RUL 05.67.25 Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering Professional Faculty Contract and Promotion Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History:  First Issued: December 6, 2024

Related Policies:

NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU REG05.20.34 – Professional Faculty Ranks and Appointments
NCSU REG05.20.20 – Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements\
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Faculty Responsibilities
REG 05.20.05 – Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations and Responses in RPT Review
NCSU RUL05.67.22 – College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures
NCSU RUL05.67.05 – Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

 

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This rule provides the standards and procedures for initial contracts, subsequent contracts, and promotion of professional faculty in the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering at North Carolina State University (“NC State”). This rule is supplemental to and consistent with university and college rules on professional faculty. Only professional faculty appointed at 0.75 FTE and above are eligible for promotion. The Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering recognizes that the specific activities upon which professional faculty are evaluated will vary.

2. AREAS OF PROFESSIONAL FACULTY RESPONSIBILITY

NC State specifies contributions in six (6) Realms of Faculty Responsibility as the principal standards for decisions about faculty promotion and subsequent contract. Except as provided by NCSU REG 05.20.34, the department requires that professional-track faculty distribute their efforts to some combination of these realms as outlined and proportioned in their Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR).

The realm(s) of responsibility that are applicable for professional faculty members of the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering in the Lecturer, Teaching, Research, and Extension tracks are either teaching or research or extension or service or a combination of aforementioned responsibilities as mutually agreed upon between the faculty and the department head and documented in their SFR.

3. GENERAL STANDARDS

The department utilizes the Glassick Standards for evaluation of scholarly accomplishments. The department recognizes the importance of a mix of activities leading to creative scholarship and supports the NCSU REG05.20.19 – Realms of Faculty Responsibility. The areas of responsibility for an individual faculty member will be described in their SFR.

Publication as a form of scholarship should encompass the quantity, quality and most appropriate form and outlet as determined by their SFRs.

Receipt of awards and honors provides a basis for quantifying recognition. Other examples are invitations to participate in symposia, to hold editorships, serve on national, regional and state review panels and policy panels. Nomination and election to positions of leadership in professional societies also indicate recognition.

Cumulative outstanding leadership within the university that contributes to the national or international recognition of university programs may be heavily weighted in lieu of the faculty member’s individual national or international recognition for scholarship and leadership.

3.1 Instruction Contributions-Teaching and Mentoring of Undergraduate and Graduate Students

3.1.1. Scholarly accomplishments in teaching, learning and advising are manifested in numerous ways via contributions in the instructional area. Creativity and innovation in the development of courses, pedagogical approaches, and contributions to curricular quality contribute to the scholarship of teaching. Some aspects of a professional faculty member’s teaching creativity should lead to scholarly publications on teaching methods, textbooks, laboratory manuals, audiovisual, computer-based educational programs, and other scholarly products. Invitations to participate in symposia, conferences, workshops and other activities related to teaching are important measures of recognition by peers on the regional, national, or international level. Effort and success in obtaining support via grants, contracts, gifts, etc. for the development and delivery of instructional material is important.

3.1.2. Teaching effectiveness must be evaluated by responses on student questionnaires as well as through evaluation by peers, e.g. direct observation of classroom teaching, examination of the syllabus, exercises and tests. Although single or infrequent observations can provide some data, regular observations are more valuable and useful. Evaluation of teaching as per NCSU REG 05.20.10 will be followed.

3.1.3. Standardized instruments such as ClassEval developed for course and instructor evaluation are expected, but in special cases (such as graduate-level courses or highly specific, low-enrollment courses) more appropriate methods may be used. Instructors should routinely remind and encourage students to utilize ClassEval. Specific written comments from students are valuable in all aspects of evaluating teaching effectiveness.

3.1.4. Academic advising is an integral part of the teaching responsibility and must be considered in any evaluation. A survey of students at or after graduation is an appropriate way to evaluate the effectiveness of faculty advising. Faculty should encourage students to utilize the college instrument developed for advising evaluation at least once a year to obtain feedback from students and the results from these assessments should be discussed with the department head. Advising load is another factor to be considered and must be managed by the department head.

3.1.5. Honors, awards, and other special recognitions are other important indicators of quality and dedication to teaching.

3.1.6. Training of graduate students and postdoctoral scholars is an important contribution to a field. Success of graduates is an important measure of the strength of a program. Peer review and publication of graduate student and postdoctoral scholars’ research is a strong indication of effective mentoring.

