RUL 05.67.852 – Department of Population Health and Pathobiology Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: September 14, 1992. Last Revised: September 19, 2008.

Related Policies: 
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU RUL05.67.853 – College of Veterinary Medicine Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statement of Faculty Responsibilities
NCSU REG05.20.34 – Non-Tenure Track Faculty Ranks and Appointments

Additional References: 
Office of the Provost RPT Website

Time Schedule for Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) Process in PHP
Standard Operating Process for Adjunct Faculty Nomination, Appointment and Evaluation (adopted by PHP faculty 10-9-06; edited Department Head 6-5-07)

Contact Info: Department Head (919-513-6440)

1. Introduction

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

1.2 The mission of the Department of Population Health and Pathobiology is to recruit, train, inspire, and graduate Doctors of Veterinary Medicine of exemplary knowledge, skill, and character. In order to maintain the intellectual and professional climate necessary to accomplish this mission, the department’s faculty will advance veterinary medical science through innovative basic and applied research, inspired mentoring of professional, graduate, and post-doctoral students and residents, excellence in clinical and diagnostic services, and innovative extension and engagement activities.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

2.1 The five realms of faculty responsibility assigned to faculty in PHP include: (1) teaching and mentoring students, (2) discovery of knowledge through discipline-guided inquiry, (3) technological and managerial innovation, (4) extension and engagement with constituencies outside the university, and (5) service to 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. The assignment percentages will be reviewed annually and adjusted if deemed necessary. The manner in which faculty members may demonstrate their accomplishments in these realms is described in each individual’s Statement of Faculty Responsibilities which is reviewed annually with the Department Head.

3. General Standards

3.1 Faculty performance will be evaluated relative to the weight of percentages assigned to each responsibility.

3.2 Each PHP faculty member will be assigned to a Faculty Team composed of members working in similar professional and scientific disciplines. The Faculty members will be expected to contribute effectively and appropriately to the overall workings of the Team.

3.3 Performance in teaching and mentoring will be evaluated on the basis of student and peer reviews and other assessments of their impact on students and courses at the undergraduate, professional, and graduate levels.

3.4 Performance in discovery will be evaluated through the number and quality of substantive works accepted for publication through a peer review process, and research grant proposals funded from internal and external sources during the period under consideration.

3.5 The evaluation of quality as well as quantity of research for reappointment, promotion and/or 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. The quality of the work itself and the quality and prestige of the journal or other media in which the work appears are factors to be considered. Most of the published works should be in the candidate’s field, broadly defined, and some should be in professional or academic journals recognized to be of high quality.

3.6 Papers presented at professional and scientific meetings will be considered. The quality and quantity of unpublished working papers, manuscripts, and grant proposals are important elements in assessing a candidate’s continuing commitment to scholarly activities. This is relevant for decisions regarding reappointment. For decisions regarding promotion and/or tenure, manuscripts submitted or in preparation will not be considered.

3.7 Performance of scholarship in extension and engagement will be evaluated through documented program reviews, peer review of applied research, and objectively assessed impacts of outreach programs.

3.8 Evidence of service within the university and/or to professional societies should accompany each positive recommendation for promotion and tenure.

4. Standards for Reappointment as Assistant Professor

4.1 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 Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure

5.1 Promotion to Associate Professor with tenure will be considered through evaluation of the faculty member’s accomplishments in their assigned realms of responsibility. The expectation is that the faculty member will have demonstrated the potential to achieve national recognition for their peer reviewed scholarship. The decision to consider promotion and tenure earlier than the established time schedule will be made in exceptional cases after consultation between the Department Head and appropriate members of the Department Voting Faculty (DVF), which is comprised of the tenured faculty.

6. Standards for Promotion to Professor

6.1 Promotion to Professor will be considered through evaluation of the faculty member’s accomplishments in their assigned realms of responsibility. In general, the expectation is that a faculty member will have achieved a national or international reputation for scholarly contributions.

