RUL 05.67.106 – College of Design Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Criteria and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: 1996. Last Revised: December 17, 2012.

Related Policies:
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
Departmental RPT Rules
NCSU REG05.20.18 – Qualifications for Rank

NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Mutual Expectations

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Contact Info: Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies and Academic Support (919-515-8316)


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The primary objective of faculty evaluation must be the professional development and fulfillment of each individual faculty member. Decisions regarding faculty reappointment, promotion, and tenure, therefore, are among the most important in the life of an academic community. These decisions are determined on the basis of the performance and record of the faculty member and are considered in an ordered and deliberate review process. The tenured faculty have the responsibility and duty to equitably and consistently apply the criteria set forth in this regulation. The dean, school director, department chairs, and other university administrators have a perspective on the process from the standpoint of clarity and adherence of each review to the process, available resources, and contribution of the individual to the college and the university. Individual faculty performance will vary in content and focus as determined by their statement of mutual expectations.

1.2 This rule describes the criteria and procedures for reviewing faculty in the College of Design and is supplemental to and consistent with the university Academic Tenure Policy. The roles and responsibilities of the candidate, the reviewing faculty, and appropriate administrators are set forth along with the sequence of events which articulate the process.

2. AREAS OF FACULTY RESPONSIBILITY

2.1 The major responsibility of the College of Design’s academic school and departments is to provide education programs of the highest quality, and the faculty evaluation process is closely linked to this responsibility. Teachers and programs alike cannot remain on the leading edge of professional education unless they are rigorously and objectively evaluated.

2.2 Faculty cannot remain constructive forces in their field unless they continue to learn and grow. The avenue for learning and growth is scholarship and service. The Faculty’s active participation in scholarship and service responsibilities is essential to their contribution to the College mission.

3. GENERAL CRITERIA

3.1 Attention is called to the distinctions that are made in the College criteria for each rank. An assistant professor is to have demonstrated abilities. An associate professor is to have recognized abilities. And a full professor is to have an extensive record of distinction and significant contributions.

4. CRITERIA FOR REAPPOINTMENT AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

In addition to the university’s required Qualifications for Rank (REG 05.20.18) standards required for reappointment as assistant professor are provided in the Departmental RPT Rules. The College of Design considers a terminal professional master’s degree or equivalent professional degree to be equivalent to a doctor’s degree.

5. CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR WITH TENURE

In addition to the university’s required Qualifications for Rank (REG 05.20.18) standards required for promotion to associate professor with tenure are provided in the Departmental RPT Rules. The College of Design considers a terminal professional master’s degree or equivalent professional degree to be equivalent to a doctor’s degree.

6. CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO PROFESSOR

In addition to the university’s required Qualifications for Rank (REG 05.20.18) standards required for promotion to professor are provided in the Departmental RPT Rules. The College of Design considers a terminal professional master’s degree or equivalent professional degree to be equivalent to a doctor’s degree.

7. PROCEDURES

Procedures outlined in this section describe the principal elements and events of the review process as well as the roles and responsibilities of the various participants in the process – candidate, reviewing faculty, administrators, and others. These procedures are to be applied consistently and equitably to all cases of review, reappointment, promotion, and tenure in the College of Design.

Each Candidate is required to make a public presentation to the College community.

7.1 Statement of Mutual Expectations

7.1.1 The Statement of Mutual Expectations (REG 05.20.27) is an essential element of the process for review, reappointment, promotion, and tenure. It is the responsibility of the individual faculty member to formulate the Statement of Mutual Expectations and articulate his or her career goals within the framework of university, college, school and departmental purposes.

7.1.2 It is important to remember that the process leading to review, reappointment, promotion, and tenure begins on the first day of the initial appointment; and the preparation of the Statement of Mutual Expectations, as required during the individual’s first year as a tenure-track faculty member, will enable him or her to build a credible case for review, reappointment, promotion, and tenure.

7.2 College RPT Committee

7.2.1 The Dean shall appoint a College Committee comprised of six persons who are to serve on a three-year rotating basis (two persons to cycle off the committee each year). The committee is to be comprised of full professors with representation from each school and department. College RPT Committee members shall be recused from the College Committee’s proceedings and discussions about candidates from their school or department. This committee is advisory to the Dean Each member of this committee is responsible for reviewing each candidate’s dossier before discussion of the candidate, for attending the public presentation of each candidate (barring serious schedule conflicts), and for maintaining confidentiality of the committee’s proceedings and discussions.

7.2.2 The written assessment by the committee will include a report on the full range of votes cast as well as brief specific documentation of measurement of the candidate against college criteria in the traditional areas of teaching, research, and service. The written form of this assessment is to be circulated to and approved by each member of the committee before it is forwarded to the Dean.

7.3 Duties of the School Director or Department Chair

7.3.1 As the chief administrative officer of the school or department, the School Director or Department Chair conducts all periodic reviews of faculty performance and manages all reappointment, promotion, and tenure proceedings within the school or department. The School Director or Department Chair’s perspective, comprising resource availability, assurance of a consistent and fair review process, and maintenance of the school or department’s academic mission, provides a unique position from which to formulate an individual recommendation on all RPT actions.

