4.6.11 Faculty engaged in community outreach can make a difference in the communities
and beyond by defining or resolving relevant social problems or issues, by facilitating
organizational development, by improving existing practices or programs, and by enriching
the cultural life of the community. Scholarship may take the form of widely disseminating
the knowledge gained in community-based projects in appropriate professional venues
in order to share its significance with those who do not benefit directly from the
project.
6.2.5 The School of Business supports and encourages the wide variety of scholarly activities recognized by the University and adopts the University Standards for scholarly and creative activity.
6.2.6 The Computer Information Systems program criteria for tenure and promotion in the
area of scholarship and creative activity are intended to elaborate the University
and School of Business standards and reflect norms within the discipline.
6.2.6.1 The Computer Information Systems program expects candidates for tenure and
promotion to Associate Professor rank to have authored or co-authored a minimum of
three scholarly contributions (full papers published in peer-reviewed/refereed journals
or in peer-reviewed/refereed conference proceedings, or patents granted) within the
past six years. These contributions must have been published (in print or accepted
and nearing publication) since the candidate's initial appointment or most recent
range adjustment. This minimum of three substantive scholarly publications should
be supplemented by the various forms of scholarly and creative activities enumerated
throughout 6.2.4.6 as appropriate to the discipline.
6.2.6.2 The Computer Information Systems program expects candidates for promotion
to the Professor rank to include evidence of a continued record of scholarly engagement
and activity that meets the University standards for the rank of Professor and expects
candidates to have authored or co-authored a minimum of three substantive scholarly
contributions (full papers published in peerreviewed/refereed journals or in peer-reviewed/refereed
conference proceedings) within the past six years. These contributions must have been
published (in print or accepted and nearing publication) since the candidate's most
recent promotion or range adjustment was awarded. This minimum of three substantive
scholarly publications should be supplemented by the various forms of scholarly and
creative activities enumerated throughout 6.2.4.6 as appropriate to the discipline.
6.3 University and Community Service
6.3.1 The faculty role includes contributions to the achievement of the University’s
mission through effective participation in governance activities, including leadership
roles at the Program, School, or University-wide levels. These contributions may require
the capacity to work collaboratively with other members of the University community,
including activities related to alumni and the University Foundation.
6.3.2 Faculty may also contribute in broader arenas such as state, regional, national
or international organizations and disciplinary/professional associations. In addition,
faculty may contribute to the University’s public mission, including its commitment
to diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, through service to our community,
region, state or country. Per the Carnegie definition, community engagement and service-learning
that enriches scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhances curriculum, teaching
and service-learning; prepares educated, engaged citizens; strengthens democratic
values and civic responsibility; addresses critical societal issues; contributes to
the public good enriches scholarship. Community engagement and service-learning is
particularly valued at Stockton.
6.3.3 The University expects faculty in their first five years of service to serve
the University and community at levels commensurate with their rank. Faculty who are
tenured, have multi-year contracts, and/or are of senior rank would be expected to
have more substantial records in this area, as demonstrated by achievements in leadership
on campus, in the community, to their disciplines, and to professional organizations.
6.3.4 Evaluation of achievements in this area focuses on the significance of participation,
the impact of service, the scope of responsibilities, the effectiveness of participation,
and contributions to the functioning, administration, and development of the University
and other entities. Clear goals, adequate preparation and appropriate methods of providing
service, significant results of the service, and reflection on the contribution and
its use to improve the quality of future service are all aspects of documenting achievement
in campus or community service. Sustained service is expected to meet the minimum
requirement of this responsibility. Compensated service is generally not sufficient
to meet the minimum requirements. However, expectations for how it can be used to
demonstrate excellence may be conveyed in School and Program standards.
6.3.4.1 Service activities that could be either paid for or unpaid by Stockton should
be weighted similarly to non-compensated service activities.
6.3.4.2 Service activities compensated by other institutions (directly or indirectly
through Stockton) should be weighted similarly to non-compensated service activities.
Such activities include program evaluation of community colleges, service activities
paid for by external grants, etc.
6.3.4.3 Activities generally not sufficient to meet the minimum requirements include
defined responsibilities of established leadership positions that are compensated.
These include defined responsibilities of faculty senate president, program chair,
etc.
6.3.4.4 Activities beyond the faculty's defined responsibilities but compensated by
the university should be weighted similarly to non-compensated service. Such activities
include summer open house participation, service activities paid for by internal grants,
etc.
6.3.5 Evidence of effectiveness in University or community service may include such
items as:
6.3.5.1 One or more instances when one has used one’s professional skills or knowledge
for the benefit of the University, or of a non-University group or individual.
6.3.5.2 Contributions to professional organizations that are focused on service or
professional responsibility as opposed to scholarship, research, or artistic/creative
work. For example, an officership or service on a professional board may be more appropriately
listed here, whereas editing a special issue of a journal may be more appropriately
listed under the section on scholarship.
6.3.5.3 General civic or community activities to which one has contributed one’s professional
skills or a significant amount of time, talent, energy, and involvement beyond that
which might be expected by the usual citizen or member.
6.3.5.4 Contributions that come directly or indirectly from the additional effort
involved in faculty oversight of student service learning or service internships (in
or outside of courses) that make a positive impact on the organization.
6.3.5.5 Professional services, such as membership or leadership positions in professional
societies, board membership, consultancy in one's discipline, conference organizer,
grant reviewer, journal editor, peer review of journal or conference publications,
computing or related contest judging, invited lectures, etc
6.3.5.6 Service within the program includes significant contributions to program meetings,
committee work at the program level, program and curriculum development, program assessment,
supporting and mentoring new faculty, obtaining grants in support of program objectives,
and leadership in initiating and implementing CIST related student activities, etc.
6.3.5.7 Contributions in university level committee appointments and elected committee
service. Involvement in student organizations and university sponsored events may
also be considered as part of a candidate’s service to the university
6.3.6 The School of Business adopts the University Standards for University and Community
Service.
6.3.6.1 The CIS Program adopts the School of Business Standards and University Standards
for University, School, and Community Service.
Updated: March 2024
