RUL 05.67.203 – Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM ED) Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: June 21, 1999. Last Revised: July 31, 2023.

Additional References:
Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost RPT Website

Contact Info: Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education (919-515-6900)

1. Introduction

This Rule describes the standards and procedures in the Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education (STEM ED) related to appointment, reappointment, promotion, and tenure of Tenure Track faculty and the appointment, reappointment, and promotion of Professional Track faculty. The Rule is supplemental to and consistent with the College of Education Rule (see RUL 05. 05.68.28 – College of Education Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures) and the Academic Policies and Regulations of North Carolina State University related to and governing personnel actions (related policies listed above). The Rule will be periodically reviewed and amended consistent with changes in the College and University Policies, Regulations and Rules, and with the changes in the departmental environment, as deemed appropriate by the Tenure Track and full time Professional Track faculty. The Rule will be used to affirm the value of faculty judgment throughout the review process and to guide us in reaching accurate and fair decisions about our peers, which is a fundamental principle of our department. The Rule will also be used as a basis for preparing faculty dossiers for review as prescribed by the University for Tenure Track and Professional Track faculty. Hereafter, in this document, “faculty” refers to both Tenure and Professional Track personnel unless specifically stated otherwise.

2. Realms of Faculty Responsibility

The realms of responsibilities recognized at the University are:

Teaching and Mentoring of Undergraduate and Graduate Students;
Discovery of Knowledge through Discipline-Guided Inquiry;
Creative Artistry and Literature;
Technological and Managerial Innovation;
Extension and Engagement with Constituencies outside the University;
Service in Professional Societies and Service and Engagement within the University itself.

3. General Standards

The manner in which each faculty member may demonstrate their contributions in these realms may vary, and the individual’s Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR) (see NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Mutual Expectations) describes the realms in which the faculty member will focus and on which they will be evaluated. However, no rigid formula exists for determining faculty qualifications for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Expectations of the extent of activity within each realm vary according to rank and appointment. The following evidence, while not all-inclusive, may be considered in all reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions.

3.1. Performance in Teaching and Mentoring of Undergraduate and Graduate Students:

As a department within the College of Education, STEM ED faculty have a responsibility to model appropriate procedures and attitudes in their own pedagogies and practices.

The following types of evidence may be used as evidence of quality teaching and mentoring:

teaching evaluations, peer evaluations, and student evaluations, including supervision of clinical and field based experiences (per University requirements and prescribed formats for collection);
summarizing teaching evaluations and describing impacts on teaching practices (reflection on teaching)
implementation of effective and research-based teaching practices;
implementation of instructional technology in promoting effective teaching and learning;
Course development as documented on approved Course Action Forms;
Program or course development, revision, and evaluation.
Advising undergraduate and graduate students on courses.
Mentoring doctoral students on their dissertation research.
Mentoring undergraduate and graduate students on research-related activities provided that visible evidence is provided, such as conference-papers, publications, or grant proposals.

3.2. Discovery of Knowledge through Discipline-Guided Inquiry:

As a component of and contributor to a land-grant university with high research activity, the faculty in STEM ED are dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge and its dissemination. Research, scholarly work, and other forms of creative endeavor are essential for the continued intellectual growth of the university, state, regional, national and international scholarly community. The quality of undergraduate and graduate teaching is also greatly enhanced by active participation of faculty members in scholarly research, and by widespread dissemination of the results of such scholarly research.

Evidence of quality discovery of knowledge may include:

published peer-reviewed journal articles;
record of submission of proposals for internal funding (within the University) and external funding (sources outside the University). Sources might include state agencies, national agencies, and private agencies or foundations;
books, book chapters, monographs, and conference proceedings reporting or reflecting original research, grant activities, extension activities, manuals, instructional materials, and/or scholarship;
published authored or edited handbooks or reference books that cover a broad area in the designated field of scholarship;
awards and recognitions for research and/or scholarship from national or international professional organizations and societies;
peer-reviewed presentations at state, regional, international or national professional meetings;
peer-reviewed published versions of invited and/or selected research papers from state, regional, national or international professional conferences or meetings;
published peer-reviewed or invited reviews of books and media that address research and/or best practices;
awards and recognitions for research from state, regional, or local professional societies.

3.3. Creative Artistry and Literature:

Creative artistry and literature involves the creation, production, interpretation, and evaluation of cultural artifacts that generate new insights and interpretations with the potential to inspire and advance the quality of life in society. Evidence of creative artistry and literature should be relevant to faculty area of expertise and may include:

creative publications, e.g., children’s books, graphic novels, flip books;
educational blogs, websites, educational movies, documentaries;
exhibitions and artistic representations.

