# data[].attributes.body
Chemistry: We don’t have such a statement that I’m aware of. In their Unit 1’s, our faculty just have a heading for each thing that they do in service, with a short description of their contributions and outcomes.

Computer Science: Computer Science does not have a Unit 1 statement or a specific format when discussing service, and has not had one during my time here.

As dept chair, I have consistently encouraged faculty members to tie their Unit 1 statements on service to the Faculty Handbook language, both broadly (what is service?) and with respect to specific rank (what should asst profs be doing vs. other ranks?).  In my Unit 3s, I clarify any mismatches with the language (usually, placing student advising in service rather than in teaching), and I often add activities that were overlooked to try to ensure that the service picture is complete.  For early-career or new-to-Elon faculty members, I encourage them to request Unit 1 examples from more seasoned colleagues (we use a "group mentorship" approach rather than assigning a single mentor), and I make any of my own Unit 1s available as well.  Post-promotion faculty also routinely share their asst->assoc p&t packets with probationary faculty, which allows new faculty to see the "progression" year-over-year in Unit 1s.

Public Health Studies: In our department, faculty describe service based on how they individually want to describe it. The service section typically includes committee work and special tasks/assignments/responsibilities at the departmental, College, and School levels. Undergraduate research is typically included in service and also in Professional Activity if they have publications or presentations with students.

Psychology: We don’t have a service statement or anything like that in Psychology. It seems like it could be helpful though. I’ll be interested to see what your committee comes up with

# data[].attributes.headline
Add responsibility to chairs and Deans for equitable responsibilities

# data[].attributes.subject
Add responsibility to chairs and Deans for equitable responsibilities

# data[].attributes.body
Expand upon chair goal

# data[].attributes.headline
How do we tell our stories - What is the role of the Unit 1

# data[].attributes.subject
How do we tell our stories - What is the role of the Unit 1

# data[].attributes.body
Expectations of how to chairs and the deans are responding to our Unit 1 and Unit 3 language

Expectations - what are the expectations and do they vary from your role on each rank

# data[].attributes.headline
Lecturer Track Special Committee Final Report & Recommendations

# data[].attributes.subject
Lecturer Track Special Committee Final Report & Recommendations

# data[].attributes.body
Data gathered from: The Faculty Handbook, Qualtrics Survey of Lecturer Track Faculty, Focus Groups of Lecturer Track Faculty, and the 2018 Perceptions of Service Report to provide perspectives and lived experiences of faculty in the Lecturer Track.

A majority of Lecturer Track faculty feel their daily workload does not align with the Faculty Handbook.

Over 60% report their teaching load is too heavy to support meaningful professional activity.

38% cite service overload, 24% lack time to meet service expectations, and 19% find the Handbook too vague.

Faculty feel pressured to over-serve without guidance.

Widespread confusion about expectations for teaching, service, and professional activity, especially regarding promotion to Senior Lecturer.

The 2018 Service Expectations Report found that:

33–37% of all faculty don’t find service expectations clearly communicated.

~40% see expectations as unreasonable and 50% find them overwhelming.

64% believe service is not distributed equitably, Lecturers and Senior Lecturers feel this most acutely.

Over 40% reported failed attempts to engage in service—access is a concern, particularly for Lecturers and Librarians.

Many eligible Lecturers delay promotion due to lack of time and unclear expectations around service and professional activity.

Inconsistent messages from administrators and promotion committees.

# data[].attributes.headline
Feedback From Departments Regarding How Service is Defined

# data[].attributes.subject
Feedback From Departments Regarding How Service is Defined

# data[].attributes.body
Music Production:

No formal document outlining service expectations. Typically, guidance comes from new faculty orientation, department discussions, P&T sessions, the chair, and conversations with colleagues.

I don’t know of any specific methods for recognizing or evaluating service contributions.

Performing Arts Department:

1. Formal Documentation:
Our department does not currently have a formal document outlining service expectations for faculty.

2. Structure and Scope (if applicable):
While we don’t have a written document, there have been verbal discussions about “mandatory service” that include Faculty In-House roles and various production-related responsibilities outside of teaching, professional activity, and university service/leadership. However, without anything in writing, these expectations can feel unclear or inconsistently applied. Additionally, university service roles are often filled on a “first come, first served” basis, which has resulted in the same few individuals repeatedly serving on university committees.

