RUL 05.67.804 – Department of Communication Appointment and Promotion of Professorial Teaching Faculty

History: First Issued: August 26, 2019.

NCSU RUL 05.67.413 College of Humanities and Social Sciences Appointment and Promotion of Non-Tenure Track Faculty Standards and Procedures
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU REG05.20.03 – Annual Reviews of Faculty Members
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Faculty Responsibilities

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website

1. INTRODUCTION

This rule describes the Department of Communication’s, hereafter referred to as the Department, appointment and promotion standards and procedures for fixed term, non‐tenure track (NTT) faculty and is supplemental to and consistent with NC State Regulation 05.20.34. The Department recognizes that the specific activities upon which NTT faculty are evaluated will vary.

2. AREAS OF FACULTY RESPONSIBILITY

North Carolina State University specifies contributions in six Realms of Faculty Responsibility as the principal standards for decisions about faculty appointments and promotion. The College of Humanities and Social Sciences, hereafter referred to as the College, recognizes the importance attached to these realms of responsibility. Except as provided by REG 05.20.34, the College requires that promotion for NTT Professorial Faculty be accomplished within the Realms of Faculty Responsibility outlined in the NTT Professorial Faculty member’s Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR) and should consider the proportion of effort assigned in the SFR. Only appointments of 0.75 FTE or greater are eligible for promotion. All NTT Professorial Faculty of 0.75FTE or greater must have a SFR in place in addition to their appointment contracts.

3. GENERAL STANDARDS

At the departmental level, the review of candidates will employ standards generally consonant with those of the College and University, while specifically suitable for faculty members in the Department. These standards are applied with the expectation that faculty who are appointed and promoted within the Department are highly qualified within their discipline, as demonstrated by their teaching, service, and other relevant areas of responsibility, and that these are in line with the needs and resources of the university. The merit of the faculty member’s performance, rather than time in rank, is the basic standard for all recommendations for promotion. However, the dossier must demonstrate that the faculty member has established a record of performance at NC State consistent with promotion criteria.

4. STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION OF ASSISTANT/ASSOCIATE/PROFESSORIAL TEACHING FACULTY

4.1 Standards for Appointment to Assistant Teaching Professor.

4.1.1 All faculty appointed to the rank of Assistant Teaching Professor must hold an appropriate terminal degree.

4.1.2 All faculty appointed to the rank of Assistant Teaching Professor must further show ability or definite promise in the mutually agreed upon realms of responsibility and ability and willingness to participate in department, college and university affairs.

4.1.3 Terms of appointment for Assistant Teaching Professors must be a minimum of three years. Exceptions to the three-year minimum appointment must be requested by the Department Head and approved by the college dean. Requests for exceptions should be justified in terms of short‐term (rather than recurring) personnel needs (e.g., a temporary increase in FTE to cover another faculty member on leave).

4.1.4 All faculty holding Assistant Teaching Professor rank must have a Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR) defining their realms of faculty responsibilities.

4.2 Standards for Appointment/Promotion to Associate Teaching Professor.

4.2.1 All Associate Teaching Professor faculty shall meet and exceed the criteria for Assistant Teaching Professors (i.e., hold an appropriate terminal degree, show relevant abilities (as described in 5.3.2 below), receive a minimum three‐year appointment, and have a SFR. Additionally, only Assistant Teaching Professors with appointments greater than or equal to 0.75 FTE will be considered for promotion to Associate Teaching Professor rank.

4.2.2 After a minimum of five years of college teaching, an Assistant Teaching Professor may apply for promotion to the rank of Associate Teaching Professor. Faculty seeking promotion from Assistant Teaching Professor to Associate Teaching Professor must provide evidence qualifying for promotion accrued since their appointment to Assistant Teaching Professor by showing recognized ability and potential for distinction in the mutually agreed upon realms of responsibility and demonstrated ability and willingness to participate in department, college and university affairs. In all cases, excellence in teaching remains the most important of the following criteria:

(a) Evidence of excellence in teaching undergraduate courses, as documented by consistently strong student (ClassEval) and peer evaluations of teaching, as well as any supervisory/departmental evaluations that have been conducted. Candidates may also cite awards or other sources of formal recognition of their excellence in teaching.

(b) Evidence of willingness and ability to work effectively with colleagues.

(c) Engagement with curriculum development and/or course design/revision, as evidenced by syllabi and pedagogical materials or student work presented in a teaching portfolio.

(d) Evidence of professional development, which may include but is not limited to: attending or presenting at regional, national or international meetings/conferences and/or attending or presenting at workshops in the discipline, on effective instructional practices, instructional technology use, critical thinking, collaborative learning, etc.

