RUL 05.67.300 – Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Faculty Contract Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: September 4, 2002. Last Revised: December 17, 2024.

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Contact Info: Department Head (919-515-2324)

1. Introduction

This rule describes the standards and procedures for initial contract, subsequent contract, reappointment, promotion, and tenure in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and is supplemental to and consistent with the college rule and the university Academic Tenure Policy.

The vision of the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering is to be a global leader in chemical and biomolecular engineering education and research. Chemical engineering graduates are our product, and those graduates enter careers in industry, university teaching and research, or utilize their intellectual skills in an increasingly diverse set of other contributions to the global society.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

The six realms of faculty responsibility are set forth in NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR) and include the following: (1) teaching and mentoring of undergraduate and graduate students (referred to hereafter as teaching), (2) discovery of knowledge through discipline-guided inquiry (referred to hereafter as research), (3) creative artistry and literature (referred to hereafter as creative), (4) technological and managerial innovation (referred to hereafter as innovation), (5) extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university (referred to hereafter as extension), and (6) service to the profession, community and within the university (referred to hereafter as service). The manner in which various faculty members may demonstrate their contributions in these realms may vary widely. The assessment of a particular faculty member’s individual combination of contributions will be evaluated using the standards described in Sections 3-7.

3. General Standards

3.1 Evaluation based on performance of assigned responsibilities as described in the Statement of Faculty Responsibilities.

Each faculty member must progress from the potential (for promotion to Associate Professor) to the achievement (for promotion to Professor) of national or international recognition based on the faculty member’s contributions in their assigned responsibilities as stated in their Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. Reappointment, subsequent contract, promotion and/or tenure will be evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across their assigned responsibilities, including effective service to the institution. Also, at each rank, the department requires evidence of appropriate quality of scholarship and leadership in those realms of responsibility.

3.2 Teaching and Mentoring

For faculty with assigned effort in teaching, Evidence of good teaching must accompany each positive recommendation for reappointment, subsequent contract, promotion, and tenure. For faculty who teach and/or mentor students, there should be evidence of student success such as successful graduation and placement and student participation in scholarly activities (e.g., competitions, publications, presentations). Other mentoring or advising efforts can also be considered.

3.3 Research

Scholarship is the total of the faculty member’s activities that contribute to knowledge or application of knowledge. Scholarly activities include publishing papers in peer-reviewed journals, publishing monographs or textbooks, contributing chapters to edited works, presenting contributed and invited presentations at technical meetings and workshops, transferring technology to industry, filing and being awarded patent applications, and all other activities aimed at generating, contributing to or disseminating knowledge.

3.4 Leadership

Leadership is the ability to inspire, influence, or guide others. Leadership activities include membership and activity in professional societies; service on institutional, regional, national, and international committees and panels; developing new courses or programs; writing proposals and successfully competing for external support; organizing workshops and conferences; and supporting and directing graduate students to successful completion of advanced degrees.

3.5 Collegiality

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. A lack of collegiality and constructive cooperation are defined as behavior by the faculty member that negatively impacts the faculty member’s ability to fulfill their professional responsibilities or that negatively impacts the department’s ability to fulfill its academic mission.

3.6 Focus on quality of contributions

In reviewing a recommendation for reappointment, promotion and tenure, the focus is on quality of contributions. Evidence for quality of scholarship can include awards and honors (e.g., outstanding paper awards), numerous citations of publications by peers, wide adoption of a textbook, invited papers and talks (especially at the national or international level), successful patents, adoption of methods by peers in industry or at other universities, strong demand for high-level consulting services, external support through peer-reviewed proposals, and strong letters of recommendation from persons able to judge significance and quality of contributions. Activity and quantity are also important, but primarily to the extent that they have resulted in a body of work subject to peer review.

Evidence of quality of leadership can include election or appointment to positions of responsibility in professional societies and in technical conferences; service as editor of a respected journal; chairmanship of institutional, regional, national, and international committees, boards, and panels; peer evaluations of impact on engineering education and practice; outstanding teaching or service awards; substantial external research support; and outstanding service in an administrative position. Evidence is required that the candidate has met or exceeded appropriate qualifications and has demonstrated quality of scholarship and leadership appropriate to the recommended action. In considering cases involving the promotion and tenure of faculty, the College has established the qualifications and expectations of performance at each level, consistent with those articulated by the university in NCSU REG 05.20.18, as indicated in Sections 4-6.

4. Criteria for Appointment or Reappointment as Assistant Professor

4.1. Ability or definite promise in teaching, research, extension, and/or another scholarly or germane creative activity

4.2. Potential for directing teaching, research, graduate study, or extension activities

4.3. Ability and willingness to participate in university affairs

4.4. A doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience

4.5. For tenure-track Assistant Professor, reappointment at the rank of assistant professor requires that the individual is making satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure (Section 5).