3. Communication of Expectations:
Service expectations are typically shared verbally or via email.

4. Unique Approaches to Defining or Evaluating Service:
At this time, we do not have a formalized or unique approach to defining, recognizing, or evaluating service contributions. I believe this is an area in need of attention and improvement within our department.

Computer Science:

1. Whether your department has a formal document outlining service expectations for faculty

1. Our department does not have a formal, written document outlining service expectations. Instead, we follow a flexible and collaborative approach. Faculty members are encouraged to choose service roles that align with their interests and expertise. Some participate in university-level committees such as the College Fellows and Curriculum Committee. These choices are typically discussed during department meetings, where faculty members select their preferred service contributions for the academic year. Additionally, we track departmental service assignments annually, noting any changes - such as committee activity status or transitions in faculty roles.

2. If such a document exists, how it is structured and what areas of service it addresses

1. We do not have a formal document, but we maintain two internal planning resources:

1. Overall Service Planning Sheet – This document focuses on department-level service roles.

2. Reassigned Time Sheet – This tracks major service responsibilities at the university level and tracks reassigned time.

4. If no formal document exists, how service expectations are typically communicated to faculty

1. Service allocations are primarily communicated during department meetings. We use these discussions to coordinate transitions—for example, reassigning roles if a faculty member is on sabbatical or requesting a shift to a different service area. These conversations allow for handovers and ensure continuity in our department’s service efforts.

5. Any unique approaches your department has developed to define, recognize, or evaluate service contributions

1. Our department prefers a "choose-your-path" model, allowing faculty members to engage in service that resonates with their professional goals. For example, one faculty member introduced “Fun Fridays” to foster student engagement by setting up a chess board and bringing snacks to encourage informal interaction. Each year, we review all service roles during department meetings to determine whether they should continue. For committees that require consistent departmental representation—such as Voice of Discovery at the college level- we ensure that at least one faculty member is appointed.

School of Communications: Faculty Service & Leadership Requirements

Overview

Faculty must contribute meaningful, high-quality service and leadership to the School

Service expectations vary throughout career stages (considering sabbaticals, reassigned time, etc.)

Service progression typically starts at department level and advances to School level

Leadership roles expected as faculty advance in rank

No distinction made between compensated and non-compensated contributions

Expected Faculty Involvement

Commitment to School mission

Presence and engagement

Accessibility to students

Responsibility for School life

Activities Not Considered Service

Department meetings

Academic meetings for majors/programs

Advisory board meetings

Faculty governance participation

Teaching responsibilities

Scholarship/professional activities

Meaningful Service Contributions

Department/program/School committees, task forces, and advisory groups

Mentoring student organizations, student media, faculty, and staff

Supporting admissions, alumni events, internships, and career development

Connecting School to University community (panels, forums, hosting speakers)

Connecting School to wider community (conferences, workshops)

Enhancing School's intellectual profile through community partnerships and disciplinary associations

Documentation Requirements

Evidence-based narrative in Unit I Review and Tenure/Promotion materials

Alignment with department/School goals and mission

Reflection on past contributions and future plans

Demonstration of purposeful service trajectory and leadership growth

Quality Indicators

Substance: Depth and complexity of work

Significance: Importance of work relative to committee charge or project purpose

Intentionality: Purposeful selection of service contributions

Connectedness: Integration of service with teaching and/or research activities

# data[].attributes.headline
Compiling Service from my own school/department

# data[].attributes.subject
Compiling Service from my own school/department

# data[].attributes.body
With our school’s accreditation recently behind us it was easy to pull a list of service, and the names that go with it. All faculty are listed by standing committees for both university level and for the school as well.

How can we gather similar list from other schools and departments on campus? Do we need to reveal names associated the service area?

Would it be useful to create a template for use by all departments/schools.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a list of committees that Jason Husser made with Kelli Shuman in 2022. It shows how Elon has at least as many committees outside the faculty handbook as inside the faculty handbook.

