Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

  1. General Benchmarks and Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

    1. There are many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, to be considered in recommending an individual for academic advancement. The criteria to be considered are related to the individual’s performance in the areas of Scholarship, Teaching, and University Citizenship. Because of the diverse nature of the disciplinary backgrounds of the CAE faculty, quantitative differences in the records of successful candidates are expected. It is recognized that the nature of scholarship differs among faculty based upon the norms, opportunities, and expectations of a particular discipline or program area. It is expected that faculty will produce records of scholarship that reflect their disciplinary focus and that the body of work that represents an individual’s scholarly activity will vary according to the faculty member’s role and academic area. 
    2.  A tenure or promotion candidate’s application/review materials must be complete, well-organized, and accurate. The candidate’s application materials must provide proof of any significant accomplishment. Each faculty member seeking tenure or promotion is obligated to provide evidence supporting their assessment of their record. This obligation will be met by providing specific information about article and journal quality and impact, funding history and plans, and description in the supplementary materials of any other evidence of scholarship, teaching, and citizenship they deem appropriate. In turn, the members of the college’s ad hoc reappointment, tenure and promotion committee and the Dean have the responsibility to evaluate a candidate’s record in light of the college’s expectations for a successful decision. Hence, it is incumbent upon the members of the ad hoc reappointment, tenure and promotion committees, and the Dean, to make their evaluation of the candidate’s record clearly reflect college expectations.
    3. Whereas Tenure is based on projected career development, Promotion is a reward based on accomplishments completed during the review period, where the review period is considered to be the time elapsed since the last promotion. If there has been no previous promotion in the candidate's history, then the review period extends back to the candidate's initial appointment. Awarding of tenure has no effect on the commencement of the review period for promotion.
    4. Many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, are considered in recommending a faculty member for tenure and advancement in academic rank. The overall evaluation of a candidate for tenure and promotion shall include consideration of the faculty member's professional behavior as recognized by the University community. A sound ethical approach to all aspects of teaching, research, publication, and the academic profession are expected of all who seek tenure and promotion in the College.
    5. Promotion considerations are based upon the criteria for evaluation, described in the subsections below. The ad hoc Committee shall consider the following areas of faculty performance when making recommendations on tenure and promotion: 1) Scholarship; 2) Teaching; and 3) University Citizenship. 
    6. The Section III Tables 3-1, 3-2A, 3-2B, 3-3A, 3-3B, 3-4A, and 3-4B, shown below, provide guidelines for the assessment of a tenured/tenure-track faculty member’s performance and a rating scale for use in the evaluation of candidates. The same categories and assessment tools apply for both tenure and promotion decisions. The Faculty Performance Standards/Criteria for Tenure and Promotion are shown in Table 3-1. The tables and text below are designed to facilitate assessment of performance of those candidates who are being evaluated for tenure and promotion. During the probationary period, these tables should be used for developmental assistance and projection of future success in achieving tenure and promotion.
  2. Benchmarks and Criteria for Tenure

    1. The granting of tenure is a decision that plays a crucial role in determining the quality of university faculty and the national and international status of the University. The awarding of tenure must be based on convincing documented evidence that the faculty member has achieved scholarly excellence through a significant body of scholarship that has had an impact on her/his discipline, has significant success as a teacher, and has provided effective service. The candidate is also expected to continue and sustain, over the long term, a program of high quality teaching and scholarship relevant to the mission of the candidate’s academic unit(s) and to the mission of the University. The tenure decision is based on evaluation all of the evidence available, including accomplishments prior to appointment at Kent State University, to determine the candidate’s potential for a long-term productive career. 
    2. Evidence of a sustained, productive, and improving record of disseminated scholarship; a sustained and improving record of teaching; and a record of professional public and professional service, are the principal criteria considered in arriving at a recommendation concerning tenure. For specific performance criteria and guidelines for tenure, refer to the indices of scholarship, teaching, and service provided in Section III.1.4.5, and by Tables 3-1, 3-2A, 3-2B, 3-3A, 3-3B, 3-4A, and 3-4B of this Handbook.  All candidates for early tenure must significantly exceed the requirements specified for on-time tenure.
  3. Benchmarks and Criteria for Promotion to Associate Professor

    1. Promotion to Associate Professor is a reward for establishing a career likely to achieve national/international prominence. Promotion to Associate Professor is recognition based on a candidate’s accomplishments completed during the review period and takes into account the candidate’s scholarly record, teaching, and citizenship/service.
    2. Evidence of a sustained, productive, and improving record of disseminated scholarship; a record of successful and/or improving teaching (for faculty with assigned instructional responsibilities); and demonstrated professional public and professional service, are the principal criteria considered in arriving at a recommendation concerning promotion to Associate Professor. For specific performance criteria and guidelines for promotion to Associate Professor, refer to the indices of scholarship, teaching, and service provided in Section III.1.4.5, and by Tables 3-1, 3-2A, 3-2B, 3-3A, 3-3B, 3-4A, and 3-4B of this Handbook. All candidates for early promotion to Associate Professor must significantly exceed the requirements specified for on-time promotion.
  4. Benchmarks and Criteria for Promotion to Professor

