Department of Botany - Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Department of Plant Biology
Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

RUL 05.67.6

Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure
Print-friendly version

Authority: Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor

History: First Issued: September 4, 2001. Last Revised: October 22, 2004. Additional History Information.

Contact Info: Department Head, Department of Botany, 919-515-2727

1. Introduction

This Department of Botany rule is supplemental to and consistent with the NC State University Academic Tenure Policy http://www.ncsu.edu/policies/employment/faculty/POL05.20.1.php.

It is the responsibility of the faculty member to be knowledgeable about the NC State University Academic Tenure Policy and the university regulations and college rule. The departmental rule augments these to provide faculty with knowledge of the general process and expectations used in evaluating faculty in the department. The Board of Trustees is the authority for final tenure approval.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

All faculty members to be considered for promotion from assistant to associate professor with tenure or from associate professor to professor must demonstrate that they are effective teachers and that they have made regular scholarly contributions to their field in an appropriate form. It is important that teaching responsibilities includes activities beyond the classroom setting. These activities with students (undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral) may include advising, mentoring, laboratory supervision, direction of papers, theses and dissertations, and other contact and relationships outside the classroom. Scholarly contributions are defined more broadly than the publication of research, as many different forms of scholarly activity can contribute to the field.

All faculty members are expected to participate in the operation of the department, college and university and in professional activities within societies and organizations appropriate to their field or discipline.

In addition, the overall program of the faculty member must fit logically within the mission of the department and the College. Collegiality and the ability to cooperate with other faculty members are important personal characteristics that are also considered.

3. General Standards

3.1. Instructional Contributions

Evidence to be reviewed in the evaluation of teaching effectiveness will include: 1) student responses on the CALS course evaluation form, 2) information gathered from exit interviews between students and the department head, 3) peer review to include direct classroom observation, 4) occasional direct classroom observation of instructors (both announced and unannounced) by the department head, 5) input from advisers outside the department, 6) graduate student training, 7) academic advising, 8) creativity and innovation, 9) special recognition (awards, honors), and 10) extramural funding attempts.

Specific written comments from students as requested on the departmental course evaluation form are of value in all aspects of evaluating teaching effectiveness. Students should be encouraged to provide these evaluations. Although faculty members may wish to use an additional student evaluation instrument tailored for their own purposes, the CALS form must be used by all faculty in all courses.

To be of most use, classroom observations by peers and by the department head should be shared with the instructor in a reasonable amount of time. These evaluations will also be appropriate items for discussion during the annual meeting between the faculty member and the department head.

Exit interviews of graduating students by the department head or the departmental teaching coordinator are used to gather data on teaching effectiveness. Follow-up interviews with students who have been out of school for a few years are also valuable. Input on teaching effectiveness is also sought from advisers outside the department. Items of material concern will be shared with the faculty member.

Training of graduate students is an important academic contribution. Serving on graduate advisory committees, both in and outside the department, is also a significant component of graduate education. The success of graduate students reflects on the entire institution.

Academic advising is an integral part of the teaching responsibility and is considered in any evaluation. A survey of students at or after graduation is used to evaluate the effectiveness of faculty advising. Faculty also are encouraged to utilize the College instrument developed for advising evaluation at least once a year to obtain feedback from students. The results from these assessments should be discussed with the department head. Information on placement of advisees can also be used to indicate the effectiveness of advising, although it is more applicable to graduate students than to undergraduates. Advising load is another factor to be considered.

In addition to classroom performance, creativity and innovation in the development of courses and contributions to curricular quality are important components of teaching. Some aspects of a faculty member's creativity are appropriately considered under the topic of scholarship and may lead to publications on teaching methods, textbooks, laboratory manuals, audiovisual materials, computer-based educational programs or other scholarly products. Invitations to participate in symposia, conferences, workshops, and other activities related to teaching are important measures of recognition by peers at the regional, national, or international level.

Honors, awards, and other special recognitions in and outside the university are also important indicators of quality and dedication to teaching.