# data[].attributes.headline
BIO-specific service items that would require explanation to other faculty members

# data[].attributes.subject
BIO-specific service items that would require explanation to other faculty members

# data[].attributes.body
I think it might be helpful to get more examples of this!

I am reaching out department chairs in ECAS for something like this. Waiting to hear back!

# data[].attributes.body
I explored perceptions of faculty service expectations based on Elon University's comprehensive 2018 survey (39% response rate with 204 faculty participants).

The data reveals significant insights about how service expectations are communicated, perceived, and experienced across faculty ranks and career stages.

Faculty generally believe their service contributions are valued by the institution (77% within departments), yet substantial numbers report feeling overwhelmed by service obligations (50%) and perceive service expectations as unreasonable (39%). Communication of expectations appears problematic, with many faculty indicating department chairs (33%) and deans (45%) have not adequately communicated service expectations.

The data highlights specific populations experiencing disproportionate service challenges: mid-career faculty (particularly those with 6-15 years of service), lecturers and senior lecturers, and faculty in the School of Education. These groups report higher service loads, greater barriers to advancement, and stronger perceptions of inequitable distribution.

# data[].attributes.body
This document was used in a planning week presentation about shared governance

Some slides show how committees (a major part of service) are key to faculty involvement in university affairs

# data[].attributes.body
·       Not knowing “how much is enough” results in service overreach, which heightens anxiety, frustration, and exhaustion.

·       Service expectations for P&T are “amorphous” and “ill-defined.”

·       Current system rewards busyness/box-checking over intellectual curiosity and exploration.

·       Service crowds out teaching and other work. Scholarship and creative activity is relegated to summers.

·       The number of events has increased over time and has become a burden.

·       The definition of service in the faculty handbook is too limited and doesn’t actually reflect “contributions to the life of the university.”

·       Faculty governance isn’t working – As the university has grown, faculty feel as though they have less power but more administrative responsibilities.​

·       Mentoring/advising students is service that requires a lot of hand-holding (is time-intensive), but isn’t recognized as service.

# data[].attributes.headline
University of Miami Faculty Guide to Service

# data[].attributes.subject
University of Miami Faculty Guide to Service

# data[].attributes.body
https://miamioh.edu/academic-affairs/faculty-resources/promotion-tenure/regional-faculty-guidelines/index.html?_ga=2.262980495.2008409201.1678367789-444446689.1678367789#wysiwygcontent_3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The following four types of faculty service can be documented and evaluated:

Service to the Institution

Academic programs, departments, schools, the campus, and the university as a whole are not simply organizations but are communities. As such, these communities rely on their members for the necessary energy, time, and leadership to sustain and develop them as viable and effective systems for accomplishing their missions. Faculty and administrators are members of these communities who share responsibility for their governance and advancement by contributing through institutional service. Service to the institution involves activities that help sustain or lead academic endeavors.

Examples of institutional service include but are not limited to:

Contributing as a member or leader of a task force to address an issue facing the campus or university community

Participating as an elected member in faculty governance

Leading faculty governance activities

Serving as an appointed or elected administrator or head of any academic group at the campus, department, division, or University levels

Chairing a committee

Helping a committee to meet its goals

Chairing a search committee

Contributing to a search committee

Bringing new campus or university initiatives to fruition

Representing the university in a public media forum

Contributing to student welfare through service on the student-faculty committees or as adviser to student organizations

Service to the Discipline or Profession

Service to the discipline or profession involves activities designed to enhance the quality of disciplinary or professional organizations or activities.

Examples of service to a discipline or profession include but are not limited to:

Serving as an appointed or elected officer of an academic or professional association

Serving as an organizer or leader of workshops, panels, or meetings in areas of professional competence

Contributing time and expertise to further the work of a professional society or organization

Promoting the image, prestige, and perceived value of a discipline or profession

Participating in accreditation activities

Editing a professional journal

Refereeing manuscripts or grant proposals submitted to journals, professional meeting program committees, and funding organizations

Establishing professional or academic standards

Community engagement involves activities that contribute to the public welfare beyond the university community and call upon the faculty member's expertise as scholar, teacher, or administrator. Community engagement demonstrates the principals of reciprocity and mutuality; it meets a need defined by the community, not merely created out of the interests of the faculty member.

