RUL 05.67.853 – College of Veterinary Medicine Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: October 2, 1991. Last Revised: July 24, 2017.

Related Policies: 
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU REG05.20.20 – Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website
Contact Info: Dean, College of Veterinary Medicine (919-513-6210)

1. Introduction

1.1 This rule describes the standards and procedures for reappointment, promotion and tenure decisions in the College of Veterinary Medicine and is supplemental to and consistent with the university Academic Tenure Policy.

The mission of the College of Veterinary Medicine is to enhance the career and life success of students, staff, faculty, and veterinary professionals through initiatives in curriculum and lifelong learning, development of leadership and entrepreneurial skills, and partnerships with the community. College programs in animal health and wellness improve animal and human health and well being, and contribute to the economy of North Carolina and beyond through education, research (medical discovery), service, extension and engagement.

1.2 Because of the diversity of faculty interests and responsibilities to support this mission, it is not possible to establish a precise series of steps that, when taken, will automatically lead to favorable decisions concerning promotion and tenure. Moreover, since a decision to promote includes a judgment of superior quality of performance, a set of rigid guidelines carries with it the risk of being misleading. Nonetheless, the examples of activities cited herein, though not all inclusive, are typical of those considered in the promotion decision and may provide guidance for a faculty member.

1.3 In this College, faculty are evaluated upon their position description and the distribution of effort mutually agreed upon by the individual and their department head. In the overall evaluation and subsequent recommendation for promotion and tenure, the scholarly achievements in all areas are deemed of primary importance. Documentation of the quality of the candidate’s teaching performance is essential. Departmental, College, and University service receive consideration in all reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions.

2. Areas of Faculty Responsibility

2.1 All decisions on promotion and the awarding of academic tenure are predicated on institutional needs and resources. The University specifies contributions in six Realms of Faculty Responsibility (section 6.2, NCSU POL 05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure) as the principal standards for decisions about faculty reappointment, promotion and tenure. This College, due to its medical and scientific focus, specifies contributions in five, and considers the sixth responsibility defined by the University, “Creative Artistry & Literature” as not required. The Realms are interrelated and mutually supportive; participation in one enhances performance in the others. The manner in which faculty members may demonstrate their credentials in these realms is described in the individual’s Statement of Mutual Expectations.

2.2 It is the duty of a faculty member in the tenure track to contribute in each of these areas. Such a spectrum of contribution is essential to the professional growth of the individual faculty member, as well as to the vitality, excellence, and mission of the College and University.

2.3 As an integral part of each promotion evaluation, the primary commitments of the faculty member are considered and an assessment made of the opportunity to contribute in each area of activity. Contributions in the areas where the greatest responsibilities and opportunities lie are weighed more heavily in the evaluation.

3. General Standards

3.1 Teaching and Mentoring Students

3.1.1 Teaching is a primary function of the CVM. It extends beyond the institutional setting and serves the profession and the community-at-large. All faculty must make a significant time commitment to teaching.

3.1.2 Faculty are expected to be knowledgeable in their field of expertise. The faculty member should demonstrate the ability to assimilate and integrate this knowledge, to effectively teach and to serve as a role model for students. Evaluation of teaching effectiveness does not lend itself solely to quantitative measurement and, in the final analysis, may be largely subjective. However, the evaluation from peers, department head, students and other sources will be used to maximize the validity of the value judgment that must be made.

3.1.3 The criteria for teaching effectiveness that shall be considered in evaluation are quality, innovation and impact upon students. Evaluation of teaching effectiveness will not be based on any single source of data. It may include peer review, faculty evaluations, teaching portfolios, exit interviews, and alumni surveys among other potential data sources (05.20.10, Section 8.1). All aspects of the faculty member’s teaching assignments will be evaluated based upon the percent effort assigned to DVM instruction, graduate student and resident advising including: classroom instruction, laboratory and clinical instruction, course coordination, seminar leadership, supervision of individual student projects, and development and reporting of teaching materials and methods.

3.1.4 Documentation and peer-review are as essential for scholarly activities related to teaching as they are for research. Scholarly activities may be in the form of publication of new teaching methods, textbooks, book chapters, or technology. Invitations to participate in symposia and conferences concerned with education are examples of important measures of peer recognition.