3.2 Research Contributions – Discovery of Knowledge Through Discipline-Guided Inquiry

The Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering values the discovery of knowledge in many forms. Appropriate evidence for evaluation on of discovery of knowledge may include, but is not limited to:

3.2.1. Research productivity is usually equated with conducting research and reporting results in peer-reviewed journals, however, it also takes other forms. These forms may include the publication of books and the production of scholarly works of a form and type determined by the department or discipline including the development of computer software and related applications for Biological and Agricultural Engineering. While quantity is an important indicator of regular activity, more significant is the quality of the contribution to new knowledge in the field and its integration into practical application. The department must determine the relative weight given to various types and forms of research activity. Expectations for individual faculty members will depend upon their assignment as set forth in their SFRs. For research publications, the college and the department define a peer-reviewed publication to have undergone review by peers selected by an editorial board of a reputable, cited journal.

3.2.2. Effort and success in attracting extramural funding is important. This funding may take the form of direct grants, university mini-grants, memoranda of agreements, unrestricted gifts, in-kind support, and collaborative efforts.

3.2.3. Although independent research is often the basis of research activities and recognition, collaborative research is also important. It is often the basis for substantive support and the advancement of knowledge. Ability to cooperate with other faculty members is an important personal characteristic. Cooperation may include participating in successful regional programs.

3.3. Extension Contributions-Extension and Engagement with Constituents Outside the University: The Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering values extension and engagement in many forms, as generally outlined below:

3.3.1. Extension and Engagement responsibilities include a variety of scholarly activities and efforts. Examples are technical assistance, applied research, and a variety of formal and non-formal educational efforts.

3.3.2. The programs developed and implemented must be coherent and focused in the area of responsibility with continuity among program activities. Effort must be focused on meeting the needs of clientele. Changes in program efforts may be appropriate with changes in political, financial or social emphasis and support and should be incorporated in a revised SFR. When appropriate, there should be a documented partnership with field faculty and a relationship between the program and the Cooperative Extension Plan of Work must be evident in goals and accomplishments.

3.3.3. Documented impacts must include the use of state-of-the-art techniques and innovative approaches that maximize benefits from the extension and engagement efforts. Impacts should include effective contributions to local, state and /or the larger society through the production of innovative materials and new approaches to solving problems. Evidence of accomplishments may include innovative instructional materials or demonstrations, technical assistance, and other methods.

3.3.4. Leadership and participation in interdisciplinary teams in development and delivery of extension programs must be documented. This includes cooperative relationships with other faculty within and outside the College, and with organizations that serve the same clientele.  Effective leadership recognized by peers and clientele at the local, regional, and national levels should be demonstrated.

3.3.5. Continuous improvement in the field of concentration should be documented through increasing and updating skills, keeping abreast of clientele needs, and developing and applying relevant new knowledge. Recognized professional achievement through the production of refereed publications, peer reviewed extension publications, honors, awards, exhibitions, prizes, invited papers, and presentations should be achieved. Publication as a form of scholarship should encompass the quantity, quality and most appropriate form and outlet as set forth in the faculty member’s SFR.

3.3.6. Efforts at and success in attracting extramural funding is important. This may be in the form of direct grants, university mini-grants, memoranda of agreements, unrestricted gifts, in kind support and collaborative efforts.

3.4 Service contributions-Service to Professional Societies and the Discipline and Service and Engagement within the University: The Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering values service to both the university and the profession in many forms as per the following general guidelines.

3.4.1. All professional track 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.

3.4.2. The department recognizes that collegiality and 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. 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.

4. STANDARDS & PROCEDURES FOR PROFESSIONAL FACULTY IN THE LECTURER TRACK

4.1 Standards for Initial Contract as Lecturer

To be eligible to serve as a lecturer in the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, the candidate must have obtained a master’s degree in Biological and Agricultural Engineering or a related discipline. The candidate is also expected to have excellent oral and written communication skills along with an enthusiasm for interacting with the students and a strong commitment to engineering and technology education for the twenty-first century. The initial contract period is typically four years or on a case-by-case basis as determined by the department head.

4.2 Standards for Subsequent Contract as Lecturer

Subsequent Contract as Lecturer requires that the faculty member provide clear evidence of a demonstrated ability in accordance with his/her individual assignment as outlined in the individual’s most recent letter of offer and as described in the Statement of Faculty Responsibilities.

4.3 Standards for Promotion as Senior Lecturer

Departmental voting faculty decisions on promotion to Senior Lecturer will be made based on evidence that the faculty has an established program in accordance with their SFRs. The evidence must include the types of items set forth in Section 3 of this document. At a minimum, promotion to Senior Lecturer will require:

4.3.1. At least five years college-level teaching experience

4.3.2. Recognized ability for distinction in teaching, mentoring students, and associated other scholarly activity that is germane to the faculty member’s assignment.

4.3.3. Clearly documented achievements, as appropriate for the individual’s SFR, that demonstrate success in developing a classroom or outreach teaching program.

