Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost
History: First Issued: November 16, 2009. Last Revised: August 25, 2017.
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
Contact Info: Department Head (919-515-9748)
This rule describes standards and procedures of the Department of Communication 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 andPost Tenure Review Regulation supersedes this rule. The Department Head is responsible for assuring that the procedures as set forth in NC State’s REG 05-20-04 and this Rule are followed.
- POST TENURE REVIEW COMMITTEE (PTRC)
2.1.1 The PTRC shall consist of three tenured faculty members, two elected by the tenured faculty of the Department of Communication and one appointed by the department head. PTRC members will serve staggered three-year terms with one new member being elected each year. All tenured faculty in the department are eligible to serve on the PTRC.
2.1.2 In any given academic year, the member of the PTRC who is serving for his or her last year will chair the committee. The PRTC Chair should familiarize himself or herself with the applicable policies and regulations and this rule.
2.1.3 The head shall initiate the election at the end of the academic year. A candidate will be considered elected if a majority of eligible voters has voted and the candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. If these conditions are not met then a runoff election will be held during the next week. In case of a vacancy on the PTRC, the Department Head after consultation with the Departmental Voting Faculty shall appoint a replacement to serve for that cycle of review.
2.2. Meeting Schedule
The PTRC Chair will meet with the Department Head early in October to learn who will be reviewed during that year and what the schedule will be. The main review will be held in the spring after the Department has assembled the required materials, as set forth in section 5.2 of university REG 05-20-4, from each faculty member to be reviewed. The following schedule will be followed:
2.2.1 Candidates for Post Tenure Review will be notified of their pending review by October 20.
2.2.2 All members of the PTR Committee and candidates must participate in the UNC PTR training available athttp://old.northcarolina.edu/aa/tenuretraining/index.php. They must complete the attestation and submit to the Department’s Executive Assistant.http://old.northcarolina.edu/aa/tenuretraining/UNC-training_attestation_writable.pdf
2.2.3 Candidates must submit their documents to either the Head or the PTRC by January 1.
2.2.4 Written Post Tenure Reviews will be completed and given to the candidates by February 22 in order to meet the March 1 College deadline.
2.2.5 The Department Head will schedule meetings with the candidates in late February to discuss the Post Tenure Reviews. During these meetings, candidates should set goals for the next five years with the Department Head, to be discussed at the next post tenure review.
2.2.6 The Head or the PTRC Chair will schedule all meetings; the PTRC Chair will coordinate with the Department Head, and prepare and transmit reports from the committee to the Head and to the faculty members reviewed.
- DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED FOR THE POST TENURE REVIEW
3.1 The documentation provided for a Post Tenure Review in the Department of Communication is the dossier used for reappointment, promotion and tenure, which can be found in REG 05-20-20 on the Provost’s website. The dossier is used in the Department of Communication for Annual Activity Reports and includes the CV, SME, annual FARS since last review, and peer teaching evaluations since last review as required by REG 05.20.04 (as well as other information of interest to the department).
3.2 Documentation of Five-Year Goals. Faculty undergoing post tenure reviews should include as part of their candidate statement a description of their teaching, research and service since their last review, as well as a set of goals or plans for the next 5 years – what the UNC PTR policy refers to as 5 year “Directional Goals.” These directional goals should be negotiated with the department head as part of the post tenure review process. As a guideline, the directional goals might include the following examples of specific and general items:
3.2.1 Specific Goals (Examples):
22.214.171.124 Publications such as single/co-authored or edited books that address significant areas of scholarly thought; journal publications, book chapters and reviews, etc.
126.96.36.199 Grant applications or applications for other sources of sponsored research/external funding.
188.8.131.52 Fulbright or similar awards that would support off-campus research leaves.
184.108.40.206 Teaching innovations such as the development of new courses; advances in service learning, etc.
220.127.116.11 Increased membership on graduate committees or other graduate student mentoring.
18.104.22.168 Service duties at the college and university level (e.g., RPT committee, research committee, UCCC, etc.).
22.214.171.124 Participation in major university initiatives such as cluster hires or new interdisciplinary academic programs.
126.96.36.199 Consideration for high-level college, university (e.g., University Alumni Distinguished Graduate Professor Award), and professional awards.
188.8.131.52 Service in esteemed academies or other professional organizations (e.g., journal editor, editorial board, holding office at NCA, ICA, etc.).
3.2.2 General Goals (Examples):
184.108.40.206 Promotional review (to professor).
220.127.116.11 Administrative aspirations (e.g., Department Head of other administrative role).
- ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES REQUIRED BY DEPARTMENT
4.1 Upon completion of the evaluation, the Department Head will submit to the Dean the faculty member’s post-tenure review documentation, the PTR Committee’s report, the Department Head’s post tenure review evaluation of the faculty member, and the faculty member’s optional response.
For a description of the Dean’s procedures, see REG 05-20-04.
- PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
UNC System-level policy calls for assigning one of three outcomes: meets expectations, exceeds expectations, or does not meet expectations. These three standards are described as follows:
5.1 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 continuing to meet expectations associated with the rank of Associate Professor as outlined in the faculty member’s SME and as set forth in the Academic Tenure Policy and college and departmental reappointment, promotion and tenure rules.
5.2 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 continuing to meet expectations associated with the rank of Full Professor as outlined in the faculty member’s SME and as set forth in the Academic Tenure Policy and college and departmental reappointment, promotion and tenure rules.
5.3 Standards for Exceeds Expectations
The UNC system-level policy characterizes an “exceeds expectations” rating as “exemplary.” Because the post-tenure review provides one comprehensive performance measure for all three realms of faculty responsibility (teaching, research, and service), a candidate would have to provide evidence of exemplary work in all three categories to receive an outcome of “exceeds expectations.” Examples of exemplary work would include an extraordinary quantity or quality of scholarly works, receipt of prestigious awards recognizing distinguished achievement in one or more realms of faculty responsibility (e.g., prestigious university or UNC system-wide, NCA, ICA or other professional association awards, being named a fellow in a relevant society, or gaining membership to one of the academies). To be clear, evidence of such honors and/or achievements in all three realms would be necessary to achieve “exceeds expectations.”