Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: September 4, 2002. Last Revised: April 13, 2026.

Related Policies:
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU REG 05.20.05 Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations and Responses in RPT Review
NCSU REG05.20.18 – Qualifications for Rank
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statement of Faculty Responsibilities
Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Contact Info: Dean of College of Engineering (919-515-2311)

---

 1. Introduction

1.1. This rule describes the standards and procedures for reappointment, promotion, and tenure in the College of Engineering and is supplemental to and consistent with the university Academic Tenure Policy.

1.2. The College of Engineering and its constituent departments are committed to providing outstanding teaching, research, extension, innovation, and service. Accordingly, departments are expected to give proper consideration to the performance of their faculty in the above areas as identified in their Statements of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR) when they are considered for subsequent contracts, reappointment, promotion, and tenure.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

The six realms of faculty responsibilities are provided in REG 05.20.27 – Statements of Faculty Responsibilities and include the following:

(1) Teaching and mentoring of undergraduate and graduate students (referred to hereafter as teaching and mentoring),

(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 Professional Societies and the Discipline, and Service and Engagement within the University itself (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 3-6.

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 realms as stated in their SFR. Reappointment, subsequent contract, promotion and/or tenure will be evaluated for each faculty member based on their assigned effort across the realms in their SFR, including effective service to the institution. The college also requires evidence of appropriate quality of scholarship and leadership in those realms of responsibility at each rank.

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.  Evidence of teaching quality may include: development or delivery of teaching workshops, publicly shared or recognized teaching materials, contributions to college or university level teaching committees or curricular development, teaching awards, testimonials from current or former students, and positive letters of recommendation from external references able to judge significance and quality of contributions. 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

Research is the total of the faculty member’s activities that contribute to the scholarship of discovery, the application of new knowledge, the scholarship of teaching, and/or the scholarship of integration which encompasses scholarly activities that are primarily interdisciplinary or interpretive in nature. Research and research activities include publishing papers in peer-reviewed journals or equivalent outlets, 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 new knowledge. In addition to these examples, teaching research activities also include innovation in education, development or improvements of courses within the department or institution, and the successful pursuit of funding to support educational programs.

3.4.  Evidence of Leadership in the Realms

Leadership is the ability to inspire, influence, or guide others. Leadership activities include serving as chair or leading major activities in professional societies; service on institutional, regional, national, and international committees and panels; developing new courses or programs; writing proposals as the lead Principal Investigator 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 college 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 and sustained contributions

In reviewing a recommendation for subsequent contracts, reappointment, promotion and tenure, the focus is on quality of contributions and the clear promise of sustained excellence. Evidence for quality of research 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 demonstrate a consistent trajectory and sustained contributions that will continue to yield significant impact.

Evidence of quality of leadership should be demonstrated in the different SFR realms. This evidence can include but is not limited to the 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.  The candidate must provide evidence of meeting or exceeding appropriate qualifications and demonstrate 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 REG 05.20.01, as indicated in Sections 4 through 6.

4. Criteria for Subsequent Contract or Reappointment as Assistant Professor

4.l. The following are considered for subsequent contract or reappointment as Associate Professor:

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

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

4.1.3. Ability and willingness to participate in university affairs; and

4.1.4. A doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience.

4.2. 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).

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

5. Criteria for Associate Professor

5.l. The following are considered for promotion to or subsequent contract for Associate Professor:

5.1.1 Recognized ability and potential for distinction in teaching, independent research, extension, and/or scholarly or germane creative activity;

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

5.1.3. Ability and willingness to participate in university affairs; and

5.4. A doctoral degree or equivalent professional experience.

5.2. Professional faculty have academic tenure based on their contract. Other faculty are eligible for permanent tenure. Subsequent contract requires satisfactory performance in areas of responsibility.

Promotion to Associate Professor will be evaluated for each faculty member based on their assigned effort across the realms in their SFR. 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 Professor

6.l. The following are considered for promotion to or subsequent contract for Professor:

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

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

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

6.1.4. Ability and willingness to participate in university affairs; and

6.1.5. 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. Subsequent contract requires satisfactory performance in areas of responsibility.