3.4. Technological and Managerial Innovation:

Technological and managerial innovation provides the means by which knowledge and imagination in the sciences, technologies, engineering design, and mathematics can be harnessed to drive the economic and social systems of the state, nation, and world, and ultimately, provide new products and services. Evidence of technological and managerial innovation may include:

developing educational software and applications such as an educational game, simulation, intelligent tutoring system, modeling platforms;
developing new and innovative curriculum products;
developing new and innovative assessment systems.

3.5. Extension and Engagement with Constituencies outside the University:

As members of a land grant institution, faculty are expected to interface with constituencies outside the university context in the state, nation, and world. Such interface is defined by active engagement that may include, but not be limited to, sharing expertise and committing to involvement in relevant activities with the goal of extending and/or strengthening the mission of outside constituencies and the university, college, and/or department connections thereto. Evidence of extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university may include:

planning and implementing professional development activities and workshops for teachers, other educators, and or students;
providing consultant services to educational enterprises that draw upon the faculty member’s professional expertise;
serving on community boards and organizations in education;
contributing substantially to school-university partnerships exemplary accomplishments, in extension including evidence that the extension effort is leading to improvement in knowledge, practice, or other measurable outcomes;
volunteering in schools and other organizations that provide education resources and services to the community.

3.6. Service in Professional Societies and Within the University Itself:

Service is faculty investment of time to professional societies and within the university. Faculty may accomplish the goal of service to the department, college, university and external agencies and organizations through various routes as determined by faculty interest, expertise, and responsibilities. As a faculty member demonstrates his or her abilities in areas of research and teaching, service responsibilities may broaden in scope, encompassing larger contributions at the University-level and in national and international arenas. The type and level of service activities may vary annually based on the faculty member’s overall commitments and/or according to professorial rank. Evidence of quality service in professional societies and within the university itself, may include:

contributions to the operation of the department, college, and university, such as serving on committees and search committees, and/or serving in administrative positions (e.g. program coordinator or director);
planning and/or evaluating special programs or initiatives of interest to the department, college, or university;
completing peer teaching evaluations;
formally mentoring new faculty members;
serving on accrediting teams for NC State University and other institutions;
sponsoring student activities and clubs;
preparing self-studies and other departmental or college reports;
serving in leadership roles in professional organizations and enterprises, serving as a peer reviewer for professional colleagues external to the university.
journal, conference, and abstract reviews and editorships for organizations;
external peer reviews for both professional and institutional.

4. Standards for Senior Lecturer

4.1 Promotion to Senior Lecturer requires a minimum of 5 years of service within the college or in a comparable position in another NC State college or at another institution. The decision to promote a Lecturer to Senior Lecturer requires demonstrated excellence in teaching and successful fulfillment of other realms of responsibility as defined in the faculty member’s Statement of Faculty Responsibilities.

4.2 The change of a faculty member’s title from Lecturer or Senior Lecturer to a Professional Track Assistant Professor is not considered a promotion. The College of Education follows NCSU REG 05.20.34, section 10.1.3.

5. Standards for Reappointment as Assistant Professor

5.1 Reappointment as Assistant Professor, tenure track, is reserved for faculty members who have met the expectations described in the general standards and have thus made significant progress toward meeting the expectations of tenure and promotion review (described below). The candidate for reappointment at the Assistant Professor, tenure track, level must provide relevant and thorough evidence of their progress towards tenure and promotion.

5.2 Reappointment as Assistant Professor, Professional Track, is reserved for faculty members who have met the expectations described in the general standards and have thus made significant progress toward meeting the expectations of promotion review (described below in Standard 6). The candidate for reappointment at the Assistant Professor, Professional Track, and level must provide relevant and thorough evidence of their progress towards promotion.

6. Standards for Associate Professor

6.1 Promotion to Associate Professor with tenure is reserved for tenure track faculty members who, in addition to meeting the expectations described in the general standards, have clearly demonstrated that their research is perceived as high quality among national peers and international peers as appropriate.

6.2 To be successful, tenure track candidates for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor must provide evidence of accomplishments in their assigned responsibilities.

6.3 Associate Professors who have been hired into a tenure track position, without tenure, and who subsequently seek tenure within the same rank will follow the same standards as Associate Professors outlined above in 6.1 and 6.2.

6.4 Promotion to Associate Professor, Professional Track, is reserved for faculty members who, in addition to meeting the expectations described in the general standards, have clearly demonstrated high quality performance in the realms relevant to their assignment as perceived by state peers and national peers as appropriate.

