RUL 05.68.74 – Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Post Tenure Review Standards and Procedures

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost for Academic Affairs

History:  First Issued 2016. Last Revised: September 15, 2016.

Related Policies:
UNC Policy 400.3.3 – Performance Review of Tenured Faculty
UNC Policy 400.3.3.1[G] – Guidelines on Performance Review of Tenured Faculty
NCSU REG05.20.04 – Post Tenure Review of Faculty
NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure
NCSU POL05.25.01 – Faculty Grievance and Non-Reappointment Review Policy
NCSU REG05.20.13 – Joint and Associate Faculty Appointments
NCSU REG05.20.20 – Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Dossier Format Requirements
NCSU REG05.20.27 – Statement of Mutual Expectations

Related Information:
Promotion and Tenure Departmental Standards and Procedures
Departmental Post Tenure Review Rules
N C Gen Stat. 126-24

_________________________________________________________________

  1. INTRODUCTION

This rule establishes NCSU Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology information for the comprehensive, periodic, cumulative review of the performance of all the department’s tenured faculty members. This rule is consistent with the requirements of

NC State’s REG 05.20.04 Post Tenure Review of Faculty, UNC Policy 400.3.3 – Performance Review of Tenured Faculty and UNC Policy 400.3.3.1[G] – Guidelines on Performance Review of Tenured Faculty.

Each tenured faculty member shall be reviewed through the post-tenure review process every five (5) years after having been tenured. All exceptions to this frequency in post-tenure review listed in NCSU REG05.20.04 are included in this department rule.

As required by UNC Policy 400.3.3.1 [G], faculty members shall develop a five-year goal or plan in consultation with the Department Head at the beginning of the post-tenure review cycle. These goals shall be included in the Statement of Mutual Expectations (“SME”), which will serve as the basis for post-tenure review.  At minimum, the SME will be reviewed and revised as appropriate after each promotion review and each post tenure review.

  1. STANDARDS FOR “MEETS EXPECTATIONS” REVIEW

Criteria used for faculty evaluation during the post tenure review process are listed below.  These criteria are not in order of priority nor are they of equal weight.  Faculty are evaluated on their total program and are expected to achieve excellence in most of the criteria that are appropriate in relation to the nature of the appointment and based on the goals outlined in the Statement of Mutual Expectations.

2.1 Teaching Contributions:

  • Student evaluations of courses (including formal courses, special topics and seminars)
  • Academic advising of undergraduate and graduate students
  • Peer evaluations of course lectures and communication skills (based on observation), Documented innovation in course content, course development, presentation or delivery
  • Development of teaching publications and aids, including videos, computer software, insect collections, progressive teaching tools, on-line offerings, and other items
  • Leadership of and participation in teaching symposia, conferences, workshops and similar activities
  • Honors, awards and other recognitions
  • Participation in and leadership of collaborative teaching efforts where appropriate (e.g., interdisciplinary, techniques-based, and IPM courses)
  • Efforts and success in obtaining extramural funding
  • Department Head and PTRC evaluation of departmental seminar

2.2 Research Contributions:

  • Quality and quantity of publications, including peer reviewed scientific papers, books, book chapters, technical bulletins, proceedings, abstracts, patents, and other intellectual property
  • Significance of research contributions relative to those of colleagues at peer institutions and appropriate to discipline and appointment
  • Development of new and innovative basic and applied research approaches, techniques, and pest management systems
  • Efforts and success in obtaining extramural funding
  • Leadership and participation in symposia and conferences, as well as non-peer reviewed publications and reports
  • Honors, awards, invited papers and presentations, and other recognitions
  • Training, advising, and co-advising undergraduate and graduate students and directing post-doctorates
  • International research activities, invitations, appointments, funding, and recognitions
  • Department Head and PTRC evaluation of departmental seminar

