RUL 05.68.28 – Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Post Tenure Review Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: December 15, 2009.  Last Revised: June 15, 2017.

Related Policies:
UNC Policy 400.3.3 – Performance Review of Tenured Faculty
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU REG05.20.04 – Post Tenure Review of Faculty
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statements of Mutual Expectations
NCSU REG05.20.10 – Evaluation of Teaching

Additional References:
Office of the Provost RPT Website
NC State Guide on Peer Review of Teaching

Contact Info:  Department Head (919-515-6900)

  1. INTRODUCTION        

This rule describes standards and procedures of the Department of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education for post tenure review of faculty.  It supplements NC State University’s Academic Tenure Policy and Regulation on Post Tenure Review of Faculty.  To the extent of any inconsistency, the Academic Tenure Policy and Post Tenure Review Regulation control.  The Department Head is responsible for assuring that the procedures as set forth in NCSU REG05.20.04 – Post Tenure Review of Faculty and this Rule are followed.

  1. POST TENURE REVIEW COMMITTEE (PTRC)  

2.1 The PTRC will be the STEM Education Departmental Voting Faculty (DVF) at the rank or above of the faculty member under review. Any member of the college CRPTC will not participate with the PTRC.

2.1.1 For the review of an Associate Professor, the PTRC will consist of all tenured faculty in the department excluding any tenured faculty who will be reviewed during the same term.

2.1.2 For the review of a Professor, the PTRC will consist of all professors in the department, excluding any professor who will be reviewed during the same term.

2.1.3 The Department Head will not participate in the PTRC review or vote.

2.2 Procedures

2.2.1 During the first month of the semester of the traditional academic year, the Department Head will report to the PTRC the names of the faculty members who will be undergoing review during the academic year.

2.2.2 The Department Head will convene the PTRC during the fall semester and inform them of the proper processes and procedures to be used for the review, as set forth in section 5.2 of university NCSU REG05.20.04 – Post Tenure Review of Faculty and this rule. At this initial meeting the PTRC will elect the Chair.  A candidate for the chair will be considered elected, if a majority of eligible PTRC members has voted and the candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. The Chair will serve for a one-year term.

2.2.3 The PTRC Chair should familiarize himself or herself with the applicable policies and regulations and this rule.

2.3 Meeting Schedule

2.3.1 The candidate’s material must be made available to the DVF by January 15. The DVF must have their recommendations to the Department Head by February 15.

2.3.2 The PTRC Chair will schedule all meetings subsequent to the initial meeting, coordinate with the Department Head, and prepare and transmit reports and information from the PTR Committee to the Department Head. The chair’s responsibilities will include scheduling the dates when the committee will meet, providing materials for review by the committee, providing the committee with Department and University PTRC rules, and transmission of the PTRC letter(s) of review to the Department Head. The Department Head shall provide to the faculty member being reviewed the written assessment of the review including the numerical vote, as well as an option for a written faculty response to the evaluation which becomes part of the review record. The Department Head shall discuss the post tenure review report and optional faculty member response with the faculty member.

2.3.3 The review will be held in the spring after the department has assembled the required materials from each faculty member to be reviewed, as set forth in section 3.

  1. DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED TO THE PTRC

To assess a faculty member’s cumulative performance, the following materials or documents shall be provided to the review committee:

  • A current CV
  • The Statement of Mutual Expectations that is on file in the Department
  • Each annual activity report since the last review
  • All peer teaching evaluations since the last review, with a minimum of 1 peer review of teaching conducted during the last three year
  • Teaching evaluations during the three year period prior to the current review
  • Copies of 2-3 publications (in-press or published) produced during the three-year period prior to the current review
  • An optional 2-page candidate statement
  1. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

4.1 Standards for Associate Professor

Associate Professors are to be evaluated to determine if they are performing the realms of responsibility set forth in their Statement of Mutual Expectations at the Associate Professor standard as set forth in the Department’s Rule on Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures. They must present evidence that they are maintaining the standards for promotion to associate professor as set forth in the Academic Tenure Policy and college and departmental reappointment, promotion and tenure rules.

4.2 Standards for Professor

Professors are to be evaluated to determine if they are performing the realms of responsibility set forth in their Statement of Mutual Expectations at the standard set forth in the Department’s Rule on Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures.  They must present evidence that they are maintaining the standards for promotion to full professor as set forth in the Academic Tenure Policy and college and departmental reappointment, promotion and tenure rules.

4.3 Criteria for PTR Assessment

The three assessment categories for University Post Tenure Review Regulation are exceeds expectations, meets expectations, or does not meet expectations. Each category involves a summative judgment rendered at each level of the post-tenure review process. Peer evaluations involve professional judgments based on formal documentation.

4.3.1 Meets Expectations

A positive vote by a simple majority of the PTRC and a positive endorsement by the Department Head indicates that the faculty member meets expectations for the post-tenure review.

4.3.2 Does Not Meet Expectations

A negative vote by a simple majority of the PTRC and/or a negative assessment by the Department Head indicate that the faculty member does not meet expectations for the post-tenure review.

4.3.3 Exceeds Expectations

NCSU Regulation 05.20.04 indicates that distinction of exceeds expectationsmust be reserved for highly exceptional performances. As such, a faculty must provide evidence of accomplishments in the realms of responsibility specified in the SME that far exceeds the standards set forth for the rank. Examples may include outstanding contributions to the discipline, top national or international recognition, or an exceptional number of high impact scholarly works.