7. Procedures for RPT Review

7.1 The Department Head (DH) will assist and advise each candidate in the preparation of the dossier but the candidate is ultimately responsible for the preparation and submission of the dossier in the required format as stipulated by the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost. The Departmental Executive Assistant will assist in keeping the process moving according to the time schedule outlined in the Time Schedule for Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) Process in PHP to this document. The staff member designated by the department head will assist with formatting and printing the dossiers. The candidate will be advised to consult the Provost’s RPT web site and to become familiar with it and the governing university Policies, Regulations and Rules.

7.2 The DH asks faculty members undergoing Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor, or promotion to full Professor to submit names of up to five potential evaluators from outside NC State University at an academic rank or similar appointment comparable to, or higher than the rank of the promotion being considered. The DH will request the Department Voting Faculty (DVF), comprised of the tenured faculty to submit names of potential external evaluators. In some cases, names may be requested from faculty members outside PHP if they are particularly familiar with the faculty member’s disciplines and work. From the names submitted by the candidate, DVF, and faculty outside PHP, the DH will select five external evaluators. The DH solicits their participation and upon their agreement sends them the candidates’ current CV’s or completed dossiers. They are requested to evaluate the scholarship and impact of the candidate’s accomplishments and are asked to return their written evaluations and a professional biographical summary to the Executive Assistant by an appropriate deadline. The Executive Assistant will keep track of the complete and incomplete returns. External evaluators are not solicited or submitted for candidates for reappointment.

7.3 For each candidate to be considered, the DH selects and solicits one member of the DVF currently appointed to an academic rank no lower than the level of the contemplated promotion to act as an “Advocate.” The Advocate will present the candidate’s dossier to the DVF at the RPT meeting. The Advocate will become familiar with the candidate’s dossier during its preparation.

7.4 The Executive Assistant reserves a room for the DVF meeting, updates the membership roster of the DVF, and notifies the members of the DVF to reserve the date scheduled for its annual RPT meeting to consider and vote on the candidates.

7.5 The DH and the Advocate may seek comments on the candidate’s accomplishments from additional individuals outside of the department, college and university. Sources of additional comments include but are not limited to faculty colleagues in other departments who work with the candidate, clinicians, Residents/House Officers, technical support personnel, clients, referring or industry veterinarians, regulatory officials, agribusiness industry representatives, and farm or production unit managers. These comments should be included by the Advocate in his/her formal presentation to the DVF before its vote. These comments are separate from the five external letters of evaluation which become a formal part of the RPT dossier.

7.6 The DVF comprising all tenured faculty (Associate and Full Professors) will vote on candidates for reappointment and promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure. Members of the DVF at the Full Professor rank will vote on candidates for promotion to Full Professor. M embers of the DVF will vote “yes”, “no”, or “abstain” on each candidate by secret ballot. The vote will be recorded. For each candidate, the DH selects two “Summarizers” to prepare a written record of the Advocate’s presentation and the DVF discussion at the annual RPT meeting. This summary will be included in the candidate’s official dossier and will be made available to those DVF members who missed the RPT meeting and who must vote in absentia.The total DVF vote of those present and those in absentia will be summated.

7.7 The Executive Assistant will help the candidate assemble the student and peer evaluations of teaching required for the dossier.

7.8 The annual RPT process in PHP will be implemented according to the time schedule published on the department’s website.

8. Special Faculty

8.1 Procedures for special faculty will follow the same format as that detailed for tenure track faculty at the annual DVF RPT meeting, relative to reappointment as Assistant or Associate Professor, promotion to Associate Professor or to Full Professor except that special faculty holding the rank of Associate or Full Professor rank will be invited to take part in the discussions on reappointment or promotion for special faculty candidates at the appropriate rank but will not vote.

9. Adjunct Faculty

9.1 Nominations to Adjunct Assistant and Adjunct Associate Professor must be approved by the DVF (all tenured faculty, Associate and Full Professors), while nominations to Adjunct Professor must be approved by the tenured Full Professors. These nominations will be voted on at the annual RPT meeting of the DVF.