3.1.5 The process for peer evaluation of teaching will follow the schedule detailed in the University regulations (05.20.10, Section 3).  Standardized instruments for evaluation of lecture, laboratory, facilitation (small group) or web-based teaching, available on the internal College website, will be used.

3.1.6 Each course will be evaluated each time it is taught (05.20.10 Section 3.1). Instructor evaluations will be conducted, at a minimum, using the same schedule as peer evaluation of teaching. The Department Heads will work with the Assessment and Educational Support Services teams to develop schedules for additional instructor evaluations, as needed. Standardized instruments for course and instructor evaluation will used.  A sample template will be available on the internal College website. Evaluation results will not be provided to faculty and administrators until after final grades for the course have been submitted (05.20.10 Section 5.4).

3.1.7 It must be emphasized that student input in faculty evaluation is essential, but it is only a portion of the information considered. Such input must be balanced against the other factors that affect the quality of teaching.

3.2 Research – Discovery of Knowledge Through Discipline-Guided Inquiry

3.2.1 Research activity is a central mission of a research university. Its components include the generation of new knowledge through original research and its publication. All faculty are expected to engage in original research.

3.2.2 In the evaluation of this aspect in promotion, attention shall be directed to the percent effort assigned to research activity, the guidance and support provided to effectively use that time, and the resources available to enhance productivity. In all instances, the quality of the research activity, as judged by authorities in the field, will be the critical measure.

3.2.3 Research is the generation of new knowledge through use of the scientific method. Such research may be basic or applied. It is most frequently expressed as manuscript publication in refereed scientific journals. Research activity should be supportive of and complementary to teaching, extension and engagement and service.

3.2.4 Demonstrated research productivity is required of all faculty. The quality of the investigative activity is of primary importance in evaluation. The quality of research can be most readily measured through peer review mechanisms, which include:

a) publication in refereed journals

b) acquisition of grant funds from sources that evaluate proposals using a quality peer review system.

3.2.5 Although most research is supported by research grants, it is recognized that quality research can be conducted without the support of peer reviewed grant awards.

3.2.6 Additional demonstrations of the research record may include:

a) invitations to present one’s research at other universities or major scientific meetings

b) invitation to be a keynote speaker at scientific meetings

c) appointment as a section or symposium chairman

d) appointment to editorial boards of peer-reviewed research journals

e) receipt of awards or other special recognition for outstanding research, – e.g., appointment to NIH, NSF, USDA and other study sections.

3.3 Technological and Managerial Innovation
3.3.1 Technological innovation provides the means by which knowledge and imagination in the sciences, humanities, and creative arts can be harnessed to drive the economic and social systems of the state, nation, and world, and ultimately, provide new products, processes, and services

3.4 Extension and Engagement with Constituents Outside the University

3.4.1 Extension and engagement responsibilities include a variety of scholarly activities, which contribute toward the university’s land grant mission and serve the community on issues of societal concern.

a) Extension and Engagement

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.

b) Professional Activities in the Veterinary Teaching Hospital

Professional activities includes activity in and on behalf of the Veterinary Teaching Hospital (VTH). Although teaching constitutes much of the time faculty spend in the VTH, considerable non-teaching related service activity in and on behalf of the VTH also must be recognized. These non-teaching related service activities occur throughout the calendar year and include:

1. the in-house provision of consultations to colleagues to assist in the diagnosis and management of the VTH caseload

2. the provision of advice (including the telephone) to the public, the agricultural and animal health industries, and the veterinary profession.

3. the continued monitoring of case care following discharge from the VTH through repeated discussions with owners and the owner’ veterinarian

c) Continuing Veterinary Medical Education

Continuing veterinary medical education is a special responsibility of the CVM and its faculty members. The state, the profession, and the general public depend on the College for help in maintaining state-of-the-art medical and production management of animals. Continuing veterinary medical education is both an instructional and public service activity that the CVM is uniquely qualified to provide. Only a faculty member whose collective responsibilities include knowledge of research and other scholarly activities can provide these important services from an informed base of current and developing new knowledge in the field.

