Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost
History: First Issued: June 21, 1999. Last Revised: March 15, 2017.
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU RUL05.67.204 – College of Education Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statement of Faculty Responsibilities
Office of the Provost RPT Website
Contact Info: Head, Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (919-515-1061)
This rule describes the Department of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education reappointment, promotion and tenure standards and procedures and is supplemental to and consistent with NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure.
The professional development of its faculty is a matter of great concern to the department. Attracting, developing and retaining an outstanding faculty are among the department’s highest priorities.
2. Realms of Faculty Responsibility
The Realms of Faculty Responsibility for faculty members include the following:
2.1. Teaching and Mentoring of Undergraduate and Graduate Students
Undergraduate and graduate teaching are both essential to the department’s mission and, therefore, essential for promotion and tenure. Clinical supervision, academic advising and mentoring graduate students are other primary missions of the department. Demonstration of competence in all these activities is an important component in personnel decisions. Teaching effectiveness will be determined through such indicators as student evaluations, student interviews, peer evaluations including direct observation of instruction, faculty portfolios, teaching awards and course preparation as reflected in course syllabi and materials. Considerable credit will be given for undergraduate and graduate student research supervision. Curriculum development/revision, innovative teaching practices and student advising will be important factors in any teaching evaluation.
2.2. Discovery of Knowledge through Discipline-Guided Inquiry
There are many ways of achieving high quality in discovery or knowledge production. Consequently, it is impractical to specify product types prerequisite to promotion and tenure. However, within the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education, there are knowledge-product characteristics that the department faculty considers important.
2.2.1. The product’s basic form or mode of dissemination: Refereed journal articles, book chapters and books are considered of the highest importance; non-refereed journal articles, refereed and non-refereed research papers/presentations, external grants, curriculum projects, instructional technology materials and patented instructional apparatus or inventions are of high importance; technical reports, published tests, assessment instruments, internal grants and published computer programs are of moderate importance; conference presentations and workshop materials are of some importance.
2.2.2. Nature of the product’s content and/or the process involved in creating it: Theory development and research are of very high importance; concept development/invention and concept presentation/explication are of high importance; reviewing and critiquing scholarly works and evaluating program/curricula are of moderate importance.
2.2.3. Nature of the product’s review prior to publication or dissemination. Refereed reviews are of very high importance; non-refereed reviews are of less importance.
2.2.4. Primary audience or user-group for the product: Professional peers, the general professional or scientific community, and mathematics, science, and technology teachers are of very high importance as target audiences; specialized groups, graduate students and undergraduate students are of rather high importance; K-12 students and lay persons are of moderate importance.
2.2.5. Degree of continuity in the product: Programmatic and thematic efforts are of very high importance; recurring themes and monograph-type efforts are of high importance. Note that this list is neither prescriptive nor proscriptive. Individual products of other kinds of activity might well be judged as important and of high quality.
2.3. Service in Professional Societies and Within the University Itself
Evaluation of service will be based upon the amount, quality and importance of the candidate’s service to the department, college, university, state and nation and/or the profession. Important contributions can be made in any of these areas. In particular, dedicated service to the department or college will count significantly, even when such activities are “invisible” outside the unit involved. Because of the need for an Assistant Professor to establish a strong knowledge-production and teaching record, the service expectations for promotion to Professor are higher than for promotion to Associate Professor with tenure. Activities and examples of commendable service that are important in evaluating faculty service are service on active departmental, college, or university committees, elected offices in state, national, or international professional associations (or divisions of associations), and service to education units such as schools, districts, or state departments of education. Service to government agencies, such as the National Science Foundation or the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, is a positive examples as well.
3. General Standards
High expectations of scholarly achievements in knowledge production–and particularly a sustained, focused, thematic research program–is what distinguishes faculty roles at a research university from faculty roles at other educational institutions. Therefore, it must be noted that sustained publication of thematic studies in quality research journals is the expected outcome and end-result of a scholarly research program and is most highly valued in personnel decisions. Some research articles published in respected research journals are necessary components of knowledge production for promotion to associate professor. A sustained record of research publications that are evident outcomes of a focused research program is a usual knowledge production expectation for promotion to full professor.
Evidence of meeting standards for reappointment, promotion and tenure should include the following.
3.1. Research/scholarly activity:
3.1.1. Statement of past, present and future research themes and programs with reference to vita
3.1.2. Significant publications, such as papers in national refereed journals or other prestigious publications (articles that are research based, which are philosophic/analytical or which are invited articles to special editions of journals are especially desirable), books and chapters in books
3.1.3. Presentations delivered to state, national, or international meetings
3.1.4. Proposals for external funding submitted and funding obtained
3.1.5. Significant media or instructional technology materials
3.2. University teaching performance:
3.2.1. Student and peer evaluations and comments regarding classes and individual guidance
3.2.2. Course actions, program development and revision and syllabi developed for classes
3.2.3. Innovative teaching practices or products
3.3.1. Contributions to department and program functioning
3.3.2. Participation in department, college and university committees
3.3.3. Service to state, national, or international organizations in person’s field (e.g., elected office, editorial board)
3.3.4. Services to public schools and education-related agencies
3.3.5. Undertaking special duties such as program coordinator or project manager.
3.4. Extraordinary professional contributions:
3.4.1. Research achievement that is recognized as being a breakthrough, turning point or a capstone in its field
3.4.2. Creation of a new curriculum which substantially influences the university or the field in which it is created
3.4.3. Achievement in a national or statewide office or function that has significant influence in the public or professional sphere.
4. Standards for Reappointment as Assistant Professor
The reappointment decision is an interim judgment about the faculty member’s probable suitability for tenure in the department. To be reappointed as assistant professor, the individual must demonstrate ability or definite promise in teaching, research, and an ability and willingness to participate in university, college, and departmental affairs that will lead to promotion to Associate Professor with tenure.
5. Standards for Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure
Promotion to Associate Professor with tenure is reserved for faculty members who have clearly demonstrated through their performance as scholars that their professional work is widely perceived among peers as distinctive and that they engage in effective teaching and service. Types of evidence of meeting standards for promotion and tenure would be the same as for reappointment, but in greater quantity and showing a sustained contribution to the field and likelihood of continuing to achieve the standards for promotion to Professor.
6. Standards for Promotion to Professor
Professors play a critical role in determining the intellectual, academic and scholarly quality and value of activities in the department, college and university. The rank of Professor is reserved for those who have clearly demonstrated continued scholarship and research, effective teaching and service and strong leadership in the profession. The knowledge production of a candidate for the rank of Professor earns him or her a national reputation as a valuable contributor to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. A candidate for the rank of Professor is generally regarded as an effective teacher by students and peers alike; and a candidate must have rendered valuable contributions to state, regional or national education agencies or professional associations.
7.1. External Reviewers
External evaluations from distinguished individuals from outside the university, in the candidate’s area of expertise, will be considered in any promotion and tenure decision. The candidate shall have the opportunity to identify external reviewers for the final list of external reviewers to be contacted. The department head also consults with the Dean of College of Education to select the external evaluators. The department head should strive for half of the reviewers nominated by the candidate and half by other appropriate persons. External reviewers are asked to provide a candid assessment of the quality, quantity, impact and creativity of the candidate’s performance.
7.2. Departmental Review
The department head initiates a review by the Department Voting Faculty following university regulations and the college rule. The department head announces arrangements for absentee voting.