RUL 05.67.851 – Department of Clinical Sciences Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: September 3, 1999. Last Revised: August 26, 2020.

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website
Department of Clinical Sciences Web Site

Contact Info: Department Head (919-513-6230)

1. Introduction

This rule describes the standards and procedures for reappointment, promotion and tenure (RPT) in the Department of Clinical Sciences and is supplemental to and consistent with the college rule and university Academic Tenure Policy.

1.1 The Department of Clinical Sciences (DoCS) is one of three departments in the College of Veterinary Medicine at North Carolina State University. The department is divided into sections, each of which concentrates on a specialty area within clinical veterinary medicine.

1.2 DoCS is charged with preparing veterinarians and veterinary specialists to enhance medical care for companion animal, equine, laboratory, avian/exotic, zoological and wildlife patients. This is accomplished through didactic, small group problem solving and clinical teaching, in addition to research to yield new methods to prevent, diagnose, and treat disease in companion animals, horses, aquatic species, and wildlife.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

The four realms of faculty responsibility that are applicable for members of the department are: (1) teaching and mentoring students, (2) discovery of knowledge through discipline-guided inquiry, (3) extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university, and (4) service in professional societies and within the university itself. The assignment of percentages of effort for each responsibility will be made by the Department Head when a new faculty member is hired and outlined in a Statement of Faculty Responsibilities signed by the Department Head and faculty member. The assignment percentages will be reviewed annually and adjusted if deemed necessary.

3. General Standards

3.1 Faculty performance will be evaluated in recognition of the weight of percentages assigned to each realm of responsibility on the Statement of Faculty Responsibilities.

3.2 Evidence of good teaching must accompany each positive recommendation for promotion. Evidence of teaching productivity may include the number of courses taught, and development of innovative lectures, laboratory sessions, courses, electives, selectives and extracurricular activities that teach veterinary students. Assessment of these efforts by students and peers is essential and will be conducted using College of Veterinary Medicine procedures which were approved by the University Evaluation of Teaching Committee. Recognition of teaching excellence by students and peers is also part of the evaluation process.

Scholarly activity in education may include: 1) hypothesis-based educational research manuscripts, 2) chapters or textbooks, 3) review papers, 4) monographs, 5) generating and organizing web-based instructional materials, 6) developing and obtaining certification for autotutorial programs, 7) organizing major symposia on topics of vital concern to the profession or 8) developing and scientifically evaluating other new approaches to teaching not listed above. A record of invited presentations on teaching methods also is evidence of scholarly activity in education.

3.3 Evidence of successful research must accompany each positive recommendation for promotion. Documentation of creative and scholarly activity in a discipline relevant to the department is the responsibility of every member of the Departmental Faculty. Research work should be original and published in major journals of the discipline concerned.

The quantity of publications will be determined by the effort assigned to the Discovery of Knowledge domain within the SFR. The quality of the work and prestige of the journal or other media in which the work appears are factors to be considered. The impact factor of the journal and other metrics may be a consideration when evaluating the quality of scholarly activity. The evaluation of quality of research for reappointment, promotion, and tenure must be applied with judgment since there may be substantial variation among refereed works in terms of their contribution to the academic and professional community. Evidence must be presented in the candidate’s dossier that the work has either been published or accepted (acceptance letter from the Editor of the Journal). Manuscripts submitted or in preparation will not be considered when evaluating the quality of scholarly activity.

Research presented at professional meetings and activities such as membership on editorial boards of refereed journals, serving as a referee, assisting colleagues with their research activities and other contributions to the scholarly life of the department may be encouraged and will be considered, but will not substitute for peer-reviewed publications for faculty promotion. Invited presentations at national and international research symposia and conferences also may be considered evidence of the impact of the faculty member’s contribution to research.

Extramural grant submission is expected of all faculty members with an FTE >20% in Discovery of Knowledge. As the FTE increases, the individual is expected to provide sufficient extramural funds to support ongoing research endeavors and personnel within the laboratory.

3.4 Clinical service within the veterinary hospital or other sites is regarded as a 50:50 mixture of teaching and extension/engagement. For those individuals engaged in clinical service, evidence that the faculty member provides professional expertise and performs his/her duties in a competent and professional manner (as documented in the Veterinary Hospital (VH) evaluations) must accompany each positive recommendation for promotion.