4.3.4. Clear service-type contributions to department, college, university, and professional affairs as appropriate.

4.4. Procedures for Change from Senior Lecturer to Assistant Teaching Professor or Assistant Research Professor or Assistant Extension Professor

In some situations, such as when the candidate acquires an advanced degree, the title of a senior lecturer may be changed to an Assistant Teaching Professor, or an Assistant Research Professor or an Assistant Extension Professor. Such changes are taken up by the department on a case-by-case basis. The minimum standards for serving as an assistant professor in all tracks are outlined in 5.1. Generally, the candidates are identified by the department head. However, mentors, other departmental voting faculty (DVF) as described in NCSU REG 05.20.34, or the candidates themselves may also initiate a change of title.

5. STANDARDS FOR PROFESSIONAL FACULTY WITH PROFESSORIAL RANK

5.1 Standards for Initial Contract as Assistant Teaching Professor, Assistant Research Professor, and Assistant Extension Professor

To be eligible to serve as an assistant professor in the teaching, research or extension tracks in the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, the candidate, at the minimum, must have obtained a doctoral degree in Biological and Agricultural Engineering or a related discipline with a documented record of accomplishments and scholarship. Depending on the specific track, successful candidates will have a strong interest and demonstrated ability in undergraduate/graduate education and mentoring, extension, outreach, basic and applied research with a commitment to equity, inclusivity, and diversity. The initial contract period is typically four years or on a case-by-case basis as determined by the department head.

5.2 Standards for Subsequent Contract as Assistant Teaching Professor, Assistant Research Professor, and Assistant Extension Professor

Subsequent Contract as an assistant professor in the teaching, research or extension tracks requires that the faculty member of respective track provide clear evidence of an established program in accordance with his/her individual assignment as set forth in the individual’s original letter of offer and as described in the SFR. Evidence must include items set forth in Section 3 of this document as applicable to the respective track and show that the faculty member is making progress toward meeting the standards for an assistant professor in the teaching, research, or extension tracks, respectively.

5.3. Standards for Promotion to Associate Teaching Professor, Associate Research Professor, and Associate Extension Professor

There must be documentation of regular contributions to the discipline in appropriate forms.  These contributions should be defined more broadly than the publication of research, as many different forms of scholarly activity contribute to the field.

Faculty must have established a regional reputation. Satisfactory progress towards the development of a national reputation should also be evident, as reputation among peers is important in evaluating faculty.

Departmental voting faculty decisions on promotion to Associate Professor will be made based on evidence that the faculty has an established program in accordance with their SFRs. The evidence must include the types of items set forth in Section 3 of this document. At a minimum, promotion to the Associate Professor level for each track will require:

5.3.1. Recognized ability for distinction in teaching, independent research, extension and/or other scholarly activity that is germane to the faculty member’s assignment.

5.3.2. Clearly documented achievements, as appropriate for the individual’s SFR, that demonstrate success in developing a classroom or outreach teaching program, an applied and/or basic research program, active participation and leadership of graduate programs, and/or leadership of appropriate extension programs.

5.3.3. Clear service-type contributions to department, college, university and professional affairs.

5.3.4. Clear evidence of progress toward development of a national reputation in the field.

5.3.5. Appropriate publication of scholarly activities performed at NC State.

5.4. Standards for Subsequent Contract as Associate Teaching Professor, Associate Research Professor, and Associate Extension Professor

Subsequent Contract as an associate professor in the teaching, research or extension tracks requires that the faculty member of respective track provide clear evidence of an established program in accordance with his/her individual assignment as set forth in the individual’s original letter of offer and as described in the Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. Evidence must include items set forth in Section 3 of this document as applicable to the respective track and show that the faculty member is making progress toward meeting the standards for an associate professor in the teaching, research or extension tracks, respectively.

5.5. Standards for promotion to Teaching Professor, Research Professor, and Extension Professor

DVF decisions on promotion to Professor (for each track) will be made based on evidence that the faculty has an established program in accordance with their SFR. The evidence must include the types of items set forth in Section 3 of this document and that both a national and international reputation in his/her field exists.  At a minimum, appointment to the professor level will require:

5.5.1. Distinguished achievement and leadership in teaching, in independent applied and/or basic research, or in extension and/or other scholarly activity that is germane to the faculty member’s assignment.

5.5.2. Clearly documented ability, as appropriate for the individual’s SFR, that demonstrates continuing and increasing success in developing a classroom or outreach teaching program, applied and/or basic research program, continued active participation and leadership of graduate programs, and/or continued leadership of appropriate extension programs.

5.5.3. Clear service type contributions to the department, college, and university; as well as at the national and international level for professional organizations.