Promotion to the rank of professor will be evaluated for each faculty member based on their assigned effort across the realms in their SFR. 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 RPT Review

7.1. The College of Engineering procedure for Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) review is consistent with those articulated by the university.

7.2. The College of Engineering Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Committee (CRPTC) is made up of eight members, six being departmental representatives who are tenured full professors elected by their respective departments on a rotational basis, one member representing the College of Engineering (college associate dean for faculty development and success), and one member who holds the rank of a full teaching professor. The professional track faculty member will be elected by the college teaching committee. All rotating members will be approved by the dean. Each member serves for a three-year term, and one of the seven departmental members is appointed by the associate dean to serve as the chair for one year.

7.3. The CRPTC members must be full professors in the tenure track or professional teaching track. The tenure track members of the CRPTC will vote on every RPT candidate being considered by the CRPTC. The professional track faculty member of the CRPTC will only discuss and vote on the professional track faculty promotion cases. While serving on the CRPTC, members are not eligible to vote as part of their departmental DVF on faculty members in their home departments who are being considered for promotion and tenure. The college associate dean for faculty development and success, who serves as the college representative on the CRPTC, is also not allowed to vote at the departmental level.

7.4. After review of each candidate’s dossier, the voting faculty in each department (DVF), excluding the department head, vote on the proposed RPT action and provide a written assessment of the candidate’s qualifications and accomplishments. The candidate’s faculty activity report (Sections I-VII in the Faculty Excellence Portal) and the DVF assessment and vote are reviewed by the department head, who then produces a written assessment that includes a recommendation on the proposed action. The department head’s assessment is shared with the DVF and forwarded to the candidate along with the DVF assessment and tally of votes. The candidate is given a 5-day response period to provide a written response to the above assessments, vote and recommendation. Should the candidate choose to provide a written response, it must not exceed two pages in length and must be submitted to the department head within five days. The department head makes the response available to the DVF and forwards their written assessment and recommendation, along with the faculty written assessment, the vote results, any candidate response, and all the required supporting documentation in accordance with the aforementioned guidelines on reappointment, promotion and tenure, to the college for evaluation by the CRPTC. The CRPTC collectively reviews each personnel action and provides a written assessment and vote on the proposed action to the dean.

7.5. The CRPTC may seek input from the department head and the chair of the department RPT committee who is representing the DVF when clarification might be needed regarding the department assessments. When such circumstances arise, the CRPTC shall meet with the department head and/or the chair of the department RPT committee as the DVF representative to seek clarification.

7.6. The dean, in turn, reviews all relevant documents, including the personnel files, the departmental recommendations, and the recommendations of the CRPTC. The dean prepares a written assessment and recommendation that is shared with the CRPTC, department head, DVF and candidate. The candidate is given a 5-day response period to provide a written response to the above college assessments, vote and recommendation. Should the candidate choose to provide a written response, it must not exceed two pages in length and must be submitted to the dean within five days. The dean shares the response with the CRPTC, the department head, and the DVF, and forwards all of the department and college assessments, votes, and recommendations, and any candidate responses, to the provost along with all the required supporting documentation in accordance with the aforementioned guidelines.

7.7 Professional Track External Reviews

In accordance with REG 05.20.34 Professional Faculty Ranks and Appointments, which requires that each dean must establish for the college for all the categories of full-time (> 0.75 FTE) Professional Faculty with professorial rank whether to require external evaluation letters for the dossier, the dean of the College of Engineering has decided the following:

Assistant to Associate Clinical Professors: N/A

Associate to Full Clinical Professors: N/A

Assistant to Associate Extension Professors: N/A

Associate to Full Extension Professors: N/A

Assistant to Associate Research Professors: Letters required

Associate to Full Research Professors: Letters required

Assistant to Associate Teaching Professors: Letters not required

Associate to Full Teaching Professors: Letters required

Assistant to Associate Professors of the Practice: Letters required

Associate to Full Professors of the Practice: Letters required