(e) Contributions to the department beyond assigned teaching responsibilities and which are clearly articulated in the candidate’s SFR. These may include, but are not limited to: committee service, mentorship, advising, etc.

(f) A record of professional engagement in or related to the discipline, and which is clearly articulated in the candidate’s SFR, which may include but is not limited to: scholarly conference presentations and/or publications including textbooks and curriculum units, creative artistry related to the discipline, technological innovation, service in professional societies, etc.

4.3 Standards for Appointment/Promotion to Teaching Professor.

4.3.1 All Teaching Professor faculty shall meet and exceed the criteria for Associate Teaching Professors (i.e., hold an appropriate terminal degree, show relevant abilities (as described in 4.3.2 below), receive a minimum three‐year appointment, and have a SFR. Additionally, only Associate Teaching Professors with appointments greater than or equal to 0.75 FTE will be considered for promotion to Teaching Professor rank.

4.3.2 Faculty seeking promotion from Associate Teaching Professor to Teaching Professor must provide evidence qualifying for promotion accrued since their appointment to Associate Teaching Professor by showing distinguished achievement in the mutually agreed upon realms of responsibility, demonstrated ability and willingness to participate in department, college and university affairs, and established reputation in the individual’s discipline or field of scholarly or germane creative activity. Promotion from Associate Teaching Professor to Teaching Professor requires evidence of teaching excellence and exemplary performance in at least some of the following areas:

(a) Evidence of excellence in teaching undergraduate courses, as documented by consistently strong student (ClassEval) and peer evaluations of teaching, as well as any supervisor/departmental evaluations that have been conducted. Candidates may also cite awards or other sources of formal recognition of their excellence in teaching.

(b) Evidence of willingness and ability to work effectively with colleagues.

(c) Engagement with curriculum development and/or course design/revision, as evidenced by syllabi and pedagogical materials and/or student work presented in a teaching portfolio.

(d) Evidence of professional development, which may include but is not limited to: attending or presenting at regional, national or international meetings/conferences and/or attending or presenting at workshops in the discipline on effective instructional practices, instructional technology use, critical thinking, collaborative learning, etc.

5. PROCEDURES FOR THE NTT PROFESSORIAL RANK PROMOTION PROCESS

College and Departmental procedures for personnel reviews must be in conformity with university guidelines and procedures.

5.1 Timetable. The candidate should indicate to the Department Head the desire to be considered for promotion by May of the academic year preceding consideration. The candidate, in consultation with the Department Head, will assemble the dossier to be ready for departmental review by early September. Members of the departmental voting faculty (DVF) will be given at least two weeks to review files before departmental votes. Meetings to discuss candidates will thus generally be scheduled for late September or early to-mid-October, but in no case later than November 1, when completed dossiers (with departmental vote tallies and written assessments from the Head and from the DVF) are delivered to the Office of the Dean.

5.2 External Evaluations. External evaluations for promotion are not required, but may be solicited only for NTT faculty whose statements of faculty responsibilities include work that external reviewers can adequately and appropriately judge (e.g., research, creative works, engagement). In cases where it is appropriate, the department head may solicit external evaluations reviewing the contributions of candidates to their respective realms of faculty responsibilities. If solicited, letters from external evaluators must follow university regulations. As outlined in those regulations, names of external evaluators should be obtained through consultation with the candidate (who must be given the opportunity to suggest names of evaluators) and with other members of the departmental voting faculty. In selecting external reviewers care must be taken to ensure that external evaluators are individuals who can fairly, conscientiously, and objectively judge the candidate’s qualifications and contributions (see REG 05.20.05 Section 5).

5.3 Content and Assembly of the File. University regulations specify the material to be included in the candidate’s dossier, and must address the realms of faculty responsibilities in which the candidate’s effort is greater than 0. Additional material, beyond that called for in university regulations, should not be added to dossiers unless solicited by the Department Head or DVF. (If applicable, candidates with RADAR entries that include multiple investigators must include a brief, 1‐3 sentence, description of their role in each project within their dossier.) Once the department votes on a case (and adds the vote tally and written assessments from the head and the DVF to the file), the candidate’s dossier is considered closed.

5.4 Written Assessments by the Department Head and the Departmental Voting Faculty.

Procedures in this section must be consistent with university policies, rules, and regulations for consultation (see REG 05.20.05). Written assessments from the Head and the DVF must substantively explain how the candidate’s accomplishments, as documented in the dossier, meet (or fail to meet) the standards for promotion laid out in departmental rules. In the event of a split vote of the DVF, the assessment from the DVF must explain both positive and negative votes. The Department may specify procedures asking voting faculty to provide written explanations of their votes for the purpose of ensuring sufficient explanation. Missing votes and abstentions must also be explained.