RUL 05.67.403 – Department of History Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: October 18, 2002. Last Revised: November 8, 2021.

Related Policies: 
NCSU RUL05.67.411 – College of Humanities and Social Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures
NCSU REG05.20.06 – Emeritus/Emerita Faculty Status Procedure
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statement of Faculty Responsibilities
NCSU POL01.05.02 – Academic Affairs and Personnel Committee Authority
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure

Additional References: 
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Contact Info:  Department Head (919-515-3307)


1. INTRODUCTION

This rule provides the standards and procedures for reappointment, promotion, and tenure in the Department of History at North Carolina State University. This rule is supplemental and consistent with NCSU RUL05.67.411 – College of Humanities and Social Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures and NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure. Final tenure approval is granted by North Carolina State University’s Board of Trustees, NCSU POL01.05.02 – Academic Affairs and Personnel Committee Authority.

2. AREAS OF FACULTY RESPONSIBILITY

History faculty of all ranks are expected to engage in teaching, research, and service according to the candidate’s Statement of Faculty Responsibility.

3. STANDARDS FOR REAPPOINTMENT AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

3.1 Research (Scholarship)

In the area of research, the DVF asks whether the assistant professor is an active scholar and is making progress on producing the significant contribution to knowledge that will be required for tenure and promotion to associate professor. Evidence in this area may consist of (but is not limited to) participation in and presentation of research at meetings of professional organizations; recognition in the profession through prizes and fellowships; drafts of work in progress; scholarly publications; and participation in and presentations of research through projects aimed at professional and public engagement.

3.2 Teaching

Effective teaching is essential. A demonstration of effective teaching may be shown by (but is not limited to) the following:

3.2.1  Student evaluations (and candidates’ reflections on them, when submitted).  When the DVF uses student evaluations, it should do so with full consideration of the most recent scholarship on bias in student evaluations of teaching

3.2.2  Peer observation

3.2.3  Involvement in graduate education through service on graduate committees, teaching of graduate seminars, etc.

3.2.4 Mentoring of students (undergraduate or graduate)

3.2.5  Participation in teaching workshops

3.2.6  Course syllabi and innovations, self-assessments

3.2.7  Use of research and scholarship in the classroom

3.2.8 Other data that might be included in a teaching portfolio

3.3 Service

Active participation in departmental, college, university, professional and/or community affairs is important. Evidence of this engagement may come from (but is not limited to):

3.3.1 Service on academic and professional committees (both within the department and beyond it)

3.3.2 Participation in university governance at any level

3.3.3 Presentations to secondary schools and community colleges, civic groups, extension programs, etc.

3.3.4. Public history-based community projects not listed in other categories that do not belong to the research category.

4. STANDARDS FOR PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR WITH TENURE

Promotion to associate professor with tenure in the History Department is awarded to teacher‑scholars who have achieved sufficient distinction to merit a permanent position in the department.  Primary importance will be given to teaching and scholarship in these decisions, though all three areas of performance that are outlined below will be considered according to each candidate’s Statement of Faculty Responsibility. The History department does not apply fixed or quantitative standards for tenure and promotion to associate professor. Instead, the DVF weighs qualitative contributions of candidates in three categories.

4.1 Research (Scholarship)

The candidate is expected to have demonstrated significant scholarly achievement whose quality will be evaluated by the DVF, informed by the letters of external reviewers.  Evidence of this achievement may consist of (but is not limited to):

4.1.1 The authorship of a peer-reviewed book that is already published or under a contract which assures its publication, and/or peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles or chapters in peer-reviewed books already published or scheduled for publication.

4.1.2 Participation in and presentation of research through a museum exhibition or exhibitions, digital or documentary history projects, policy paper, commissioned study, or other publicly engaged projects. Because research and creative activities related to public and digital history may take forms different from traditional scholarship, it is the responsibility of the candidate to thoroughly explain and document the quality and quantity of work (clearly stating their role in collaborative projects), its method of scholarly or professional evaluation, and its contribution to public engagement. Digital history projects should be submitted by the candidate and evaluated by the DVF in the form experienced by users, while public history projects should be submitted by the candidate and evaluated by the DVF in as close to practically possible to the form experienced by users.

4.1.3. The candidate is also expected to have demonstrated a pattern of research that suggests the potential for continued research accomplishment. The candidate is expected to have maintained an active scholarly profile as evidenced by participation in and presentation of research to meetings of professional organizations or at other institutions, and/or recognition in the profession through prizes and fellowships, etc.

4.2 Teaching

Effective teaching is essential. A demonstration of effective teaching may be shown by (but is not limited to) the following:

4.2.1

Student evaluations (and candidates’ reflections on them, when submitted). When the DVF uses student evaluations, it should do so with full consideration of the most recent scholarship on bias in student evaluations of teaching.