Faculty members are encouraged to seek extramural funds for teaching development, when appropriate, and efforts in this direction will be considered in evaluating teaching effectiveness.

3.2. Scholarly Activity

Although scholarly productivity is usually equated with conducting research and reporting results in peer- reviewed journals, it may also take other forms. These forms may include the publication of books, the development of computer software, and the production of scholarly works of a form and type determined by interaction of the department head and the full professors with the relevant faculty members.

Quantity is of importance only as a general indicator of regular activity. Of more significance is the quality of the contributions to new knowledge or interpretation in the field and regularity of publications such that there are not significant gaps in productivity.

For reappointment at the assistant professor level, publications from work conducted in a doctoral, postdoctoral, or other professional position may be considered if appropriate. It is expected, however, that tangible scholarly activity at this institution be well established during the initial appointment period. For promotion to associate professor with tenure, emphasis will be placed on contributions developed since coming to NC State. These contributions or activities will include, but are not limited to, publications in high quality peer reviewed journals, graduate student training, and extramural funding.

Effort and success in attracting extramural funding is important. This funding may come through various methods, including direct grants, university mini-grants, memoranda of agreement, unrestricted gifts, and in-kind support.

Independent work is the basis of many scholarly activities and recognition. Collaborative work is also important in many fields and for specific types of appointments, and is often the basis for substantive support and the advancement of knowledge. Cooperation may include participation in successful multi-disciplinary, multi-departmental, multi-university, regional or national programs. Whether independent or collaborative, scholarly activity must lead to the establishment of an independent reputation.

As mentioned under "Instructional Contributions", training of graduate students and postgraduates is an important contribution to the field of botany. Success of graduates is an important measure of the strength of a research program.

Reputation among peers is important in evaluating faculty. To be considered for promotion and tenure, all faculty must have established at least a regional but preferably a national reputation. For promotion to the rank of professor, national and international recognition is required. Receipt of awards and honors, invitations to participate in symposia, holding editorships, and serving in positions of leadership in professional societies provide evidence of recognition. These and other types of evidence will be carefully considered when evaluating national and international recognition.

3.3. Service

All faculty members are expected to participate in the operation of the department, college, and university by serving in various capacities (for example, on committees, boards, panels, task forces, and commissions). Although there is a reasonable limit to the extent of involvement (to be managed by the department head), it is not unreasonable for these tasks to occupy an average of 10 percent of a faculty member's time. Appointments requiring larger amounts of time should be approved in advance by the department head. Faculty members are encouraged to participate in professional activities (for example, by serving on committees and editorial boards, or holding office) within societies and organizations appropriate to their field or discipline.

3.4. Expectations Based on Term of Appointment

Most faculty members in the department are appointed on a fiscal year or 12-month annual basis. There are, however, faculty who are appointed on an academic year or 9-month annual basis.

Faculty members holding 9-month appointments cannot be expected to produce the same annual quantity of scholarly output as those on 12-month appointments. Within the academic year, however, the performance of a 9-month appointee is expected to equal that of a 12-month appointee with the same distribution of responsibilities.

Differences in availability of support must be taken into account in any quantitative comparison between the scholarly outputs of 12- and 9-month faculty.

3.5. Expectations of Non-Tenure Track Faculty

In general, expectations of non tenure track faculty (research assistant, associate and full professors; teaching assistant, associate, and full professors) are the same as those for tenure track faculty. However, evaluation of these faculty will emphasize the major responsibility defined in the appointment (teaching or research). All faculty are expected to show accomplishments across the three areas of faculty responsibility (instruction, scholarly activity, and service), but the individual's appointment expectations will be taken into account in the evaluation.

3.6. Mentoring and Evaluation

Mentoring of faculty is the collective responsibility of the department head and faculty. A formal mentoring committee is established for all assistant professors (tenure track and non tenure track), and is charged with providing advice and guidance, assisting the candidate through the tenure and promotion process, and serving as a resource for the department faculty in annual evaluations. The mentoring committee provides an annual evaluation separate from that provided by the department head, and also serves to provide peer review of teaching, along with other faculty.