5.5.4. Clear evidence of the development of a national and international reputation in the field.

5.5.5. Appropriate publication of scholarly activities in the individual’s realm of teaching, research, and extension.

5.6. Standards for Subsequent Contract as Teaching Professor, Research Professor, and Extension Professor

Subsequent Contract as a professor in the teaching, research or extension tracks requires that the faculty member of respective track provide clear evidence of an established program in accordance with his/her individual assignment as set forth in the individual’s original letter of offer and as described in the SFR. Evidence must include items set forth in Section 3 of this document as applicable to the respective track and show that the faculty member is making progress toward meeting the standards for a professor in the teaching, research or extension tracks, respectively.

6. Procedures

6.1. Mentoring and annual review by Department Head

It is critical that faculty understand the process to the maximum extent possible so that they can most effectively participate.

Each year, when the Department Head meets with faculty to discuss annual accomplishments, program directions, and mutual expectations; he/she shares with them the general needs and expectations for subsequent contract and/or promotion.

The Department also has a formal mentoring program in which each faculty member at lecturer, assistant, and associate level will be assigned two senior faculty mentors. The mentors will work with the faculty member to help set priorities, develop his/her primary and secondary programs, and resolve problems. They will assist the faculty members to be aware of the expectations for reappointment and promotion and keep them informed as to changes in policies and procedures.

6.2. Identification of candidates to be considered during a given year

First, there may be candidates for whom consideration is mandatory based on university rules for initial contracts. Thus, first-term professional faculty with a typical 4-year contract must be considered for subsequent contract prior to the end of their second year.

There is no mandatory year for promotions for professional-track faculty. However, depending on the individual merit, the candidates for promotion may be identified by the department head, mentors, other DVF, or by the candidates themselves.

6.3. Preliminary preparation of dossier by candidate

During annual spring meetings between the department head and individual faculty members, one topic of discussion is the subsequent contract and promotion process and a preliminary evaluation is made of the status of potential candidates. Candidates identified by any of the above listed sources are then asked to prepare a preliminary dossier that consists of evidence of accomplishments and scholarship as advised by the department head. For the renewal of the contracts and for the promotion to senior lecturer, the dossier will consist of a candidate statement, updated CV, and faculty activity reports for the current contract period. For the promotion cases for all professorial ranks, a full dossier is required.

6.4. Review of the preliminary package by departmental voting faculty (DVF)

All faculty members who prepare preliminary dossiers are requested to prepare those packages by July 1st. These packages are then electronically distributed to the DVF. The DVF are asked to review the preliminary packages and provide input to both the department head and to the candidates concerning both the merit of the proposed action and the state of the package. This preliminary review is used by the department head and ultimately the candidate to decide whether to proceed with the promotion process.

6.5 Preparation of final package by candidate

If the faculty member decides to proceed (or if consideration is mandatory), the candidate is requested to finalize the portions of the dossier package which are the responsibility of the candidate. This should be completed by late August.

6.6. Solicitation of reviews by external evaluators

For candidates in the professorial ranks undergoing a promotion review, external evaluators are chosen to review the dossier package including examples of the candidate’s work. The final decision on external evaluators is made by the department head, subject to NCSU REG05.20.05-Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations and Responses in RPT Review, after consultation with the candidate and DVF. Evaluators should be selected with the aim of obtaining evaluations from at least five (5) individuals with representation across the realms of responsibility in the SFR. Evaluators are not asked for a judgment about promotion. Instead, they are asked for their professional judgment on the impact and quality of the candidate’s contributions. The packages should be sent to external evaluators by September 1st and evaluation letters received by September 30th.

6.7. Discussion and vote by Departmental Voting Faculty

The dossier package prepared by the candidate is then distributed to the DVF for consideration at a meeting called during September/October. At the DVF meeting, the dossier will be discussed on the merits of each proposed action. The discussion concerning each proposed action will be summarized by members of the faculty designated by the department head. The summary of the DVF discussion will become a part of the dossier package.

Departmental voting faculty are expected to make every possible effort to attend the meeting to consider RPT packages. However, it is inevitable that there may be unavoidable conflicts.  The DVF who are unable to attend are encouraged to provide in advance written comments to the department head for inclusion in the discussion at the meeting.  All members of the DVF are required to participate in a formal vote subjective to NCSU REG05.20.05-Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations and Responses in RPT Review within 3 business days of the DVF discussion meeting.

7. Any modification of this department RUL shall be approved by a vote of all tenure-track faculty and all full-time professional faculty who are at the rank of associate and full and require a majority vote of support. A vote shall be taken either by secret ballot or open ballot, with the method of voting to be decided by a majority vote of the DVF.