College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
Reappointment, Promotion
and Tenure Standards and Procedures
March, 1999 Archived Version (Effective March 1999 through October 21, 2004)
Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure (RPT)
Authority: Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
History: First issued: March, 1999. Additional History Information.
Related Policies:
Academic Tenure Policy
Contact:
North Carolina State University Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) policies
and regulations are set forth on the Provost's web site ( http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/provost/academic_affairs/rpt/
). These policies and procedures are the basis upon which all college and departmental
guidelines have been developed.
To be applicable to faculty members in various disciplines and with differing
responsibilities, college-wide guidelines must, of necessity, be general. Each
department has developed specific guidelines appropriate to the types of activities
and disciplines of its faculty. The College recognizes the importance of a mix
of activities leading to creative scholarship and supports the Realms of Faculty
Responsibility ( http://www.provost.ncsu.edu/promotion-tenure/2001-2002/realms.html
). Further, the College recommends that all departments
follow the guidelines for evaluation of scholarly accomplishments known as the
Glassick Standards ( http://www.ncsu.edu/provost/academic_affairs/rpt/2001-2002/ESA.html
) .
Philosophy
The criteria to be used in evaluating faculty members for reappointment, promotion,
tenure and comprehensive review must reflect an expectation of high-level performance
in all types of scholarly activities based on the job description of the appointment
and Statement of Mutual Expectations ( http://www.provost.ncsu.edu/promotion-tenure/2001-2002/SMEPPD.html
). In addition, the overall program of the faculty member must have addressed
the mission of the department and the College.
Regardless of their specific type of appointment, all faculty members to be
successfully promoted from assistant to associate professor with tenure or from
associate professor to professor must demonstrate and document that they have
made regular contributions to their discipline in appropriate forms. These
contributions should be defined more broadly than the publication of research,
as many different forms of scholarly activity contribute to the field. Reputation
among peers is important in evaluating faculty. To be successfully promoted
or tenured, faculty must have established a regional or national reputation.
International recognition should be required, if appropriate for the discipline,
for promotion to the rank of Professor. Recognition by peers on a national and
international basis is more critical in the evaluation of faculty for promotion
to the rank of professor than for promotion to lower ranks, although satisfactory
progress towards the development of peer recognition should be evident. Receipt
of awards and honors provides a basis for quantifying recognition. Other examples
are invitations to participate in symposia, to hold editorships, serve on national,
regional and state review panels and policy panels. Nomination and election
to positions of leadership in professional societies also indicate recognition.
Publication as a form of scholarship should encompass the quantity, quality
and most appropriate form and outlet as determined by appointment and audiences
served.
Instruction Contributions – Teaching and Mentoring of Undergraduate and
Graduate Students
Scholarly accomplishments in teaching and learning are manifested in numerous
ways via contributions in the instructional area. Creativity and innovation
in the development of courses, pedagogical approaches, and contributions to
curricular quality contribute to the scholarship of teaching. Some aspects
of a faculty member’s creativity should lead to scholarly publications on teaching
methods, textbooks, laboratory manuals, audiovisual, computer-based educational
programs, and other scholarly products. Invitations to participate in symposia,
conferences, and other activities related to teaching are important measures
of recognition by peers on the regional, national, or international level.
Effort and success in obtaining support via grants, contracts, gifts, etc. for
the development and delivery of instructional material is important.
Teaching effectiveness should be evaluated by responses on student questionnaires
as well as through evaluation by peers, e.g. direct observation of classroom
teaching, examination of the syllabus, exercises and tests. Although single
or infrequent observations can provide some data, regular observations are more
valuable and useful. The University requirements (Guidelines for Reporting
Student and Peer Evaluations http://www.provost.ncsu.edu/promotion-tenure/2001-2002/EvalTeach.html
) be followed.
Standardized instruments for evaluation are required, but in special cases
(such as graduate-level courses or highly specific, low-enrollment courses)
more appropriate methods may be used. Specific written comments from students
are valuable in all aspects of evaluating teaching effectiveness.
Exit interviews of students by the department head or the departmental teaching
coordinator are recommended as an excellent way to gather data on teaching effectiveness.
Follow-up interviews with students who have been out of school for a few years
are also valuable.
Academic advising is an integral part of the teaching responsibility and must
be considered in any evaluation. A survey of students at or after graduation
is an appropriate way to evaluate the effectiveness of faculty advising. Faculty
are encouraged to utilize the college instrument developed for advising evaluation
at least once a year to obtain feedback from students and 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 and must be managed by the department
head.
Honors, awards, and other special recognitions are other important indicators
of quality and dedication to teaching.
