RUL 05.67.04 – Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority:  Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost for Academic Affairs

History:  First Issued: December 1991. Last Revised: May 5, 2011.

Related Policies: 
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU REG05.20.16 – Plans for Professional Development
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Mutual Expectations 
NCSU RUL05.67.22 – College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Additional References: 
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Contact Info:  Department Head, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, (919-515-3107)


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1  Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure issues of the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics are addressed in this report.  The source of authority is NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure.  Departmental reappointment, promotion and tenure rules are consistent with college and university reappointment, promotion and tenure policy.  The Board of Trustees is the authority for final Tenure Approval.

2. AREAS OF FACULTY RESPONSIBILITY

2.1  Tenure-track faculty in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics will have various combinations of responsibilities in the areas of teaching, research, and/or extension and service.

3. GENERAL STANDARDS

3.1  Faculty seeking tenure are expected to perform in the areas of responsibility as defined in their Statement of Mutual Expectations.  Faculty will be evaluated on their abilities to teach, conduct research, and/or disseminate information.  Faculty will be expected to participate in departmental governance and service.  Collegiality is valued among all faculty.

3.2  Faculty with teaching responsibility are expected to follow a scholarly approach to teaching including assembly and presentation of both written and oral materials.  Faculty with research responsibility are expected to be creative and original in their efforts to discover new knowledge which adds to the understanding of the discipline.  Faculty with extension responsibility are expected to develop programs that interpret and disseminate science-based knowledge to the various clientele groups appropriate for that faculty person’s program.

3.3  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.

4. STANDARDS FOR REAPPOINTMENT AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

4.1  Assistant Professors must show evidence of progress and performance in the areas of responsibility (teaching, research, or extension).  They will have demonstrated ability to conduct and manage a scholarly program in teaching, research or extension with clear potential to achieve the standards required for promotion to Associate Professor with tenure.

4.2  Evidence can consist of student and peer teaching evaluations, peer research evaluations, peer extension evaluations.  Positive performance must be recorded in all the areas of responsibility defined in the “Statement of Mutual Expectations.”

5. STANDARDS FOR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR WITH TENURE

5.1  The primary standard for promotion and tenure as Associate Professor is distinction in scholarship and program effectiveness, based on evidence that the candidate has several program areas (at least two in most cases) that are coherent and productive in their assigned areas of responsibility.

5.2  The program areas, whether in research, classroom instruction or extension should indicate scholarship (originality, vigor, competence and publication success).  The content of publications provides assess-able evidence of scholarship, however, there is no quantitative index of publication numbers or types that assures a minimum satisfactory level of distinction. Quality of publications is an important aspect of the scholarship assessment.  Program effectiveness in teaching and extension must not only reflect scholarship but capacity to reach students and clientele.  Effectiveness is assessed by information from learners, peer observers and the content of instructional materials.  Both effectiveness and scholarship are required for tenure.

6. STANDARDS FOR PROFESSOR

6.1  Before being promoted to the rank of professor, the individual must exhibit distinguished achievement in scholarship and program effectiveness.  Scholarship will be evidenced by a national reputation in Agricultural and Resource Economics through directing graduate students, independent research publications and other indicators (grants, research citations and awards).  Program effectiveness in extension is indicated by adoption of materials and methods inside and outside the state and recognition by other disciplines.  Distinguished teaching is recognized through items that include, awards, innovations, and student achievements.

7. PROCEDURES FOR RPT REVIEW

7.1  When a faculty member is being considered for promotion to Associate Professor or Professor, the department head will assign a departmental reading committee.  That committee will work with the candidate to be sure all appropriate materials of teaching, research, and/or extension programs are available for evaluation.  The written dossier for evaluation and supporting materials will be available for higher ranked faculty to examine at least two weeks prior to the department P&T meeting.  The Departmental Voting Faculty (DVF) will typically review a draft of the dossier in late spring or early summer.  If it is determined that there is sufficient support for a more formal evaluation, the candidate and DVF will submit separate lists of possible external reviewers to the department head.  With input by the faculty member, the department head will select persons to perform the external review by mid-summer.  The DVF evaluates and votes on the dossier (with external review letters) by early fall.

7.2  All voting faculty are encouraged to participate in the review of materials and participate in the discussion of the candidate’s qualifications.  Faculty unable to attend the discussion can either submit a proxy vote to the department head (within two days following the faculty meeting) or refrain from voting.

7.3  Selection of a representative for the college P&T committee shall be from the tenured Professors in the department and voted on by all departmental voting faculty.  The person receiving a majority of votes will be nominated to the college for service on that committee.