3.5 Extension activities outside hospital service may be documented by providing evidence of continuing education activities, hosting visiting veterinarians and trainees, practice visits, and lay person educational activities.

3.6 Evidence of service within the college and university must accompany each positive recommendation for promotion. Service in professional societies is encouraged.

4. Standards for Reappointment as a Tenure Track Assistant Professor

Reappointment as Assistant Professor requires that the individual is making satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure (Section 5).

5. Standards for Associate Professor with Tenure

Promotion to Associate Professor with tenure will be evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across the faculty member’s contributions in teaching, research and extension with due consideration to effective service to the institution. The expectation is that a faculty member will have demonstrated competency in teaching, research, clinical service, and organizational service and the potential to achieve national or international recognition as noted below.

5.1 Evidence of good teaching based on a number of measures, including student learning outcomes, will be demonstrated.

5.1.1 It is normally and generally expected that the faculty member will have provided effective teaching based on peer teaching review, performed according to the University schedule.

5.1.2 It is normally and generally expected that the faculty member will have provided effective teaching based on student teaching review performed according to the College schedule. On the question regarding overall effectiveness, 80% of students will agree or strongly agree that the faculty member was an effective teacher. If the individual teaches within a clinical service, 80% of students will have rated the faculty member as Excellent (4) or Good (3) for overall effectiveness as a teacher in clinical teaching.

5.1.3 It is normally and generally expected that clinical teachers will have effective teaching documented by at least one comprehensive VH evaluation.

5.1.4 Exceptions to Standards 5.1.1, 5.1.2, and 5.1.3, will be documented and discussed in the Department Head Summary.

For subsections 5.1.5, 5.1.6, and 5.1.7, the faculty member will select, from all of their accomplishments in these areas, the requisite items she/he wants to be considered for review.

5.1.5 Improvements or innovations in teaching that have been implemented.

5.1.6 Individually initiated activities or contributions to section activities that provide clinical and/or research experience to years 1-3 students (special rounds, case presentations, lectures in non-DoCS courses, summer opportunities, student clubs, selectives, etc).

5.1.7 Mentoring of professional students, as documented by completion of the professional curriculum and successful transition into their chosen professional paths. Mentoring of graduate students and residents as documented by completion of their programs, passing of boards (if applicable), and transition into successful scientists and clinicians.

5.2 A faculty member will have demonstrated scholarly activity in research. From all of their manuscripts and grants, the faculty member will select the designated items she/he wants to be considered for review for each of the following subsections:

5.2.1 A minimum of five manuscripts (or more as determined by the SFR) that have been published in refereed journals, reporting original research beyond the level of a case-report. In exceptional circumstances, publication of fewer manuscripts with high impact may be considered. The faculty member being reviewed should be first author, corresponding author or a significant co-author on the manuscripts. Hypothesis-based educational research manuscripts will count towards the five research manuscripts. (Significant accomplishment in teaching, clinical service, or organizational service may substitute for at most 1 manuscript. The work must be assessed for significance and outcome. External review is required).

5.2.2 A minimum of two grant proposals that have been submitted for extramural funding. Receipt of substantial extramural funding may be considered as a substitute for 1 or 2 manuscripts.

5.3 If a faculty member has responsibilities in the Veterinary Hospital (VH), she/he will have demonstrated accomplishment by providing effective and efficient patient care and hospital management, with continually improving quality.

5.3.1 Peers, staff and hospital administrators agree that the faculty member has provided effective service in the VH (if applicable), as documented by comprehensive VH evaluation.

5.3.2 Diplomat status (board-certification) has been achieved, if appropriate to the specialty.

5.3.3 Innovations in clinical service that have been introduced to the VH (new techniques developed or learned, new methods for delivery of service, clinical protocols established, etc.) are documented.

5.4 The faculty member will have demonstrated dissemination of knowledge and skills to professional colleagues and the lay public. For subsections 5.4.1, 5.4.2, and 5.4.3, from all of her/his accomplishments in these areas, the faculty member will select at least 5 items she/he wants to be reviewed. A mix of regional and national activities should be included. If applicable, international activities may be included. Peer recognition and contributions to the State of North Carolina and its’ veterinary community are valued and should be noted.

