RUL 05.67.24 – Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: August 1, 2017. Last Revised: May 20, 2021.

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

1. Introduction

This Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology (DEPP) rule is supplemental to and consistent with NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure, REG05.20.34 – Professional Faculty Ranks and Appointments, and RUL05.67.22 – College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures. It is the responsibility of each faculty member to be knowledgeable about the university regulations and college rule. The departmental rule augments these to provide faculty with knowledge of the general process for reappointment, promotion, and final tenure approval within DEPP.

The evaluation of professional faculty with professorial rank will emphasize the major responsibilities defined in the appointment (academics, research, extension, service, administration). The expectations of professional faculty with professorial rank (research assistant, associate and full professors; teaching assistant, associate, and full professors; extension assistant, associate, and full professors) are the same as those for tenured and tenure-track faculty. All professional faculty with professorial ranks are expected to demonstrate accomplishments in their areas of faculty responsibility commensurate with expectations of tenured and tenure-track faculty members of similar rank as described in this rule.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

Faculty in DEPP hold responsibilities in teaching and mentoring of students, research and scholarship, extension and engagement, and service. Areas of individual faculty responsibility are identified in the offer letter and further documented in the latest approved Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR) as outlined in NCSU REG05.20.27.

All faculty members to be considered for reappointment, tenure, or promotion in faculty rank must demonstrate that they have been effective in meeting their designated areas of responsibility through scholarly contributions in an appropriate form. Academic responsibilities include activities beyond the classroom teaching setting. These activities with students (undergraduate, graduate) and trainees (postdoctoral) may include advising, mentoring, supervising laboratory research, directing the preparation of papers, theses and dissertations, and other appropriate activities. Scholarly research contributions are defined more broadly than the publication of research, as many different forms of scholarly activity can contribute to the field and research community. Extension and engagement contributions will be evaluated based upon their appropriateness for, service to, and impact upon, target stakeholder audiences.

All professional faculty members are expected to demonstrate accomplishments in their areas of faculty responsibility (academics, research, extension, and/or service) commensurate with expectations of tenured / tenure-track faculty members of similar rank as described in this rule.

All faculty members are expected to participate in the operation of the department, college and university and in activities within professional societies and organizations appropriate to their field or discipline. Program activity that serves the collective mission of the department and contributions as a valued citizen and colleague of NC State University are expected.

3. General Standards

The department recognizes that the ability to cooperate with other faculty, staff, and/or students are factors that can affect a faculty member’s ability to meet the standards for their ranks and realms of responsibility. Further, because success within our fields necessarily requires collaborative work, the faculty should document collaboration in their realms of responsibility inside and outside NC State University. While collegiality in and of itself is not a performance standard, a lack of collegiality may be acknowledged in an evaluation process to the extent that it served as a factor negatively affecting the faculty member’s productivity in their realms of responsibility.

3.1. Teaching and Mentoring of Students

Scholarly activity in teaching and mentoring of students will be evaluated in accordance with the expectations outlined in the SFR. Evidence to be reviewed in the evaluation of academic effectiveness may include, but is not limited to: student responses on the course evaluation form, peer review to include direct classroom observation, graduate student training, academic advising, creativity and innovation, special recognition (awards, honors), and extramural funding record.

Specific written comments from students as requested through ClassEval assessments are of value in all aspects of evaluating teaching effectiveness. Students should be encouraged to provide these evaluations. Although faculty members may wish to use an additional student evaluation instrument tailored for specific purposes, the ClassEval form must be used by all faculty in all courses when they are available.

To be of most use, assessments of classroom observations generated by peer review should be shared with the instructor in a timely manner to facilitate course improvement for the next time the course is taught. These assessments will also be appropriate items for discussion during the annual meeting between the faculty member and the department head.

Training of graduate students is an important academic contribution. Chairing and/or serving on graduate advisory committees, both in and outside the department, is also a significant component of graduate education. The success of graduate students reflects on the entire institution. Academic advising of undergraduate students can also be an integral part of academic responsibility to be considered in an evaluation.

In addition to classroom performance, creativity and innovation in the development of courses and contributions to curricular quality are important components of teaching. Some aspects of a faculty member’s creativity are appropriately considered under the topic of scholarship and may lead to publications on teaching methods, textbooks, laboratory manuals, audiovisual materials, computer-based educational programs or other scholarly academic products. Invitations to participate in symposia, conferences, workshops, and other activities related to teaching are exceptional measures of recognition by peers at the regional, national, or international level.

Honors, awards, and other special recognitions in and outside the university are also important indicators of quality and dedication to teaching.