7. Standards for Professor

7.1 Promotion to Professor, tenure track, is reserved for tenure track faculty members who, in addition to continually meeting the expectations described in the general standards, have clearly demonstrated that their research is widely perceived among authorities in their field(s) of scholarship as high quality, and thus has achieved national and/or international recognition for its value and impact. The candidate’s impact in their field should be clear and compelling.

7.2 Professors, tenure track, are expected to provide substantive contributions to the departmental operations and program development, to present evidence of high-quality teaching and mentoring, to provide leadership in the mentoring and development of all Assistant and Associate Tenure-Track and Professional Track faculty and to accomplish exemplary service in national and/or international professional organizations and groups external to the department.

7.3 To be successful, tenure track candidates for promotion to the rank of Professor, tenure track, must provide evidence of accomplishments in their assigned responsibilities.

7.4 Promotion to Professor, Professional Track, is reserved for faculty members who, in addition to continually meeting the expectations described in the general standards, have clearly demonstrated that their evidence of accomplishments in their assigned responsibilities is widely perceived among authorities in their field(s) as highly qualified, and thus has achieved national and/or international recognition as valuable. The candidate’s impact in their field should be clear and compelling.

7.5 Professors, Professional Track, are expected to provide substantive contributions to the departmental operations and program development, to present evidence of high quality teaching and mentoring, to provide leadership in the mentoring and development of Assistant and Associate ranked faculty and to accomplish exemplary service in national and/or international professional organizations and groups external to the department.

8. PROCEDURES FOR RPT REVIEW (Tenure Track) or PROMOTION (Professional Track)

8.1 Every year, during the annual performance evaluations, the department head will provide feedback to Assistant Professors on progress toward promotion (and tenure when applicable). DVF may provide informal feedback, if requested by the faculty member, that could assist early career faculty with their development, via a personal communication from a member of the DVF.

8.2 The candidate for departmental RPT consideration must provide clear, concise evidence of achievement in the assigned responsibilities as described in the SFR. The department head will advise the candidate to seek feedback from faculty in the preparation of the RPT Dossier. The RPT dossier will be submitted to the department head as prescribed in university regulations.

8.3 The department head will make the dossier available to the appropriate DVF. College-level and University-level administrators with more than .25 FTE as an administrator are not considered members of the DVF.

8.4 The RPT process will follow the timeline set by the Dean of the college. In the absence of a college-wide timeline, the department head will inform faculty of impending required reviews by March 30th of the calendar year in which the review will begin. Faculty members requesting a review should also communicate with the department head by March 30th. When letters from external reviewers are required, the department head will work with the faculty member who is being reviewed and the DVF to select reviewers and will send initial requests for external reviews no later than May 15th.

8.5 The Departmental Voting Faculty (DVF) shall annually elect from its members a chairperson who will be responsible for coordinating the DVF work. Each DVF member and the Department Head shall read and thoroughly review all the materials submitted by each candidate under consideration. The DVF will convene and during the formal discussion of the candidate(s) dossier(s), the Department Head will not be present, but will be available for consultation if requested. DVF members who cannot attend the meeting must make known to the DVF chairperson their intention to vote in absentia or to have their vote reported as missing. All votes in absentia must be submitted to a STEM ED staff member (designated by the DVF chairperson) prior to the DVF meeting. Only DVF members will attend the meeting. No other individuals (e.g., STEM ED staff, non-DVF members) shall be present during the DVF discussions. At the conclusion of each discussion, the DVF chairperson shall poll the committee members, and a vote shall be taken using a prepared secret ballot with check-off voting options: “Yes”, “No”, “Abstain” to render a decision on the request for promotion and/or tenure for each candidate. The vote outcome(s) will be made known to the DVF members present. After the outcome of the vote(s) has/have been revealed, the Department Head shall communicate with the DVF chairperson to discuss, confidentially, the decision rendered by the DVF on the candidate(s) under consideration.

8.6 Subsequent to the meeting, the DVF will prepare a written recommendation for each candidate that reports the vote on the requested personnel action along with the supporting discussion. The recommendation will be submitted to the Department Head by the DVF chairperson and will include (i) names of members present for and those absent from the discussion; (ii) the number of votes cast in each category “yes,” “no,” “abstain”; and (iii) a general description of the major points raised in the DVF’s discussion related to the candidate’s performance in each realm of faculty responsibility. The DVF also reports the number of missing votes and recusals.

8.7 The Department Head will prepare a written recommendation related to the requested personnel action and will share the recommendation with the DVF. The Department Head and/or the DVF may seek a joint meeting prior to such time as the Department Head’s written assessment is added to the candidate’s dossier.