Research Contributions – Discovery of Knowledge Through Discipline-Guided
Inquiry
Research productivity is usually equated with conducting research and reporting
results in peer-reviewed journals, however, it also takes other forms. These
forms may include the publication of books and the production of scholarly works
of a form and type determined by the department or discipline. One example
is development of computer software.
Quantity is an important indicator of regular activity, but more significant
is the quality of the contribution to new knowledge in the field and its integration
into practical application. The department must determine the relative weight
given to various types and forms of research activity. The College defines
peer-reviewed publication to be one that has undergone review by peers selected
by an editorial board of a reputable, cited journal.
Each department should set guidelines defining a reasonable quantity of research
activity in terms of the number of items produced and their format. It is important
that the guidelines identify expectations for faculty members holding split
appointments.
Effort and success in attracting extramural funding is important. This funding
may take the form of direct grants, university mini-grants, memoranda of agreement,
unrestricted gifts, in-kind support, and collaborative efforts.
Although independent research is the basis of most research activities and
recognition, collaborative research is important in many fields. It is often
the basis for substantive support and the advancement of knowledge. Ability
to cooperate with other faculty members is an important personal characteristic.
Cooperation may include participating in successful regional programs.
Training of graduate students and postgraduates is an important contribution
to a field. Success of graduates is an important measure of the strength of
a program.
Extension Contributions Extension and Engagement with Constituents
Outside the University
Extension and Engagement responsibilities include a variety of scholarly activities
and efforts. Examples are technical assistance, applied research, and a variety
of formal and non-formal educational efforts.
The programs developed and implemented must be coherent and focused in the
area of responsibility with continuity among program activities. Effort must
be focused on meeting the needs of clientele. Changes in program efforts may
be appropriate with changes in political, financial or social emphasis and support
and should be incorporated in a revised Statement of Mutual Expectations ( http://www.provost.ncsu.edu/promotion-tenure/2001-2002/SMEPPD.html
). When appropriate, there should be a documented partnership with field faculty
and a relationship between the program and the Cooperative Extension Plan of
Work must be evident in goals and accomplishments.
Documented impacts must include the use of state-of-the-art techniques and
innovative approaches that maximize benefits from the extension and engagement
efforts. Impacts should include effective contributions to local, state and
/or the larger society through the production of innovative materials and new
approaches to solving problems. Evidence of accomplishments may include innovative
instructional materials or demonstrations, technical assistance, and other methods.
Leadership and participation in interdisciplinary teams in development and
delivery of extension programs must be documented. This includes cooperative
relationships with other faculty within and outside the College, and with organizations
that serve the same clientele. Effective leadership recognized by peers and
clientele at the local, regional, and national levels should be demonstrated.
Continuous improvement in the field of concentration should be documented through
increasing and updating skills, keeping abreast of clientele needs, and developing
and applying relevant new knowledge. Recognized professional achievement through
the production of refereed publications, honors, awards, exhibitions, prizes,
invited papers, and presentations should be achieved. Publication as a form
of scholarship should encompass the quantity, quality and most appropriate form
and outlet as determined by appointment and clientele served.
Efforts at and success in attracting extramural funding is important. This
may be in the form of direct grants, university mini-grants, memoranda of agreement,
unrestricted gifts, in kind support and collaborative efforts.
Service in Professional Societies and Within the University Itself
All faculty members are expected to become involved in the operation of the
department, college, and university by serving in various capacities (for example,
on committees, boards, panels, task forces, and commissions). Faculty members
are also expected to further their disciplines by providing service to their
professional societies by serving as officers or on committees, serving as editors
and reviewers for professional journals or other professional publication outlets,
and serving on study and review panels for governmental agencies and funding
organizations. 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 to 15 percent of a faculty member’s time. Appointments
requiring larger amounts of time should be approved in advance by the department
head.
Terms of Appointment
Although most faculty members in the College
of Agriculture and Life Sciences
are appointed on a fiscal year or 12-month annual basis, many are appointed
on an academic year or 9-month annual basis.
Faculty members holding 9-month appointments cannot be expected to produce
the same quantity of scholarly output as those holding 12-month appointments.
Within the academic year, the performance of a 9-month appointee is expected
to equal that of a 12-month appointee with the same distribution of appointment
percentages.
Differences in availability of support must be taken into account in any quantitative
comparison between the scholarly output of 12- and 9-month faculty.
The above guidelines are intended to identify areas to consider in evaluating
faculty for reappointment, promotion, tenure and comprehensive review tenured
faculty. Evaluation must be an on-going 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. There is no substitute
for careful consideration of the criteria that are most appropriate to the faculty
member within a department, field, or discipline and the clear enunciation of
those criteria at that level as a specific guide for development and evaluation.