3.5 Service in Professional Societies and Within the University Itself

3.5 All faculty members must share in the work necessary to maintain the operation of the institution. Furthermore, faculty are expected to contribute to the growth of the institution through efforts that are aimed at improving programs and facilities. Especially, the faculty should contribute to the maintenance and growth of their professional discipline. Finally, faculty are encouraged to serve the community-at-large in a professional capacity that enhances the stature of the University.

4. Standards for Reappointment as Assistant Professor

To be considered for reappointment as assistant professor, candidates must be regarded by the department head and peers as one who has the background and potential to excel, and who is making satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure.

5. Standards for Associate Professor with Tenure

To be considered for promotion to associate professor, candidates must have recognized ability and demonstrated excellence based on the areas of responsibility and expectations that are addressed in the Statement of Mutual Expectations. The quality and significance of publications are more important than their number. Publications of work performed following employment at NCSU will be given greater consideration for promotion and tenure than work completed previously.

6. Standards for Professor

The associate professor, who expects to be promoted to professor, must show continuing development. Sustained productivity as an independent investigator or collaborator and leadership activity should be evident by national or international recognition for the faculty member’s contributions in scholarship and leadership. The professor is expected to be a distinguished authority in his/her discipline and, as such, should be committed to guiding the development of young faculty in their scientific and professional endeavors. Cumulative outstanding leadership within the university, over an extended number of years, that contributes to the national or international recognition of university programs may be heavily weighed in lieu of the faculty member’s individual national or international recognition for scholarship and leadership.

7. Procedures for RPT Review

7.1 The College Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Committee (CRPTC) consists of eight (8) members; Two (2) faculty members elected from each department by an intradepartmental vote organized by the Department Head; Two (2) at-large members elected after the departmental representatives have been identified. Voting for at-large members will be limited to faculty holding the rank of Professor, and membership on the committee is restricted to faculty holding the rank of Professor.

7.2 Members will serve three (3) year terms. Election of Departmental representatives will be staggered such that both representatives do not join the committee in the same year. Election of at-large members will be staggered such that both representatives do not join the committee in the same year. Members are eligible for re-election. At the first committee meeting each year, the chair will be elected from representatives in the third year of service. The election will be arranged by the Dean’s Administrative Assistant.

7.3 Members of the DVF should only participate in one voting process in the College as part of any Reappointment, Promotion or Tenure Process. Therefore if a DVF is also a member of the College RPT Committee they are ineligible to participate in the DVF vote. Associate Deans and Assistant Deans will participate in the voting process as members of the DVF of their home departments.

7.4 The responsibilities of this committee are to examine the dossiers of faculty being considered for reappointment, promotion without tenure, and promotion with granting of tenure. The faculty member candidate will have prepared a dossier summarizing their activities in teaching, research, service, and (possibly) extension and engagement. Dossiers will have been prepared according to NCSU REG05.20.20 – Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements. The Chair of the CRPTC will assign one primary reviewer and one secondary reviewer for each faculty member candidate assigned by the committee Chair. The primary reviewer will prepare a detailed written summary of the teaching, research and service aspects of the dossier. The summary will contain a review of the strengths of the faculty member as well as any concerns related to reappointment, promotion and/or tenure. The secondary reviewer will also prepare a written assessment of strengths and concerns. A discussion of each faculty member being considered will be led by the primary and secondary reviewers. After general discussion, each committee member will vote to approve, or oppose reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure. Voting will be by closed paper ballot. The Chair will prepare a written summary of the discussion for each candidate listing strengths and any concerns. The final report will contain the results of the vote for each faculty member being considered.

7.5 If making a recommendation not consistent with the vote of the DVF and the CRPT Committee, the Dean will meet with the DVF to discuss the recommendations.

7.6  In accordance with NCSU REG 05.20.34 – Non-Tenure Track Faculty Ranks and Appointments Section 9.1.3 which requires that each Dean must establish for the college for all the categories of full-time (> 0.75 FTE) NTT faculty with professorial rank whether to require external evaluation letters for the dossier, the Dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine has decided the following:

Clinical Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters required.
Extension Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters required.
Research Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters required.
Teaching Assistant/Associate/Full Professors:  Letters required.
Assistant/Associate/Full Professors of the Practice:  Letters required.