Program Standards for Marine Science (MARS)

Preamble

The faculty of the Marine Science Program endorses the University standards as well as
those of the School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics. Both sets of standards were used
as the basis of these Program standards for the Marine Science faculty. University, School,
and Program standards will be used during review and evaluation of all Program faculty,
including tenure-track faculty, non-tenure track faculty, and part-time faculty.

6.0 ELABORATION OF UNIVERSITY STANDARDS FOR TEACHING FACULTY

6.1 Teaching

6.1.1 Same as the University and School standards.
6.1.2 The Marine Science Program (MARS) encourages the MARS faculty
member to demonstrate teaching effectiveness by a variety of
methods. There are many ways of achieving excellence in teaching,
and each individual faculty member may have a unique way of dealing
with the challenges of teaching. In addition to traditional classroom
teaching, we recognize that MARS faculty are often involved in
independent studies, internship supervision, and field and laboratory
work, which may present additional time constraints and challenges.
To demonstrate teaching effectiveness, we encourage the faculty to
use, as appropriate, multiple indicators of successful teaching,
including but not limited to the ones listed in the following sections.
In broad terms excellence in teaching is characterizedby:
6.1.2.1 A thorough and current command of the subject matter,
teaching techniques, and methodologies. MARS instructors
are expected to integrate in their courses the complex
elements of all the sciences, and to make clear the highly
interdisciplinary nature of the marine science field. Syllabi,
teaching portfolios and other course materials may be
submitted as indicators of teaching approaches, as well as
peer evaluations of teaching.
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. Syllabi, teaching
portfolios and other evidence, such as assessment results,
may be submitted as indicators. Faculty may submit
evaluation of their course materials and content by
members of their program or of General Studies who do not
participate in the formal “Peer Evaluation of Teaching” as
described in Section 7.3.3 of the Procedures.
6.1.2.3. The ability to organize course material and to communicate
this information effectively. The ability to link classroom
material with laboratory work and field exercises is critical.
The development of a comprehensive syllabus for each
course taught, including expectations, grading, and
attendance policies and the timely provision of copies to
students. Syllabi, peer evaluations, student evaluations,
and assessments of student learning administered by the
instructor may be submitted as indicators.
6.1.2.4 Same as University and School standards.
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, international education, and
global engagement.
6.1.3.5 Evidence of effectiveness for alternate assignments and/or
non-teaching responsibilities should be demonstrated.
Alternative assignments and non-teaching responsibilities
include but are not limited to grant course releases,
sabbaticals, and assignments from the Dean or other
administrator to fill course load requirements after an
unexpected cancellation.
6.1.3.6 Professional development training in classroom topics,
such as attending seminars or webinars on pedagogy, anti-
bias/discrimination, inclusivity, or other topics pertinent
to teaching. This also includes developing and/or
delivering such training to others.

6.2 Scholarly and Creative Activity. Note: Instructors and Non-Tenure Track
Teaching Professionals are not required to engage in scholarly or creative activity.

6.2.1 Same as University and School standards.
6.2.2 Same as University and School standards.
6.2.3 MARS recognizes a wide variety of scholarly vehicles: disciplinary or
interdisciplinary research, pedagogical research, applied research,
integrative scholarship, community engagement (such as community
science or community stakeholder involvement in the scholarly process),
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 MARS program recognizes that the time and effort
required to complete scholarly activity may vary markedly
among disciplines and subdisciplines. Some fields, such as
(but not limited to) ecology, generally require the collection
of multiple years of data before publication, so these types
of projects take longer to reach the publication stage.
The MARS program recognizes that expenses and other
research needs can vary as well. For example, the need to
purchase and maintain expensive equipment and supplies,
or to schedule and pay for boat time will necessitate
additional time and effort for a faculty member in all phases
of a research project.
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 cases of conference
presentations or proceedings, the MARS program recognizes that
selectivity varies between subdisciplines. Clarification should be
provided with regard to the selectivity of the review process if the
conference is selective. Clarifications of the evaluation of scholarly
and creative activities are as follows.
Judgments about the excellence of scholarly and creative activity
should be assessed by the following guidelines as appropriate:
6.2.4.1 Same as School standards.
6.2.4.2 Same as School standards.
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 as through published papers,
funding agencies as through funded proposals or those
proposals unfunded yet receiving positive reviews,
conference professional organizations as through
accepted conference presentation or proceedings
abstracts, ad hoc groups, such as evaluation, judging, or
refereeing panels, as through the evaluation or judging
sheets provided.
6.2.4.4 Documentation of the impact of one’s work
• with students conducting independent research.
• by inclusion into the classroom or teaching laboratory.
• 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 educational settings.
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. Examples include (but are not
limited to) authoring and delivering trainings on topics
that advance the discipline or the teaching/scholarship of 
others.
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 Same as University and School standards.
6.2.4.6.2 Same as School standards.
6.2.4.6.3 Scholarly and creative activity that involves students
as co-presenters, co-participants, or co-authors is
valued regardless of the venue. Additionally, field
conferences (where appropriate) may be used as
indicators of the candidate's scholarly activities.
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. 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.
6.2.4.6.5 Same as University and School standards.
6.2.4.6.6 Same as School standards.
6.2.4.6.7 Same as University and School standards.
6.2.4.6.8 Same as School standards.
6.2.4.6.9 Same as University and School standards.
6.2.4.6.10 Same as School standards.
6.2.4.6.11 Same as University and School standards.

6.3 University and Community Service

6.3.1 The MARS faculty’s 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 or
other agencies. Off-campus professional activity is also valued. Members
of the MARS faculty should also be willing to meet with prospective
students and their parents/guardians, to work with local governments
on marine matters, to speak at schools, and/or to be available to the
media, as appropriate or according to need and circumstance. The
quality of the service and leadership activities is of critical importance.
6.3.2 Same as University and School standards.
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.
Expectations for quantity of service are reduced for full-time Instructors
and Non-tenure Track Teaching Professionals due to their increased
teaching loads. 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 Same as School standards.
6.3.5 Same as University and School Standard.