Faculty members are encouraged to seek extramural funds for teaching development, when appropriate, and efforts in this direction will be considered in evaluating academic effectiveness.

3.2. Research

Scholarly activity in research will be evaluated in accordance with the expectations outlined in the SFR. Although scholarly productivity is usually equated with conducting research and reporting results in peer-reviewed journals, it may also take other forms. These forms may include technology innovation, publication of books, development of computer software, patent applications, and other scholarly research works as appropriate. The quantity of research productivity is of importance mainly as a general indicator of regular research activity. Of more significance is the quality of the research contributions to new knowledge or interpretations in the field and their impact in the community of research stakeholders.

For reappointment at the assistant professor level, research published during appointment at NC State that is from work conducted in a doctoral, postdoctoral, or other professional position may be considered in assessments. It is expected, however, that tangible research activity at this institution be evident during the initial appointment. For promotion to associate professor, emphasis will be placed on research contributions developed since coming to NC State. These contributions or activities can include, but are not limited to, research publications in high quality peer-reviewed journals, graduate student thesis research, research presentations, and extramural funding awarded for sponsored research.

Effort and success in attracting research program funding is important for program success and subsequent career advancement. This funding may come through various methods, including competitive extramural grants, university grants, memoranda of agreement, unrestricted gifts, and in-kind support.

The research of independent programs is the basis of many scholarly activities and recognitions. Collaborative work is also important in many fields and for specific types of appointments, and is often the basis for substantive support and the advancement of knowledge. Collaborations may include participation in successful multi-disciplinary, multi-departmental, multi-university, regional, national or international projects and programs. Whether independent or collaborative, scholarly research must lead to the establishment of an independent reputation as a scholar and investigator.

As mentioned under “Teaching and Mentoring” contributions, training of graduate students and postgraduates is also an important research contribution. Successful completion of thesis and dissertation research of graduate students and research projects of postgraduates is an important measure of the strength of a research program.

Professional reputation among peers is important in evaluating faculty, and this is most evident in solicited reviews provided from peers external to the institution. To be considered for promotion to associate professor, faculty should have established at least a regional, but preferably a national reputation for scholarly research excellence. National and international recognition in scholarly research excellence is considered for promotion to the rank of professor. Receipt of awards and honors, invitations to present program achievements, invitations for manuscript and grant peer reviews, invited editorships, and serving in positions of leadership in professional societies provide evidence of peer recognition. These and other types of evidence will be carefully considered when evaluating faculty professional reputation among peers.

3.3 Extension

Extension productivity will be evaluated in accordance with the expectations outlined in the SFR. Faculty with extension appointments are expected to identify appropriate target stakeholder groups, assess their needs relative to the role of expectations of the position, and effectively engage with them in order to promote near-, mid-, and long-term changes in knowledge, skills, and practice.

Stakeholder engagement considered for promotion can take different formats based on target audience need and may include presentations, extension and technical publications, social media information platforms, grant and funding generation for extension activities, and online content development. Faculty with extension responsibilities can be expected to collaborate and align extension efforts with other programs, when feasible, to leverage outcomes. While faculty with extension responsibilities within the department may serve very diverse stakeholder groups, they should prioritize these groups appropriately, in alignment with their SFR and through the guidance of their mentoring committee.

Applied research is an important aspect of extension; successful extension programs often demonstrate a robust continuum from fundamental to applied areas of study and in resulting extension products. There is an expectation that independent funding will be secured by faculty extension specialists to support an applied research program that informs their extension efforts.

For reappointment at the assistant professor level, it is expected that faculty will be engaged with stakeholders, have assessed their needs, and have established activities that address them. For promotion to associate professor with tenure, faculty with extension responsibilities should be expected to describe and measure the impact of their extension activities at the state and regional levels, with the potential to achieve a national reputation among their stakeholder community. For promotion to the rank of professor, national recognition of the extension program is expected and international recognition where appropriate. Receipt of awards and honors, invitations to participate in meetings, receipt of sponsored program support from stakeholders, and invited collaborations provide evidence of professional recognition. These and other types of evidence will be carefully considered when evaluating extension program reputation.

3.4. Service

All faculty members are expected to participate in the operation of the department, college, and university by serving in various capacities (for example, on committees, boards, panels, task forces, and commissions). 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 five percent of a faculty member’s time.