5.4.1 Manuscripts that have been published based on clinical observations or of clinical relevance (including case reports). These manuscripts are not necessarily in addition to those listed under research.

5.4.2 Activities that have been implemented to provide professional development opportunities for veterinarians, such as practitioner-oriented laboratories, practice visits, hosting visiting veterinarians, interactions with practitioner adjunct faculty, substantive consults, etc.

5.4.3 Continuing education lectures and proceedings, books, book chapters, and/or review articles.

5.5. A faculty member will have provided a leadership role in the Department, VH, College of Veterinary Medicine, NC State University or professional organizations as documented by contributions to the process and accomplishments of committees and teams. (Although faculty may serve in an advisory role for some committees, faculty are expected to take an active working role on at least one committee).

6. Standards for Professor with Tenure

6.1 Promotion to Professor will be evaluated for each faculty member with regard to assigned effort in the individual’s realms of responsibility as described in her/his Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. In general, the expectation is that a faculty member will have demonstrated internationally recognized scholarly accomplishments. These accomplishments may be in the area of teaching, research, clinical service, and/or organizational service. However, for promotion to Professor, cumulative outstanding leadership within the university, over an extended number of years, which contributes to the national or international recognition of university programs may be heavily weighted in lieu of the faculty member’s individual national or international recognition for scholarship and leadership.

6.2 The types of activities detailed in section 5 above (Standards for Associate Professor with Tenure) will be used to assist in these deliberations, but the expectations are above and beyond those detailed in that section. Most importantly, the contributions of the faculty member must have made a difference, whether it is in the way veterinary students learn, the manner in which veterinary medicine is practiced and delivered, or in the creation and application of new knowledge.

7. Standards for Promotion of Professional Faculty

Professional faculty appointments are fixed-term appointments as lecturer, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor with the appropriate modifier. Professorial professional faculty appointments have an appropriate prefix modifier (“Clinical”, “Teaching”, “Research”). Qualifications for professional faculty professorial ranks are similar to comparable tenure track ranks. The candidate will be evaluated with regard to assigned effort in the individual’s realms of responsibility as described in her/his Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. Typically, clinical faculty will have a 10% FTE in Discovery of Knowledge, with a minimum expectation of two manuscripts that have been published in refereed journals, reporting original research beyond the level of a case-report. Promotions within the professorial professional faculty ranks are considered through the same departmental process as for promotion and tenure.

8. Procedures for RPT Review

8.1 Tenure track faculty members will be notified by the Department Head during their annual review the spring before their mandatory time for reappointment and tenure consideration. In cases where there is a request for non-mandatory reappointment, tenure or promotion, the Department Head may consult with the Assistant Department Heads. This consultation will be for the purpose of evaluating the individuals to give them guidance as to whether the timing for such consideration is appropriate.

8.2 Professional faculty members will be reviewed in the spring semester of their penultimate contract year by the Department Head and the appropriate Assistant Department Head. If there is a consensus that promotion should be considered, the candidate will be notified. The dossier will be prepared and reviewed using the same departmental procedures used for tenure track faculty.

8.3 All Department procedures will be consistent with those of the College of Veterinary Medicine and NC State University.

8.4 The schedule of deadlines for dossier submission and Department Faculty Voting (DVF) meetings regarding promotion decisions will be set and communicated by the Department Head. Professional faculty members appointed in the same track (i.e. clinical, teaching, etc.) and at or above the rank for which a professional faculty candidate is being considered will vote. Professional faculty will not vote on tenured or tenure-track faculty RPT actions.

8.5 Absentee votes may be submitted to the Department Head by faculty who are unable to attend the DVF meeting. The Head will announce the deadline for absentee vote submission to enable the department to meet the college submission deadline.

9. Standards for Appointment and Reappointment of Professional Faculty

Decisions for professional faculty initial and subsequent contracts are dependent on recommendations by the DVF and Department Head to the Dean, unless the initial or subsequent contract is for two (2) years or less. The Department Head can recommend contracts of up to and including two (2) years to the Dean without DVF consultation. Professional faculty with three (3) annual reviews documenting that the individual meets expectations will be considered for reappointment. The DVF will be provided with the faculty member’s CV and will vote regarding reappointment.