RUL 05.67.308 – College of Engineering Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: September 4, 2002. Last Revised: March 6, 2015.

Related Policies:
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure

NCSU REG05.20.19 – Realms of Faculty Responsibility
NCSU REG05.20.18 – Qualifications for Rank
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Mutual Expectations

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 and service. Accordingly, departments are expected to give proper consideration to the performance of their faculty in the above areas as identified in their Statement of Mutual Expectations when they are considered for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. In addition to those individuals for whom a reappointment, promotion, or tenure decision is mandatory, each department shall also review all other eligible faculty each year to determine which individuals should be considered for any of the above personnel actions.

  1. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

The realms of faculty responsibilities include: teaching and mentoring students, discovery of knowledge through discipline-guided inquiry, technological and managerial innovation, extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university, and service in professional societies and within the university itself. The manner in which various faculty members may demonstrate their credentials in these realms varies from individual to individual. Thus, an assessment of a particular faculty member’s individual combination of contributions will be evaluated using the standards described in Sections 3-6.

  1. General Standards

3.1. Reappointment, promotion and/or tenure is evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across these dimensions with due consideration to effective service to the institution. Evidence of good teaching must accompany each positive recommendation for personnel action. In addition to positive performance in those areas supporting the mission of the university, each faculty member is expected to work in a collegial manner.

3.2. In general, the expectation is that each faculty member will 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 scholarship and leadership. For promotion to Professor, cumulative outstanding leadership within the university that contributes to the national or international recognition of university programs may be heavily weighed in lieu of the faculty member’s individual national or international recognition for scholarship and leadership.

3.3. The general standards are:

3.3.1. Evidence of good teaching as demonstrated through student evaluations, peer review evaluation of teaching, and in-class observation of teaching methodology and class conduct.

3.3.2. Evidence of quality scholarship and leadership in one or more of education, research, extension, and institutional service.

  1. a) In this document, scholarship refers to activities that contribute to knowledge or application of knowledge. Scholarly activities include publishing papers in peer-reviewed journals and refereed conference proceedings, publishing monographs or textbooks, contributing chapters to edited works, presenting contributed and invited presentations at technical meetings and workshops, transferring technology to industry, filing patent applications, and all other activities aimed at generating, contributing to or disseminating knowledge.
  2. b) Leadership refers to ability to inspire, influence, or guide others. Leadership activities include membership and activity in professional societies and technical conferences; service on institutional, regional, national, and international committees and panels; developing new courses; writing proposals and successfully competing for external support; organizing workshops and conferences; and supporting and directing graduate students to successful completion of advanced degrees.

3.3.3. Evidence that the candidate has met or exceeded appropriate qualifications and has demonstrated quality of scholarship and leadership appropriate to the recommended action.

  1. a) 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 05.20.18, as indicated in sections 4 – 6.
  2. Criteria for Reappointment as Assistant Professor

4.l. 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

  1. Criteria for Associate Professor with Tenure

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

5.2. Demonstrated ability to 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

  1. Criteria for Professor

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

6.2. Demonstrated ability to 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

  1. Procedures for RPT Review

7.1. The College of Engineering procedure for 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 five members, four being departmental representatives elected by their respective departments on a rotational basis, and one member representing the College of Engineering (College associate dean representative). Each member serves for a three-year term, and one of the four departmental members is elected by the committee members to serve as the chair for one year.

7.3. The departmental CRPTC members must be tenured full professors. Members of the CRPTC will vote on every RPT candidate being considered by this college-wide committee. CRPTC members, however, 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 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, votes on the proposed RPT action and provides a written assessment of the candidate’s qualifications and accomplishments. The candidate’s PA-2 form 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 the opportunity of providing 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 his/her 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 College Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Committee (CRPTC). This committee 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 one faculty member representing the DVF when clarification might be needed or when a discrepancy exists between the DVF and department head assessments. When such circumstances arise, the CRPTC shall meet with the department head and a DVF representative for further discussion and 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 the opportunity of providing 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 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 In accordance with REG 05.20.34 Non-Tenure Track Faculty Ranks and Appointments Section 9.1.3 which requires that each Dean must establish for the college for all the categories of full-time (> 0.75 FTE) NTT faculty with professorial rank whether to require external evaluation letters for the dossier, the Dean of the College of Engineering has decided the following:

 

Clinical Assistant/Associate: N/A

Clinical Associate/Full Professors: N/A

Extension Assistant/Associate: N/A

Extension Associate/Full Professors: N/A

Research Assistant/Associate: Letters required

Research Associate/Full Professors:Letters required

Teaching Assistant/Associate: Letters not required

Teaching Associate/Full Professors:Letters required

Assistant/Associate Professors of the Practice:Letters required

Associate/Full Professors of the Practice:Letters required