2.3 Extension Contributions:

  • Quality and quantity of appropriate educational publications, training materials, and decision aids disseminated through a variety of technologies to relevant audiences
  • Evaluations by stakeholders including extension field faculty and other clientele identified in the statement of mutual expectations
  • Interpretation of research data and technology transfer as measureable through deliverables and impacts
  • Leadership of and participation in symposia, conferences, workshops and similar activities
  • Innovations in program development and implementation
  • Honors, awards, invited presentations, and other recognitions
  • Active participation in collaborative and interdisciplinary extension and research efforts appropriate to area of responsibility
  • Leadership and participation in stakeholder training and county and area-wide programs, and publication in trade journals, and the popular press
  • Quantity and quality of applied research and demonstration projects
  • Success at fostering mutually beneficial linkages with the private and public sectors to enhance funding, available facilities, collaborative programming, and outreach
  • Efforts and success in obtaining extramural funding
  • Department Head and PTRC evaluation of departmental seminar

2.4 Department, College and University Service:

  • Committee service, including considerations of the scope and administrative level of the committees
  • Election to offices in College and University organizations
  • Special assignments, task forces, commissions and similar activities
  • Contributions to departmental meetings and activities
  • Leadership in inter-departmental programs and contributions to other departments.

2.5 Professional and Community Service:

  • Election to office in state, regional, national and international scientific societies and professional organizations
  • Committee service for scientific and professional organizations
  • Special assignments for grant evaluations, program reviews and similar activities
  • Service on editorial and publication boards and editorships for journals and books
  • Organization of scientific meetings, symposia, workshops and similar events
  • Presentations and publications for the public, schools and other groups
  • Advisory services to the public, the private sector, governmental agencies, and international organizations
  1. STANDARDS FOR “EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS” REVIEW

It is expected that a faculty member in the department will be at the top of their field and criteria for “exceeds expectations” will be the same as the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.  For a faculty member to “exceed expectations” they would need to win a top internationally known award or other similar level of achievement.  The recommendation and use of “exceeds” expectations will be reserved for only the most exceptional performance.

  1. PROCEDURES

Department PTR Procedures will exactly follow those outlined in Section 5 ofNCSU REG05.20.04.

4.1 Post Tenure Review Committee Selection.  The PTR process will be managed by the Departmental Tenure and Promotion (RPT) Committee whose three (3) members are full professors elected by the DVF on rotating 3-year terms.  Each member ascends to Chair of the committee in their third year on the committee, and members must rotate off the committee for at least three years after serving as Chair.

4.2. Support Materials and Documentation will be provided to the Departmental PTR Committee and Department Head by the candidate faculty member and will include:

  1. A current CV in RPT format according to NCSU REG05.20.20
  2. The Statement of Mutual Expectations (SME)
  3. A compilation of faculty activity reports since the last review presented in RPT format according to NCSU REG05.20.20
  4. Peer teaching evaluations (for academic expectations)
  5. An optional two-page candidate statement
  6. An optional seminar presentation on review period activity to the full Department

4.3 Post Tenure Review Committee Operations

4.3.1    Faculty to be reviewed will be notified by the Department Head in writing in January of the calendar year of the review.

4.3.2    Support documentation from section 4.2 is due to the departmental administrative office three weeks prior to the PTR Committee meeting.

4.3.3    Confidential copies of the support documentation will be provided to each member of the Departmental PTR Committee upon receipt and destroyed after the process is complete.

4.3.4    The Departmental PTR Committee will meet in the first two weeks of March of the calendar year to evaluate candidate performance during the review period.

4.3.5    Determination of “Meets” or “Does Not Meet” will be based on criteria listed in Section 2.0. Determination of “Exceeds” will be based on criteria in Section 3.0.

4.3.6    Report to Department Head. Within one week of the PTR Committee meeting, the Chair of the committee discusses and provides the Department Head with a written assessment of each candidate with the PTR Committee vote count and recommendations.

4.3.7    The Department Head will develop an independent assessment of each PTR candidate after consultation of assessment with the PTR Committee.

4.3.8    The Department Head will provide the PTR candidate with the written assessment and vote of the PTR Committee and the written assessment of the Department Head.

4.3.9    The PTR candidate has the option to provide a written response to the assessment of the PTR Committee and/or Department Head that becomes part of the PTR record.

4.3.10  All PTR documentation and assessments are forwarded to the Dean for college level review by March 25.