RUL 05.67.407 – School of Public and International Affairs Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: November 2000Last Revised: September 29, 2009.  

Related Policies:
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU RUL05.67.411College of Humanities and Social Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Mutual Expectations
NCSU REG05.20.11 – Scholarly External Evaluations for RPT Review 
NCSU REG05.20.18 – Qualifications for Rank
NCSU REG05.20.20 – Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Contact Info: Director, School of Public and International Affairs (919-515-5069)


1.  INTRODUCTION

The School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA) Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) Standards and Procedures are based on the NC State University Academic Tenure Policy.

SPIA RPT standards are supplemental to and consistent with department, college, and university standards. The Board of Trustees (BOT) is the authority for final tenure approval.

The mission of the School of Public and International Affairs is to serve the university, North Carolina, and the nation with practical, knowledge-based analysis and educational offerings on government, public affairs and public policy, and to engage and inform citizens in a global society. SPIA pursues its mission through its political science, public administration, international studies, and leadership programs.

2.  AREAS OF FACULTY RESPONSIBILITY

In view of our mission, it is important that all members of the faculty be involved in teaching and mentoring students, research and publication, extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university, and service in professional societies and within the university itself. The areas of responsibility on which each faculty member will be evaluated will be defined in the faculty member’s Statement of Mutual Expectations.

3.  GENERAL STANDARDS

There is an expectation that faculty members demonstrate achievement in four areas: (1) teaching and mentoring students, (2) research and publication (3) extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university and (4) service in professional societies and within the university itself, except as noted in 5.3 and 5.4. University qualifications are documented in the regulation on Qualifications for Rank.

4.  STANDARDS FOR REAPPOINTMENT AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

When an assistant professor is reappointed after the initial three-year appointment, suggestions are made about what the assistant professor shall emphasize in the next three years to meet the department’s standards for tenure/promotion.

The assistant professor’s record in publication and teaching must show promise that a favorable tenure decision is likely in three years.

5.  STANDARDS FOR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR WITH TENURE

Standards for promotion cannot be reduced to a quantitative formula; for example, a specified number of books, articles, or average scores on course evaluations. Qualitative judgments have a major bearing on whether promotion is recommended.

The main criterion for promotion to associate professor is demonstrated ability and potential for distinction. The decision is based primarily on accomplishments in research/publication and teaching. Service and extension are secondary considerations in decisions on whether to recommend tenure/promotion.

The following points provide an indication of what tends to be emphasized by members of the departmental voting faculty (DVF) in applying the University’s standards.

5.1  Research and Publication

5.1.1 Demonstrated ability and potential for distinction in research is shown through significant scholarly publications during the candidate’s probationary period.

5.1.2 The following relative weights for types of publications are generally applicable.

5.1.2.a Authored academic books that present original research and/or thought, particularly those published by respected university presses and trade presses, will carry greater weight than textbooks that summarize a field.

5.1.2.b Authored books will be given greater weight than books that are edited collections of articles by other authors.

5.1.2.c Articles appearing in peer-reviewed journals will carry greater weight than those appearing in other journals or edited books.

5.1.2.d  Of peer-reviewed articles, those appearing in leading journals in the individual’s discipline will carry the greatest weight.

5.1.2.e  Peer-reviewed articles appearing in the leading journals in the individual’s fields of research will carry more weight than those appearing in more specialized journals.

5.1.2.f Peer reviewed articles will usually be given greater weight than research notes. Research notes, in turn, will usually be given more weight than book reviews, encyclopedia entries, proceedings, or technical manuals.

5.1.2.g Consideration will also be given to indirect measures of publication quality, including awards, citations, reviews and reprints.

5.1.2.h  A candidate should have (1) an authored academic book and other additional published scholarly research; (2) approximately five refereed journal articles in journals considered to be of high quality, with the expectation that exceptional journal quality may justify exceptions to these numbers; or (3) some equivalent combination of research publications.

5.1.3  Research grant proposals and awards will also be considered; factors taken into account will include the size of the research grant, the competitiveness of the grant, and the reputation of the granting organization.

5.1.4  Though encouraged to engage in collaborative research, an assistant professor is also expected to demonstrate scholarly independence.

5.1.5 Assistant professors are encouraged to seek and obtain support for their research from internal and external sources; to become actively involved in professional associations in their field, such as by presenting papers at their meetings; and to develop a network of professional contacts with similar research interests.

5.1.6  Accomplishments during the probationary period will be given greater weight than those that come before it.

5.2  Teaching

5.2.1  Evidence of good teaching is a necessary condition for tenure/promotion.

5.2.2  The following factors may be taken into account in evaluating teaching:

5.2.2.a  student course evaluations (also including a consideration of the level of the courses, the number of courses, and the grade distribution as shown in courses across a number of semesters.)