7.3.2 The school director or department chair is responsible for guiding each faculty member through the process; for giving clear information to the faculty member about progress toward promotion and tenure in each annual review; for assisting the candidate in preparing the dossier; for notifying all members of the faculty and the RPT Committee of the date and time of the candidate’s public presentation; for seeing that promotion and tenure reviews in the school or department proceed on schedule; and for informing the candidate of the recommendations of the School Director or Department Chair and assessment of the Departmental Voting Faculty.

7.5.3  In accordance with REG 05.20.34 Non-Tenure Track Faculty Ranks and Appointments Section 9.1.3 which requires that each Dean must establish for the college for all the categories of full-time (> 0.75 FTE) NTT faculty with professorial rank whether to require external evaluation letters for the dossier, the Dean of the College of Design has decided the following:

Clinical Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Extension Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Research Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Teaching  Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Assistant/Associate/Full Professors of the Practice:  Letters not required.

7.4 Dean’s Perspective for Review, Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure: The Role of NC State College of Design Dean

7.4.1 Meeting with Director/Chair

a) Before deciding on the review, reappointment, promotion, or tenure of a faculty member, the Dean shall meet with the Director of the School or Chair of the Department in question to review the specific faculty needs of the School or Department. This review shall include an assessment of the performance of the candidate with the perspective of the College and School or Department strategic and educational plans.

7.4.2 School or Department and College Consultations

a) The Dean may hold a consultation with the Departmental Voting Faculty of a School or Department to request specific opinions regarding a review, reappointment, promotion, or tenure action. The purpose of this consultation is to provide the Dean with additional information regarding the appropriate course of action.

b) The Dean may hold a consultation with College RPT Committee to request specific opinions regarding a review, reappointment, promotion, or tenure action. The purpose of this consultation is to provide the Dean with additional information regarding the appropriate course of action.

7.4.3 The Participation of College Administrators

Those assistant and associate deans of the college who have academic tenure in some school or department shall participate with the faculty of the school or department of their tenure in the reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions of that school or department.

7.5 External Review Procedures

7.5.1 Evaluations by accomplished scholars who are not a part of the NC State community provide a valuable element in assessing the accomplishments of faculty who are being considered for promotion in rank and for conferral of tenure. These evaluations should be obtained in a manner that assures the involvement of the individuals being reviewed and the academic leadership of the school or department in identifying outside evaluators. Outside evaluators should be provided with documentary evidence of the individual’s accomplishments and asked to comment on the quality, quantity, impact, and creativity of those accomplishments.

7.5.2 All external evaluations for outside review shall be conducted in compliance with REG05.20.11 External Evaluation for RPT Review.

7.5.3 In accordance with REG 05.20.34 Non-Tenure Track Faculty Ranks and Appointments Section 9.1.3 which requires that each Dean must establish for the college for all the categories of full-time (> 0.75 FTE) NTT faculty with professorial rank whether to require external evaluation letters for the dossier, the Dean of the College of Design has decided the following:

Clinical Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Extension Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Research Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Teaching Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters not required.
Assistant/Associate/Full Professors of the Practice:  Letters not required.

7.6 Duties of Mentors

7.6.1 Each School Director and Department Chair is responsible for appointing a full professor to each non-tenured faculty member as a mentor. The mentor is to give guidance, advice, and support to the non-tenured faculty member in the process toward promotion and tenure.

7.7 Schedule for Faculty Review, Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure

7.7.1 The following schedule establishes target dates for all specific required actions in the reappointment, promotion, and tenure review process. Further, it identifies the party responsible for initiating action or decision at each step in the process. This schedule must meet the Provost’s timetable and therefore is subject to change relative to this requirement. The dates listed are guides which may need to be adjusted each year to account for weekends, academic holidays, etc.

May 1 School Director or Department Chair to notify all faculty of the procedures and schedule for review.

May 15 School Director or Department Chair to meet with each candidate who is required to be reviewed or who wishes to be reviewed. Purpose of meeting is to make sure each candidate has the latest information regarding criteria, procedures, and schedule from the University, College, School, and Department. Begin discussion to identify external reviewers.

August 15 Candidate to submit complete RPT dossier for review. List of external reviewers established with consideration of potential reviewers from candidate and the established University and College criteria.

September 1 School Director or Department Chair to have completed the list of external reviewers who have agreed to perform reviews. Document mailed to external reviewers.

Sept15 -Oct 15

The Candidate is required to make a public presentation to the College community. This presentation is to be scheduled by the School Director or Department Chair during this time period and inform all faculty, especially the departmental RPT Committee.

September 15 Dean to have completed appointment of the College RPT Committee.

October 1 Receipt of comments from external reviewers.

October 15 Completion of review by the School or Department Voting Faculty with written assessment to the School Director or Department Chair and Dean.

November 1 Dean to submit multiple copies of all documentation on all candidates to College’s RPT Committee for review (School Director or Department Chair recommendation to be forwarded on November 1. Completion of review by the School Director or Department Chair with written recommendation to the Dean. Relevant information to be submitted by the Dean to the College’s RPT Committee includes: current versions of the University policies and regulations and College rule, and each candidate’s dossier.

December 15 College’s RPT Committee to submit vote and written assessment regarding each candidate to Dean.

January 10 Dean to submit dossier and recommendation for each candidate to Provost. (this date is subject to change depending on university deadlines for submission to the provost.)