A faculty member might undertake community engagement independent of teaching and research or integrate them in various ways. For instance, while service-learning is a pedagogy that most specifically relates to a faculty member's teaching, if the result is a project that appropriately combines community need, professional expertise, and meaningful outcomes, then it is community engagement as well. Community engagement may also be legitimately connected to a faculty member's research agenda, particularly for publications in the area of "public scholarship" or the "scholarship of engagement."

Examples of community engagement include but are not limited to:

Participating in collaborative endeavors with schools, industry, or civic agencies

Consulting with private and public, profit, and not-for-profit organizations by applying expertise to enhance the efficiency or effectiveness of the organizations served

Assisting the public through a university clinic, hospital, laboratory, or center

Providing public policy analysis for local, state, national, or international government agencies

Making research understandable and useable in specific professional and applied settings

Communicating in popular and non-academic media including newsletters, radio, television, and magazines

Giving presentations or performances for the public

Testing concepts and processes in real-world situations

Evaluating programs, policies, or personnel for agencies

Engaging in seminars and conferences that address public interest problems, issues, and concerns and that are aimed at either general or specialized audiences such as trade, commodity, practitioner, or occupational groups

Participating on governmental or social service review panels

Engaging in economic or community development activities

Community outreach involves fulfilling a role in the wider community as an active representative of the campus or university. Volunteerism and acts of good citizenship do not in themselves constitute community outreach unless they are undertaken as part of one's professional responsibilities to the institution. The distinction between engagement and outreach has primarily to do with the extent to which the activity involves disciplinary expertise applied to real-world issues (engagement) versus serving as the institution's representative in a community setting (outreach).

Examples of community outreach include but are not limited to:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Regionals Faculty Guide | Department Chairs and Program Directors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The following four types of faculty service can be documented and evaluated: Academic programs, departments, schools, the campus, and the university as a whole are not simply organizations but are communities. As such, these communities rely on their members for the necessary energy, time, and leadership to sustain and develop them as viable and effective systems for accomplishing their missions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dave Gammon Report: Campus Conversation on 11/3/2017

# data[].attributes.subject
Dave Gammon Report: Campus Conversation on 11/3/2017

# data[].attributes.body
Slides 9 - 10: Second Level Criterion - gives vague but good definitions of service

Faculty from smaller schools serve more

# data[].attributes.body
Mentoring students, advising students beyond class or research?

Participating in University events like Fellows weekend, admissions, graduation

Mentoring junior faculty and adjunct/associated faculty and staff

Committee work

...

# data[].attributes.headline
Faculty Well-Being & Contributions to the Life of the University​

# data[].attributes.subject
Faculty Well-Being & Contributions to the Life of the University​

# data[].attributes.body
Culture of "Busyness" -Busy bragging

P&T expectations are not transparent

"Some areas contribute enormously to the life of the university but are not counted as service (Fellows Weekend, Admissions Weekends, Family Weekend, non-committee work, etc.)​"​

"Mentoring junior faculty is not valued as service"

# data[].attributes.headline
Service Transcript - Report of Task Force on P&T Appendix C

# data[].attributes.subject
Service Transcript - Report of Task Force on P&T Appendix C

# data[].attributes.body
Print out for portfolio

Signed off by chair?

# data[].attributes.headline
“contributions to the life of the university” and “university service”

# data[].attributes.subject
“contributions to the life of the university” and “university service”

# data[].attributes.body
Do we need to standardize language?

Can someone do service to their profession or to the community?

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
meeting of diverse adults at conference table

# data[].attributes.headline
Report of Task Force on P&T to Academic Council 2024.1.31

# data[].attributes.subject
Report of Task Force on P&T to Academic Council 2024.1.31

# data[].attributes.body
1. Need clarity in P&T processes regards

expectations for quantity of service, followed by expectations regarding the quality and/or type of

2. Can we write a Service statement similar to "High-Quality Peer-Reviewed Scholarship statements"

and "High-Quality Teaching and Learning at Elon University"? But what level should these be at? School based, University level?

3. Do peer and aspirant institutions have descriptions of service requirements?

4. Consider quantity AND quality service opportunities

# data[].attributes.body
Current P&T language for Service.docx - link to document with P&T language about service to allow for comments, edits, and additions

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
black female college professor typing on a computer at a desk