4.6. For professional-track Assistant Teaching Professor and for Assistant Research Professor, subsequent additional appointment requires satisfactory performance in areas of responsibility.

5.0 Criteria for Promotion to or Appointment as Associate Professor

5.1. Recognized ability and potential for distinction in teaching, independent research, extension, and/or another scholarly or germane creative activity

5.2. Demonstrated ability to independently direct teaching, research, graduate study, or extension activities

5.3. Ability and willingness to participate in university affairs

5.4. A doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience

5.5. Professional faculty have academic tenure based on their contract. Other faculty are eligible for permanent tenure.

Promotion to Associate Professor will be evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across the faculty member’s contributions relative to the faculty member’s negotiated Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. In general, the expectation is that a faculty member will have demonstrated the potential to achieve national or international recognition for the faculty member’s contributions in their realms of responsibility.

6. Criteria for Promotion to or Appointment as Professor

6.1. Distinguished achievement in teaching, independent research, extension, and/or another scholarly or germane creative activity

6.2. Demonstrated ability to independently direct teaching, research, graduate study, or extension activities

6.3. Established reputation in the individual’s profession or field of scholarly or germane creative activity

6.4 Ability and willingness to participate in university affairs

6.5. A doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience

6.6. Professional faculty have academic tenure based on their contract. Other faculty are eligible for permanent tenure.

Promotion to the rank of professor will be evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across the faculty member’s contributions relative to the faculty member’s negotiated Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. In general, the expectation is that a faculty member will have achieved national or international recognition for the faculty member’s contributions in research, scholarly achievements, and leadership.

7. Procedures for Reappointment and Promotion Review for Tenure-Track and Professional Faculty

7.1 Definitions – The Departmental Voting Faculty (referred to hereafter as DVF) are defined according to the regulation or policy of the university.

7.1.1 The DVF for promotion and tenure of tenure-track assistant professors and for tenure of untenured associate professors includes all tenured associate and full professors.

7.1.2 The DVF for promotion of tenured associate professors includes all tenured full professors.

7.1.3 The DVF for promotion of professional faculty with professorial rank includes all tenured/tenure-track faculty at or above the rank being sought and all full-time professorially ranked professional faculty who are in the same track (i.e., teaching, research, etc.) as the candidate under review and at or above the rank being considered.

7.1.4 Ad hoc committees are appointed by the Department Head to review and prepare cases for a vote of the DVF. Ad hoc committees typically consist of two DVF members. Upon the request of The Department identify a list of external reviewers, which should include some of the suggestions of the candidate; the number of external reviewers will be chosen to meet Provost guidelines. The ad hoc committee requests the external reviewers to assess the candidate’s scholarly contributions using the letter template provided by the Provost’s office.

In all cases involving external letters, the letters will be made available for review by the DVF prior to and during the DVF discussion. If some letters have not yet been obtained prior to the discussion, the DVF may choose to delay the discussion or the vote until more letters are received. In any case, all letters received before the DVF vote are made available for review by the DVF. Letters received after the DVF vote will not be included in the dossier when it is sent to the COE RPT committee.

7.4 Review of Dossier by DVF

The ad hoc committee initiates the DVF discussion, reviewing the candidate’s dossier and providing an overview of the candidate’s contributions in the realms described in the SFR. The ad hoc committee does not make a recommendation regarding the action being considered. If unresolved questions arise during the DVF discussion, the ad hoc committee will work with the candidate to answer the questions before a subsequent meeting.

The ad hoc committee drafts a written summary assessment that captures the DVF discussion. The draft is made available to members of the DVF so that they may review and comment over a period of approximately 2 to 3 days. The ad hoc committee then finalizes the DVF written summary assessment that becomes part of the package.

The DVF vote is typically recorded electronically after the meeting and is anonymous. Ultimately, the vote reflects the collective judgment of the departmental voting faculty (DVF) in consideration of the standards presented in sections 4 to 6.

7.5 The Department Head writes an assessment and makes their recommendation.

7.6 The remainder of the process follows University policies.

8. Affiliate, Part-time, and Adjunct Faculty

8.1 For all faculty not eligible for the University promotional process, they may undergo a process for a rank and title change consistent with departmental processes outlined above.

8.2 For faculty who are Affiliate, if their faculty rank at another university or department changes, then the affiliate rank in CBE will also change.

8.3 For EHRA non-faculty associated with CBE or CBE centers, they may undergo a promotion process similar to the described in Section 7, ending with the department DVF and Head review. The letters requested for review can include internal ones. The Department Head has the final determination.