4.2.2 Peer observation

4.2.3 Involvement in graduate education through service on graduate committees, teaching of graduate seminars, etc.

4.2.4 Mentoring of students (undergraduate or graduate)

4.2.5 Participation in teaching workshops

4.2.6 Course syllabi and innovations, self-assessments

4.2.7 Use of research and scholarship in the classroom

4.2.8 Other data that might be included in a teaching portfolio

4.3 Service

Active participation in departmental, college, university, professional and/or community affairs is important. Evidence of this engagement may come from (but is not limited to):

4.3.1 Service on academic and professional committees (both within the department and beyond it)

4.3.2 Participation in university governance at any level

4.3.3 Presentations to secondary schools and community colleges, civic groups, extension programs, etc.

4.3.4. Public history-based community projects not listed in other categories

5. STANDARDS FOR PROMOTION TO PROFESSOR

In the promotion to professor, primary importance will be given to teaching and scholarship, though significant service will also be considered according to the individual candidate’s Statement of Faculty Responsibility.  The History Department does not apply fixed or quantitative standards for promotion to professor.  Instead the DVF (Professors) weigh qualitative contributions of candidates in all three categories.

5.1 Research (Scholarship)

The candidate is expected to demonstrate significant scholarly achievement beyond the material submitted for appointment or promotion to associate professor. Judgments on the significance of the work will be made by the DVF (Professors), informed by the letters of external reviewers. Evidence of such achievement may consist of (but is not limited to):

5.1.1 The authorship of a peer-reviewed book that is already published or under a contract which assures its publication, and/or peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles or chapters in peer-reviewed books already published or scheduled for publication.

5.1.2 National and or international recognition in the profession. In making this evaluation, the DVF (Professors) will weigh the totality of the candidate’s scholarly production over their career and the impact of that totality on their field. The candidate is expected to have maintained an active scholarly profile as evidenced by participation in and presentation of research to meetings of professional organizations or at other institutions, recognition in the profession through prizes and fellowships, etc.

5.1.3 Participation in and presentation of research through a museum exhibition or exhibitions, digital or documentary history projects, policy paper, commissioned study, or other publicly engaged projects. Because research and creative activities related to public and digital history may take forms different from traditional scholarship, it is the responsibility of the candidate to thoroughly explain and document the quality and quantity of work (clearly stating their role in collaborative projects), its method of scholarly or professional evaluation and its contribution to public engagement. Digital history projects should be submitted by the candidate and evaluated by the DVF in the form experienced by users, while public history projects should be submitted by the candidate and evaluated by the DVF in as close to practically possible to the form experienced by users.

5.2 Teaching

Effective teaching is essential. A demonstration of effective teaching may be shown by (but is not limited to) the following:

5.2.1 Student evaluations (and candidates’ reflections on them, if submitted) When the DVF uses student evaluations, it should do so with full consideration of the most recent scholarship on bias in student evaluations of teaching.

5.2.2 Peer observation

5.2.3 Involvement in graduate education through service on graduate committees, teaching of graduate seminars, etc.

5.2.4 Mentoring of students (undergraduate or graduate)

5.2.5 Participation in teaching workshops

5.2.6 Course syllabi and innovations, self-assessments

5.2.7 Use of research and scholarship in the classroom

5.2.8 Other data that might be included in a teaching portfolio

5.3 Service

Active participation in departmental, college, university, professional and/or community affairs is important. Evidence of this engagement may come from (but is not limited to):

5.3.1 Service on academic and professional committees (both within the department and beyond it)

5.3.2 Participation in university governance at any level

5.3.3 Presentations to secondary schools and community colleges, civic groups, extension programs, etc.

5.3.4. Public history-based community projects not listed in other categories

6. PROCEDURES

6.1 Reappointment of Assistant Professor

In addition to the procedures mandated by the Provost, the History Department has the following procedures for considering faculty members for reappointment as assistant professors:

6.1.1 At the beginning of the Fall semester, the Department Head sets the dates for the meetings of the DVF to consider reappointments and announces them to the DVF members.

6.1.2 In consultation with the Department Head, the candidate selects two tenured faculty members who serve as an ad hoc Committee to assemble the material for a consideration for reappointment. The responsibility of the Committee is to assist the candidate and the Department Head in reviewing the material and dossier for completeness and appropriateness and in assembling all necessary documents and information.

6.1.3 The material will be ready for review by all members of the DVF at least two weeks before the meeting of the DVF to consider reappointment.

6.1.4 The discussion of any individual candidate for reappointment must be completed within a single meeting. The DVF may choose to discuss more than one candidate in a single meeting, but must hold separate meetings to discuss different candidates should any DVF member so request.   Votes on each candidate will be sealed until all candidates have been reviewed and all votes have been completed in the DVF meeting(s).