5.2.2.b  course syllabi

5.2.2.c  peer observation of classroom teaching

5.2.2.d  curriculum development, such as new and innovative courses or extensive revisions of existing ones

5.2.2.e  development and application of new teaching methods, technologies, and techniques

5.2.2.f  advising honors theses and graduate theses and dissertations

5.2.2.g  indicators of excellence, including outstanding teacher and/or advisor awards

5.3  Extension and Engagement

5.3.1  There are no specific requirements for involvement in extension and engagement, except when specified in a Statement of Mutual Expectations, but these activities will be considered in the tenure/promotion decision.

5.4  Service

5.4.1  Assistant professors are expected to carry out assigned responsibilities and participate in Department and SPIA meetings, ceremonies, and other activities.

5.4.2  There are no requirements for college or university level service for assistant professors, such as committee membership, but such activities will be considered in the tenure/promotion decision.

5.4.3  A superior record in college and university service does not compensate for performance in research and teaching that does not meet expectations.

6.  STANDARDS FOR PROFESSOR

Standards for promotion cannot be reduced to a quantitative formula; for example, a specified number of books, articles, or average scores on course evaluations. Qualitative judgments have a major bearing on whether promotion is recommended.

The criterion for promotion to full professor is distinguished achievement. Thus, key considerations in decisions on promotion are the professional progress and accomplishments of faculty members during their tenure as associate professor. Decisions on promotion to full professor normally give greatest weight to research and teaching, but service and extension are also taken into account.

The following points provide an indication of what tends to be emphasized by members of the DVF in applying the University’s standards.

6.1  Research and Teaching

6.1.1  Distinction in research is normally expected for promotion to (full) professor. Distinguished achievement in research implies a substantial and sustained contribution to the academic literature in the field of concentration of the faculty member, thereby earning him or her recognition as a leader in the discipline.

See sections 5.1 and 5.2 above for what is taken into account by members of the departmental voting faculty (DVF) in applying the University’s standards for teaching and research

6.2  Extension and Engagement

6.2.1  Involvement in extension and engagement activities is expected for promotion to full professor, unless specified otherwise in the Statement of Mutual Expectations. Outreach activities of various types are viewed favorably, particularly when they advance the program objectives of the department and SPIA.

Extension and engagement are normally weighted less than research and teaching in recommendations for promotion to full professor.

6.3  Service

6.3.1 University policy specifies “an ability and willingness to participate in university affairs” as a criterion for full professor. As an associate professor, the faculty member should have a history of assuming and effectively completing departmental and programmatic responsibilities that are assigned and make contributions to the programs and operations of the University, College, SPIA, department, and profession.

7.  PROCEDURES FOR RPT REVIEW

In any given year, an associate professor may request to be considered for promotion to full professor.

Before initiating a request, associate professors are encouraged to consult with the SPIA Director about their prospects for promotion. Faculty members in the political science department and the public administration department are also encouraged to consult with their department chair.

In the case of faculty in the political science and public administration departments, the department chair will advise the SPIA director on whether to recommend promotion.

Taking into the account the vote and written assessment of the DVF and the counsel of the chair of the department with which the faculty member is affiliated, the SPIA Director decides whether to recommend promotion to the Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. A favorable majority vote of the DVF does not ensure that promotion will be recommended.

7.1 Dossier Content

The materials to be assembled in the dossier for reappointment, promotion, and tenure are specified in the university’s Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements regulation.

7.2  External Evaluations

External letters are required in reviews for promotion and tenure. They should be prepared by persons of significant expertise and reputation in the candidate’s field of scholarship. The reviewers should not include persons who have a relationship with the candidate such that they might not be able to provide an objective assessment of the candidate’s work. There shall be at least five reviews of the candidate’s work. Two of the evaluators will be chosen from a list provided by the candidate. The remaining evaluators will be selected by the department chair and SPIA Director from persons specializing in the candidate’s field of scholarship.

7.3  Decisions

The DVF should consider the statement of mutual expectations in relation to the dossier in evaluating candidates for tenure and promotion.

7.3.1  Absentee votes may be submitted to the SPIA Director by faculty who are unable to attend the meeting. The SPIA director will make available the candidate’s dossier to eligible voting faculty who are on leave. Faculty members are encouraged to submit a written explanation with the absentee vote. The votes are tabulated and relayed with a summary of the discussion of the voting faculty to the Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. The recommendation of the SPIA Director is also conveyed to the Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences.

7.3.2  For a candidate who is primarily affiliated with the political science department or the public administration department, the appropriate department chair, after consulting with the appropriate departmental voting faculty of the department, will make a recommendation to SPIA director on whether to recommend reappointment or promotion.

7.3.3  Taking into account the vote and written assessment of the DVF and the counsel of the chair of the department with which the faculty member is affiliated, the SPIA director decides whether to recommend promotion to the Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. A favorable majority vote of the DVF does not ensure that reappointment or promotion will be recommended.