Appointments requiring unusual amounts of service time should be reflected in the SFR. Faculty with significant administrative roles such as Associate Department Head, Director of Graduate Programs, Director of Undergraduate Programs, and Department Extension Leader fall into this category and should detail those responsibilities for appropriate consideration in evaluations. Faculty members are encouraged to participate in professional activities (for example, by serving on grant panels, committees and editorial boards, or holding office) within societies and organizations appropriate to their field or discipline.

3.5. Mentoring and Evaluation

Mentoring of faculty is the collective responsibility of the department head and faculty. A formal mentoring committee is established for all assistant professors (tenure track and professional faculty), and is charged with providing advice and guidance, assisting the candidate through the tenure and promotion process, and serving as a resource for the department faculty in annual evaluations. The mentoring committee provides an informal annual evaluation separate from that provided by the department head, and also may serve to provide peer review of teaching along with other faculty members.

All faculty members will be evaluated on an annual basis by the department head consistent with REG 05.20.03 Annual Reviews of Faculty Members. Contracts of two years or less for professional faculty members will be evaluated and renewed at the discretion of the department head and based upon successful completion of faculty responsibilities in the current appointment.

All tenure-track assistant professors are informally evaluated every Spring semester by the mentoring committee and the tenured department faculty, and the results of these evaluations are communicated to the individual. Recommendations for submitting documentation for non-mandatory (voluntary) promotions (to full professor, early promotion to associate professor with tenure, or promotion to either rank for professional faculty) will be considered by department tenured professors and may be initiated by the candidate, the department head, or a member of the Departmental Voting Faculty (DVF, as defined in Section 8.2). Formal RPT evaluations and DVF vote will occur every Fall for mandatory and voluntary RPT actions as outlined in NCSU POL 05.20.01.

Evaluation of faculty is a continuous process that includes guidance, recommended changes,

peer feedback, and sensitivity to the faculty member’s growth toward or revised from their original capacity and position. It is the responsibility of each faculty member seeking promotion to keep their mentoring committee, the department head, and the DVF apprised of the goals and direction of their program activities. Any changes in faculty responsibilities and expectations should be reflected in the SFR.

4. Standards for Assistant Professor

Evaluation at the assistant professor level will be made in the context of the faculty member’s SFR. The faculty member should demonstrate program development in academics, research, extension, or service commensurate with their SFR that are indicative of future success as a faculty member. Initial establishment of program personnel (students, staff, postdoctoral associates), program facilities development, efforts to secure extramural program funding, collaborative interactions and networking with colleagues and stakeholders, and similar metrics are indications of successful initial program development towards reappointment.

The faculty member should demonstrate contributions towards mentoring and education of students and developments in academic programs commensurate with the SFR. In research, publications from work conducted in a doctoral, postdoctoral, or other professional position may be considered in assessments. It is expected, however, that tangible scholarly activity at this institution be established during the initial appointment period. Faculty members with extension responsibilities should be engaged with stakeholders, have assessed their needs, and be developing activities that address those needs. The faculty member may demonstrate service in professional activities within and external to the university as further consideration for reappointment.

5. Standards for Promotion to Associate Professor

Evaluation for promotion will be made in the context of the faculty member’s SFR. For promotion to associate professor, emphasis will be placed on program productivity and contributions developed since coming to NC State. The faculty member is expected to have served or demonstrated leadership on departmental, university, or national professional committees.

The faculty member is expected to demonstrate effective contributions to academic programs commensurate with their SFR that can include development and teaching of university courses, student and postgraduate advising activities, serving as Chair or member of graduate advisory committees, and other appropriate academic activities.

The faculty member is expected to generate original research publications in peer-reviewed journals appropriate for the discipline and the faculty responsibilities outlined in the SFR. Efforts toward and success in securing extramural funding for sponsored research should be demonstrated and expected to continue.

Faculty with extension responsibilities should have demonstrated professional engagement to address stakeholder needs and extension program productivity to effectively communicate extension program deliverables. The impact of extension activities at the state and regional levels should be demonstrated and potential for national level extension recognition should be evident.

It is expected that a faculty member promoted to associate professor demonstrates at least a regional but preferably a national reputation as a scholar and independent investigator, as evidenced by factors such as letters from external evaluators, service on national committees, grants reviews and panels, manuscript reviews and editorial boards, invitations to speak on scholarly activities, and other appropriate evidence.

6. Standards for promotion to Professor

Evaluation for promotion will be made in the context of the faculty member’s SFR. For promotion to professor, the faculty member must meet and exceed the standards for promotion to associate professor. In addition, it is expected that the faculty member has established a national reputation as a scholar and educator and international recognition for professional excellence as appropriate for faculty responsibilities. A sustained record of research publications in appropriate peer reviewed journals with evidence of significant impact on the field of study and regular success in securing program funding are expected. The faculty member should have demonstrated excellence in academic programs and the ability to mentor M.S. and Ph.D. students to successful graduation. Demonstrated service and leadership at the departmental, university, and national levels are expected.