6.1.5 Voting will be by written secret ballot. Arrangements for absentee voting will be announced by the Department Head prior to the meeting.

6.1.6 All Associate Professors with tenure and Professors are expected to attend all meetings of the DVF. Any tenured faculty member who cannot attend a DVF meeting will be asked by the Department Head to follow the Department’s procedures for absentee voting in RPT cases.

6.2 Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure

In addition to the procedures mandated by the Provost, the History Department has the following procedures for considering faculty members for promotion to the rank of associate professor with permanent tenure.

6.2.1 On or around May 1 of the year in which the consideration occurs, the Department Head sends letters to qualified external reviewers to request written evaluations of the candidate’s scholarship. A reviewer who agrees to submit an outside evaluation receives copies of all the candidate’s articles and books published to date, unless they inform the Department Head that  they already have the required material. The Department Head also sends all external reviewer’s documentation of publicly engaged projects that the candidate wishes to have sent for evaluation.

6.2.2 In the letters requesting their evaluations, external reviewers are informed that the Department Head must receive their evaluations by September 5th of the year in which the consideration occurs.

6.2.3 At the beginning of the fall semester, the Department Head sets the dates for the meetings of the DVF to consider tenure and promotion, and announces them to the DVF members.

6.2.4 In consultation with the Department Head, the candidate selects two tenured faculty members who serve as an ad hoc Committee to assemble the material for a consideration for tenure and promotion. The responsibility of the Committee is to assist the candidate and the Department Head in reviewing the material and dossier for completeness and appropriateness and in assembling all necessary documents and information.

6.2.5 The material will be ready for review by all members of the DVF at least two weeks before the meeting of the DVF to consider promotion and tenure is held.

6.2.6 The discussion of any individual candidate for promotion and tenure must be completed within a single meeting. The DVF may choose to discuss more than one candidate in a single meeting, but must hold separate meetings to discuss different candidates should any DVF member so request. Votes on each candidate will be sealed until all candidates have been reviewed and all votes have been completed in the DVF meeting(s).

6.2.7 Voting will be by written secret ballot. Arrangements for absentee voting will be announced by the Department Head prior to the meeting.

6.2.8 All Associate Professors with tenure and Professors are expected to attend all meetings of the DVF. Any tenured faculty member who cannot attend a DVF meeting will be asked by the Department Head to follow the Department’s procedures for absentee voting in RPT cases.

6.3 Promotion to Professor

In addition to the procedures mandated by the Provost, the History Department has the following procedures for considering faculty members for promotion to the rank of Professor:

6.3.1 Any Associate Professor may nominate themselves for consideration of promotion to Professor in the form of a signed letter to the Department Head by April 1st.

6.3.2 On or around May 1 of the year in which the consideration occurs, the Department Head sends letters to qualified external reviewers to request written evaluations of the candidate’s scholarship. An external reviewer who agrees to submit an outside evaluation receives the candidate’s vita and copies of all articles and books published to date, unless they informs the Department Head that they already have the required material. The Department Head also sends all external reviewers’ documentation of publicly engaged projects that the candidate wishes to have sent for evaluation.

6.3.3 In the letters requesting their evaluations, external reviewers are informed that the Department Head must receive their evaluations by September 5th of the year in which the consideration occurs.

6.3.4 At the beginning of the Fall semester, the Department Head sets the dates for the meetings of the DVF (Professors) to consider promotions and announces them to the DVF (Professors) members.

6.3.5 In consultation with the Department Head, the candidate selects two Professors who serve as an ad hoc Committee to assemble the material for a consideration for promotion to Professor. The responsibility of the Committee is to assist the candidate and the Department Head in reviewing the material and dossier for completeness and appropriateness and in assembling all necessary documents and information.

6.3.6 The material (including copies of published and unpublished scholarship) will be ready for review by all members of the DVF (Professors) at least two weeks before the meeting of the DVF (Professors) to consider promotion is held.

6.3.7 The discussion of any individual candidate for promotion to Professor must be completed within a single meeting. The DVF (Professors) may choose to discuss more than one candidate in a single meeting, but must hold separate meetings to discuss different candidates should any DVF (Professors) member so request.  Votes on each candidate will be sealed until all candidates have been reviewed and all votes have been completed in the DVF (Professors) meeting(s).

6.3.8 Voting will be by written secret ballot. Arrangements for absentee voting will be announced by the Department Head prior to the meeting.

6.3.9 All Professors are expected to attend all meetings of the DVF (Professors). Any Professor who cannot attend a DVF (Professors) meeting will be asked by the Department Head to follow the Department’s procedures for absentee voting in RPT cases.