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: May 25, 2017.

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 – Statements of Mutual Expectations
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. Generally, faculty will devote 40% of their time to teaching, 40% to research, and 20% to service.

3. STANDARDS FOR REAPPOINTMENT AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

3.1 Teaching

An assistant professor must have demonstrated that he/she is an effective teacher, with one of the standards for effectiveness being the ability to communicate research and scholarship in the classroom. A demonstration of effective teaching may come from (but is not limited to) student evaluations, collegial observation, participation in teaching workshops, course syllabi and innovations, self-­assessments, and other data that might be included in a teaching portfolio.

3.2 Research

In the area of research, the DVF asks whether the assistant professor is proving to be 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 a museum exhibition, digital or documentary history project, policy paper, commissioned study, or other publically engaged projects..

3.3 Service

Service may take a variety of forms of active participation in operation of the department, college or university; professional organizations, and community affairs. These include (but are not limited to) service on faculty committees (whether within the department or beyond it), participation in academic governance at any level, involvement in professional organizations, lectures to secondary schools and community colleges, civic groups, extension programs, and public history-based community projects.

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 and in the History (or Art History) profession. 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. The History department does not apply fixed or quantitative standards for tenure and promotion to associate professor. Instead, the Department weighs qualitative contributions of candidates in three categories. Although considerations of enrollment, budget, and personnel limitations may affect the final campus determination to grant tenure, they will in no way influence Departmental Voting Faculty decisions.

4.1 RESEARCH (Scholarship)

A significant contribution to historical knowledge is paramount. Evidence of this contribution may consist of (but is not limited to):

4.1.1 The authorship of a peer‑reviewed book or scholarly articles (including journal articles and book chapters)

4.1.2 Participation in and presentation of research to meetings of professional organizations, recognition in the profession through prizes and fellowships, etc.

4.1.3. Participation in and presentation of research through a museum exhibition or exhibitions, digital or documentary history projects, policy paper, commissioned study, or other publically engaged projects.

4.2 TEACHING

4.2.1 Efficacious teaching is essential. A demonstration of efficacious teaching may come from (but is not limited to):

4.2.1a Student evaluations

4.2.1b Collegial observation

4.2.2 Participation in teaching workshops

4.2.2a Course syllabi and innovations, self‑assessments

4.2.2b Use of research and scholarship in the classroom

4.2.2c Other data that might be included in a teaching portfolio.

4.2.3. Participation in public programs that draw upon faculty expertise.

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.

5. STANDARDS FOR PROMOTION TO PROFESSOR

In the promotion to  professor, paramount importance will be given to teaching and scholarship, though service will also be considered. The History Department has consistently rejected fixed quantitative standards for promotion to  professor. Instead, it has chosen to weigh the qualitative balance in all categories on a case-by-case basis.

5.1 RESEARCH (Scholarship)

5.1.1 Evidence of substantial contribution to historical scholarship beyond the material submitted for appointment or promotion to associate professor.

5.1.2 Evidence of national and/or international recognition in the profession.

5.1.3 The committee will also weigh the totality of a candidate’s scholarly production over his/her career and the impact of that totality on his/her field.

5.2 TEACHING

5.2.1 Evidence of the effective application of research to teaching, as manifested, for example, in new courses, appropriate and challenging syllabi and reading lists, web pages, contributions to the scholarship of teaching and learning, distance education.

5.2.2 Effectiveness in classroom teaching, as demonstrated, for example, by student evaluations, classroom observation, etc. Involvement in graduate education, where appropriate, through, for example, service on graduate committees, teaching of graduate seminars.

5.3 SERVICE

5.3.1 Continued effectiveness in service on department, college, or university committees.

5.3.2 Active participation in departmental affairs and activities.

5.3.3 Continued involvement in the non‑university community. These activities could include Humanities Extension programs, lectures to high schools and community groups, responses to media requests, etc.

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 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 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 Head in reviewing the material and dossier for completeness and appropriateness and in assembling all necessary documents and information.

6.1.3 The material  (including copies of published and unpublished scholarship) 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 Head sends letters to appropriate outside scholars requesting written evaluations of the candidate’s scholarship. A scholar who agrees to submit an outside evaluation receives copies of all the candidate’s articles and books published to date, unless he/she informs the Head that he/she already has the required material. The Head also sends all outside reviewers’ copies of all work in progress that the candidate wishes to have sent for evaluation.

6.2.2 In the letters requesting their evaluations, outside evaluators are informed that the Head must receive their evaluations by September 15th  of the year in which the consideration occurs.

6.2.3 At the beginning of the fall semester, the 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 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 Head in reviewing the material and dossier  for completeness and appropriateness and in assembling all necessary documents and information.

6.2.5 The material  (including copies of published and unpublished scholarship) 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 him/herself for consideration of promotion to Professor in the form of a signed letter to the Head by April 15th.

6.3.2 On or around May 1 of the year in which the consideration occurs, the Head sends letters to appropriate outside scholars requesting written evaluations of the candidate’s scholarship. A scholar who agrees to submit an outside evaluation receives the candidate’s vita and copies of all articles and books published to date, unless he/she informs the Head that he/she already has the required material. The Head also sends all outside reviewers’ copies of all work in progress that the candidate wishes to have sent for evaluation.

6.3.3 In the letters requesting their evaluations, outside evaluators are informed that the Head must receive their evaluations by September 15th  of the year in which the consideration occurs.

6.3.4 At the beginning of the Fall semester, the 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 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 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 (Professor) meeting will be asked by the Head to follow the Department’s procedures for absentee voting in RPT cases.