All assistant and associate professors are evaluated on an annual basis by the full professors in the department. The results of this evaluation are communicated to the individual by the department head. Recommendations for submitting documentation for promotion to full professor, early promotion to associate professor with tenure, or promotion to either rank by non tenure track faculty may come from the full professors or be initiated by the candidate.

Evaluation of faculty is a continuous process that includes guidance, recommended changes, peer feedback, and sensitivity to the faculty member's growth toward or away from his or her original capacity and position. It is the responsibility of each faculty member seeking promotion to keep his or her mentoring committee, the department head, and full (and associate as appropriate) professors apprised of the goals and direction of their instructional and scholarly activities.

4. Standards for Reappointment to Assistant Professor

For reappointment at the assistant professor level, the faculty member is expected to show productivity in teaching, research, and service. In research, publications from work conducted in a doctoral, postdoctoral, or other professional position may be considered if appropriate. It is expected, however, that tangible scholarly activity at this institution be well established during the initial appointment period. Efforts toward the securing of extramural funding are expected. The faculty member is expected to have demonstrated effective contributions to instruction, including the teaching of courses, advising activities such as undergraduate advising, serving on graduate committees, or serving as an advisor to a graduate student. The faculty member is expected to have shown service to departmental and institutional committees. Evidence of current or the likelihood of future national visibility should be evident. Evaluation for reappointment will be made in the context of the faculty member's statement of mutual expectations.

5. Standards for Promotion to Associate Professor with and Tenure.

For promotion to associate professor, emphasis will be placed on contributions developed since coming to NC State. The faculty member is expected to have publications in high quality peer reviewed journals appropriate for the discipline. Efforts toward and success in securing funding are expected. The faculty member is expected to have shown proficiency in teaching and advising, including training of graduate students. The faculty member is expected to have served and/or demonstrated leadership on departmental, university, and/or national committees. It is expected that a faculty member promoted to associate professor with tenure demonstrate at least a regional but preferably a national reputation as a scholar and independent investigator, as evidenced by factors such as letters from external evaluators, service on national committees, grants panels, editorial boards, etc., invitations to speak on their scholarly activities, and other appropriate evidence. The faculty member should have demonstrated an ability to cooperate effectively with other faculty in the department and a commitment to cooperative efforts in teaching and research. Evaluation for promotion will be made in the context of the faculty member's statement of mutual expectations.

6. Standards for Promotion to Full Professor

For promotion to full professor, the faculty member must meet and exceed the standards for promotion to associate professor. In addition, it is expected that the faculty member have established a national and international reputation as a scholar and educator. A sustained record of publications in high quality peer reviewed journals and success in securing funding are expected. The faculty member should have demonstrated excellence in teaching, and the ability to mentor and graduate Ph.D. students. Demonstrated leadership at the departmental, university, and national level is expected. Evaluation for promotion will be made in the context of the faculty member's statement of mutual expectations.

7. Procedures

Faculty members undergoing review for reappointment, promotion, and tenure must submit their dossier for initial evaluation by the Full Professors in the spring semester prior to the RPT cycle. The full professors will make an initial evaluation. Mandatory promotions will move forward as scheduled, however the full professors will make a recommendation for all non-mandatory actions (promotion to full professor, promotion of non-tenure track faculty to associate and full). For promotion to associate or full professor, evaluation letters will be solicited from distinguished individuals both suggested by the faculty member as well as others suggested by the full professors in the department. External evaluators will be provided with the completed dossier (minus the statements of mutual expectations and self-assessment) as well as copies of selected publications.

The vote on reappointment and promotion will be conducted in the fall after the external letters have been received. Promotions to full professor will be voted on by the tenured full professors in the department. For assistant professors requesting promotion to associate professor, both full professors and associate professors will vote. The summary of faculty performance will be prepared by an appropriate faculty member appointed by the department head.

Left Navigation

Department of Plant Biology Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures