Standards and Guidelines
Standards for Retention and Tenure of Visual-Arts Faculty
Adopted by the CAA Board of Directors, April 24, 1993; revised October 27, 2002, and October 24, 2004.
Introduction
That the College Art Association establish the following standards respecting visual-arts faculty, a copy of which will be sent to each accrediting body in the United States and to institutional members of CAA under cover of a letter from the current president of the Association urging the said accrediting body to recognize the standards as appropriate to any collegiate visual-arts program. These standards are to be updated or approved by the appropriate CAA committee in a timely manner.
CAA encourages institutions to maintain their diverse and unique departmental missions. Given the great range of missions and standards among institutions, it is essential that all applicants be provided with as much information as possible. CAA encourages institutions to comply with AAUP (American Association of University Professors) standards with respect to normal time frames of academic advancement.
CAA notes that this set of standards represents national norms and thresholds that should provide a framework for supporting individual and institutional purposes. The standards should not appear to be obligatory or required; specific needs and missions of institutions need to be respected. CAA urges art and design units to put specific guidelines and criteria in writing, and to consider attaching CAA Standards to institutional guidelines.
Status of Visual-Arts Faculty
All visual-arts faculty on full-time annual appointments other than visiting artists, critics, or artists-in-residence are to be regarded as having regular faculty status including eligibility for academic rank, promotion to all academic ranks, tenure, retirement, and other benefits, and participation in college and university governance. The title “artist-in-residence” should not be used as a construction to circumvent normal hiring practices. Equal access to university support for research and professional development is essential for regular faculty status. The work of visual-arts faculty is not extra-academic. Their commitment to creative work (production, expression, research, etc.) should be regarded as the same as that of academics in other disciplines:
- Exhibition of creative work is to be regarded as analogous to publication in other fields
- Artists are entitled to safe, secure, and appropriate studio teaching spaces
- Freedom of expression and inquiry must be supported and protected
- Recognition of regular faculty status for visual-arts professionals teaching at colleges or universities implies that visual-arts faculty will not be expected to provide professional services other than those directly related to their teaching without proper additional compensation or reduction in teaching load
Terminal Degrees
The master of fine arts (MFA) is the terminal degree for visual artists. No academic degree other than the MFA or equivalent professional achievement should be regarded as qualification for appointment to professional rank, promotion, or tenure. Degrees in education and related fields shall not be required except for faculty appointed specifically to teach courses in education. Similarly, education degrees should not be regarded as constituting appropriate preparation for teaching studio art. Degree requirements for tenure and promotion must be made clear at the time of appointment; expectations should not change during an individual’s probationary period.
Listings for Teaching Positions
Detailed information (beyond the position listing) regarding responsibilities and departmental policies should be available for any job candidate requesting such material.
For compliance, all of the following information should be available upon a candidate’s request:
- A thorough description of the position, including rank and whether the position is tenure track, nontenure track, visiting, term appointment, etc.
- A brief statement of departmental mission or philosophy
- Course descriptions, numbers of sections, and maximum number of contact hours per week. If these items are unknown at that time or are to be shaped to the candidate’s strengths, that too should be stated
- A description of responsibilities related to advising, supervision of graduate students, gallery responsibilities, shop and classroom maintenance, office hours, etc.
- Availability of studio space for the faculty member
- Availability of office space for the faculty member
- Availability of support for research and professional development through the department, the university, the community, etc.
- Relative weights of Teaching-Research-Service (as they apply to institutional standards for renewal, promotion, tenure, etc.)
- Being discipline-specific, brief comments regarding the kinds of professional activities and honors that are considered important for regular progress toward renewal, promotion, tenure, retention, salary increases, etc.
- Brief descriptions of procedures and evaluation processes used in making decisions of professional advancement. Examples: periodic meetings with chair or dean, written peer reviews, external referees or reviewers, classroom visitations, etc.
- Clarification as to whether credit toward tenure will be awarded for existing teaching experience at the time of appointment
Academic Advancement
The criteria for promotion, retention, and tenure for visual-arts faculty shall be professional development, teaching effectiveness, and service to the college or university. The criteria must be given to the candidate during the interview process. Evaluation of professional development and teaching effectiveness shall be carried out with the participation of other visual-arts professionals. Whenever possible, visual-arts professionals shall be represented at the first stage of promotion, tenure, renewal, and retention recommendation procedures.
Universities and their respective visual-arts departments should make all matters of renewal, retention, promotion, and tenure as clear as possible and in writing to all members of the department. These matters should be made as discipline-specific as possible. Conferences between the appropriate administrator(s) and the candidate (for promotion, tenure, etc.) should be held regularly. At the time of hiring or reclassification of a studio artist’s position within a program (e.g., moving from part-time to tenure-track), the institution should provide the faculty member a written account of all previous research (creative production), teaching, and service activities that will count towards retention, tenure, and promotion.
In discussing the professional activities related to research or creative production, the relative importance of activities under those headings must be made clear and in writing to the faculty and appropriate administrators. Issues of national, regional, and local recognition must be clarified at institutions that make those distinctions as these expressions do not hold universal meaning. Should outside referees or reviewers be part of the decision processes for professional advancement, they too should be informed of the standards and definitions used by the candidate’s institution. In addition, outside reviewers should be given a profile of the institution’s weighting of teaching and service responsibilities in tenure, retention, and promotion consideration.
Should university or departmental standards and criteria be changed, faculty members should be notified promptly of such changes and be allowed either to continue with the standards under which they were initially employed or be given a minimum of three years to comply with the new standards. If the candidate chooses the latter, the need for a period of adjustment should be taken into consideration in regard to the normal timetable related to renewal, retention, promotion, or tenure. Faculty on the tenure clock should have the opportunity to develop a plan with the department head or other officially designated mentor who is responsible for renewal, retention, promotion, and tenure to move from the old standards to the new if so desired, and that reasonable time be given as per the standards.
Teaching Loads
The full-time teaching assignments of artists shall not exceed eighteen contact hours per week consonant with practice across the institution. Appropriate reductions in teaching loads are warranted to support research, managing and maintaining classroom/studio facilities, and for administrative responsibilities.
Class Size
CAA encourages institutions to place limits of fifteen or less on classes where safety and the use of specialized equipment are major factors. Generally, to ensure quality instruction in visual-arts courses, twenty students or less is appropriate. Class size of twenty-five or more is inappropriate for effective visual-arts teaching.
The use of dangerous machinery, complicated equipment, solvents, chemicals, etc., shall be taken into consideration in determining an effective teaching and learning situation.
Evaluation of Teaching
While student evaluations are meaningful aids in determining teaching effectiveness, those involved with the faculty review should also consider the following and other items: peer reviews of teaching, teaching awards, innovative pedagogy, student achievements, and student awards.
Evaluation of Artist-in-Residencies
In the evaluation of artist-in-residencies, consideration should be placed on competitiveness, the applicant pool, and whether it is local, regional, national, or international in scope. The exhibition, publication, etc. of the work completed while in residence should also be considered in evaluating the experience.
The Retention and Promotion Review
A. Information to be included in the review:
- Current Curriculum Vitae in form required by the institution
- Documentation of teaching, including but not limited to: teaching evaluations, lists of courses taught, teaching innovations, teaching awards, teaching portfolios, etc.
- Visual documentation of creative work/research/scholarly activity, in format required by the institution
- Documentation about exhibition record, including exhibition announcements, etc.
- Documentation assessing creative output, including reviews or articles about the candidate’s work, press releases, award notifications, grant applications, or notifications
- If applicable, documentation about collaborative art efforts, following institutional guidelines for presentation with clarification and identification about candidate’s role in the collaborative efforts
- Documentation about service to unit, institution, community, and at the national and professional levels
B. The review process:
- Candidates should be told at the time of appointment whether the institution or the candidate is responsible for costs associated with assembling the dossier and distributing it for external review, if applicable (return mailing, methods of delivery, etc.)
- Candidates should receive in advance (preferably at the time of appointment) a timetable for the review process with all deadlines and clarification about party responsible for meeting each deadline
C. The appeal process:
- Candidates should be informed at the at time of hire about the appeal process and policies regarding the addition of new information to the dossier or file during the appeal process
D. External review:
- The use of external reviewers is a common and respected method for evaluating the work of colleagues for promotion and tenure. Institutions using external reviewers should describe in writing (for everyone involved with the review, including the candidate and external reviewers) the role and the minimum number of reviewers required for the process
- Candidates should be provided written information in regard to their role in identifying potential external reviewers. If the candidate is allowed to play an active role in the selection, he or she should be informed in writing of the nature and limits of permissible communication with the external reviewers
- External reviewers should be in or closely aligned with the field or discipline of the candidate
- External reviewers selected from academia should hold an academic rank higher than that of the candidate; external reviewers who are not in academia should similarly be of higher professional status than the candidate
- Reviewers should be provided sufficient time, at least one month, to review the dossier and complete a report
- Potential reviewers should be asked about their willingness to serve as an evaluator several months before receiving a dossier
- Reviewers who agree to serve should be asked to provide an up-to-date curriculum vitae when they accept the request to review
- Evaluators should be given explicit directions as to what aspects of the candidate’s professional activities should be addressed in their review, and they should be clearly informed of the deadline for the receipt of the review letter
- Evaluators should be informed of the particular standards and definitions used by the candidate’s institution, including defining terms like “regional,” “national,” and “international” recognition
- Reviewers should be informed of the extent to which their letters and comments are made public or kept confidential, and their own obligations of confidentiality with regard to the content of their review
- Payment for writing a review is not a universal practice; payment or its absence should not in any way affect the evaluator’s opinion; contributing external evaluations constitutes an important service to the field
Other CAA Recommendations
When visual-arts programs define their standards of excellence, they should be founded upon realistic criteria. Research expectations should be commensurate with teaching loads, service to the institution, professional support, geographical setting of the institution, availability of studio space, etc. Teaching expectations should be commensurate with class size, facilities, teaching loads, etc.
Professional expectations should also take into consideration changes in academia, the commercial marketplace, the discipline of the visual-arts faculty member, and so on. For some, the commercial gallery may not be a suitable indicator of excellence or national recognition.
Safety at both the personal and environmental levels should be a major concern. Institutions are encouraged to establish standards and policies related to these matters.
Committee on Revising Tenure Procedures: Michael Aurbach, Vanderbilt University (chair); Emma Amos, New York; Phillip Blackhurst, University of Kansas; Jon Meyer, University of Dayton; Larry Scholder, Southern Methodist University; Gregory Shelnutt, University of Mississippi; Victoria Star Varner, Indiana University; Barbara Hoffman, CAA counsel.
Revised in 2002 by the Professional Practices Committee, with D. Fairchild Ruggles, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (chair).
Revised in 2004 by the Professional Practices Committee, with Kristi Nelson, University of Cincinnati (chair).