7. Professional Faculty

Professional faculty will be evaluated using the same criteria as for tenure track faculty.

8. Procedure

8.1. A dossier as required by university regulation (NCSU REG 05.20.20 – Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements) will be provided to the Department Head by each tenure-track, tenured, and professional faculty member requesting consideration for tenure or promotion in faculty rank. The faculty candidate should meet with their mentors to specifically discuss the preparation and review of the dossier. This dossier will be due according to the timeline outlined below, or as needed to allow all deadlines for the annual RPT process to be met.

8.2. Departmental Voting Faculty. The Departmental Voting Faculty (DVF) are defined by NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure and by NCSU REG 05.20.34 Professional Faculty Ranks and Appointments. USDA faculty will be included in deliberations consistent with rank held and policies of the college and university, but their vote is not counted in the DVF.

The DVF for reappointment, tenure, and promotion of tenure-track and tenured faculty members shall consist of all departmental faculty who hold tenured positions at a rank equal to or higher than the rank being considered for promotion.

The DVF for promotion of a professional faculty member shall consist of all departmental faculty who hold tenured or tenure-track positions at a rank equal to or higher than the rank being considered for promotion as well as full-time professional faculty in the track that is under consideration who hold professorial rank equal to or higher than the rank under consideration.

In the case of faculty hired without tenure prior to the merger of the Entomology and Plant Pathology departments, the DVF will consist of the faculty in the former department into which the faculty member was hired. Following tenure, faculty will be reviewed by the merged DVF. Tenured associate professors will be evaluated by the DVF of their previous promotion, if prior to the merger, and tenured full professors will be evaluated by the full merged DVF.

8.3. Schedule

8.3.1. Spring informal RPT meeting. Tenured faculty will meet annually during spring semester to informally review the progress of each tenure-track, tenured, and professional faculty member towards reappointment, promotion and tenure. At this time, the department head will inform candidates of pending mandatory RPT activities and opportunities for voluntary or early requests for reappointment, promotion and tenure. The Spring meeting will include submission of an updated candidate dossier to the department head for informal review by the DVF. During the Spring meeting, the mentorship committee chair of each candidate faculty member will describe the candidate SFR and summarize the individual’s progress in detail to initiate the informal review discussion. The substance of the spring review will be shared with the candidate faculty member by the mentoring committee and the department head shortly after the Spring meeting. The mentors and department head will use the discussion from the Spring meeting when counseling faculty to be considered for reappointment, promotion and tenure. At this time, the department head will discuss the procedures and timelines for any RPT actions scheduled for the following Fall.

8.3.2. On or before July 15: Faculty candidates scheduled for mandatory or voluntary RPT to associate or full professor during the following Fall should have met with their mentorship committee to finalize their dossier by this date. The candidate will submit the finalized dossier to the department head at this time and also provide a list of at least six potential external reviewers for the pending Fall RPT action. Mentors of the candidate and the department head will develop a separate list of potential external RPT reviewers for the candidate. A minimum of six external reviewers will be chosen from a combination of both lists to solicit external reviews for the candidate for Fall RPT action.

8.3.3. On or before September 15: All faculty members being considered for reappointment, tenure or promotion will present a seminar to the department. Faculty candidates for reappointment should have met with their mentoring committees to finalize and submit their dossiers to the department head by this date. All external reviews received and final dossiers of candidates requesting tenure, promotion to associate professor, or promotion to full professor should have been received by this date. All documentation to support faculty candidate RPT will be uploaded into the NC State University RPT online system for review by appropriate department DVF prior to the Fall Formal RPT meeting.

8.3.4. Fall Formal RPT meeting: Department DVF will meet annually in early October to formally review and vote for faculty candidates scheduled for mandatory or voluntary RPT. During the Fall RPT meeting, the mentorship committee chair of each candidate faculty member will describe the candidate SFR and summarize the individual’s progress in detail to initiate the formal review. The chair of the candidate’s mentoring committee will record the DVF discussion and vote tally and provide a written DVF summary statement and the vote tally for the RPT candidate to the department head within a week after the Fall RPT meeting. The department head will prepare an individual assessment of the RPT candidate at this time. The DVF summary statement, vote tally, and department head assessment will be uploaded into the NC State University RPT online system for candidate review and further RPT actions according to NCSU POL05.20.01.