    1. Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor recognizes the highest level of university achievement and is a reward to an individual for bringing their career to national/international prominence. 
    2. Evidence of “Outstanding” scholarship accomplishments; a record of successful and/or improving teaching (for faculty with assigned instructional responsibilities); demonstrated professional public and professional service; and evidence of significant contributions to the candidate’s field of study are the principal criteria considered in arriving at a recommendation concerning promotion to Professor. Evidence for this prominence includes a record of sustained and substantial scholarship, along with prominence in and impact on their field of expertise. 
    3. For additional, specific performance criteria and guidelines for promotion to Professor, refer to the indices of scholarship, teaching, and service provided in Section III.1.4.5, and by Tables 3-1, 3-2A, 3-2B, 3-3A, 3-3B, 3-4A, and 3-4B of this Handbook. Promotion to Professor requires five years teaching at the rank of Associate Professor, unless otherwise specified. All candidates for early promotion to Professor must significantly exceed the requirements specified for on-time promotion.
  5. Performance Assessment

    1. Tables 3-1, 3-2A, 3-2B, 3-3A, 3-3B, 3-4A, and 3-4B (shown below) provide a rating scale along with assessment criteria and guidelines used for evaluation of a tenured/tenure-track faculty member’s performance in the areas of Scholarship, Teaching, and University Service. 
      1. Candidates for tenure must have a minimal rating of “Excellent” in Scholarship; a minimal rating of “Very Good” in Teaching; and a minimal rating of “Meets Obligations” in University Citizenship. A candidate applying for early tenure must significantly exceed the performance required for on-time tenure.
      2. Candidates for promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor must have a minimal rating of “Excellent” in Scholarship; a minimal rating of “Very Good” in Teaching; and a minimal rating of “Meets Obligations” in University Citizenship. Letters from external reviewers must show substantial support for promotion, and ideally, would indicate that the candidate is recognized as an emerging national/international expert in his/her area of expertise. A candidate applying for early promotion to Associate Professor must significantly exceed the performance required for on-time promotion to Associate Professor.
        The following list exemplifies accomplishments that are highly considered for promotion to Associate Professor. 
        The candidate: 

        ⦁    Has demonstrated a history of exceptional publication quality within a substantial body of scholarship. 
        ⦁    Has obtained extensive and substantive grant awards for nationally competitive extramural research grants as a principal investigator. 
        ⦁    Is recognized as an international/national expert in his/her area of expertise.
        ⦁    Has developed and established new, successful academic programs. 
        ⦁    Has developed and established new, successful research areas/programs.
        ⦁    Has significantly enhanced existing academic programs and research programs.
        ⦁    Has advanced knowledge through original research. 
        ⦁    Has a record of sustained scholarship with a measurable impact on the field.
        ⦁    Has a history of continuous and/or extensive submission of proposals for research.
         
      3. Candidates for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor must have a rating of “Outstanding” in Scholarship; a minimal rating of “Very Good” in Teaching; and a rating of “Exceeds Obligations” in University Citizenship. Letters from external reviewers must show strong support for promotion, and ideally, would indicate that the candidate is recognized as an established national/international expert in his/her area of expertise. A candidate applying for early promotion to Professor must significantly exceed the performance required for on-time promotion to Professor.
        The following list exemplifies accomplishments that are highly considered for promotion to Professor. 
        The candidate: 

        ⦁    Has demonstrated a history of exceptional publication quality within a substantial body of scholarship. 
        ⦁    Has obtained extensive and substantive grant awards for nationally competitive extramural research grants as a principal investigator. 
        ⦁    Is recognized as an international/national expert in his/her area of expertise.
        ⦁    Has developed and established new, successful academic programs. 
        ⦁    Has developed and established new, successful research areas/programs.
        ⦁    Has significantly enhanced existing academic programs and research programs.
        ⦁    Has advanced knowledge through original research. 
        ⦁    Has a record of sustained scholarship with a measurable impact on the field.
        ⦁    Has a history of continuous and/or extensive submission of proposals for research.
         
    2. The activities provided on the various “Criteria for Evaluation” tables are not meant to be an exhaustive list or mandatory checklist. It is recognized that some individuals may have valid accomplishments that should be considered that are not listed in the tables. 
    3. Candidates for tenure and promotion should consult most closely with their initial letters of appointment, their letters of reappointment, the CAE Faculty Handbook, their Academic Program Director, and their senior faculty colleagues for guidance on specific requirements and expectations. 
    4. The performance expectations for tenure and promotion do not apply identically across all faculty members in the College. Some faculty have appointments in which the scholarly expectations involve primarily traditional academic publications, while others will receive appointments in which the scholarly expectations involve primarily professional and/or applied accomplishment. Also, grant-writing expectations will vary depending on the availability of extramural funding in the faculty members’ areas of specialization. 
    5. For all candidates for tenure and promotion, the College considers three broad categories of work: scholarship, teaching and service, but definitions, particularly of scholarship, will vary some from discipline to discipline. Initial letters of appointment and letters of reappointment always take precedence over the College Handbook for purposes of tenure and promotion decisions.
    6. The ad hoc review committee and the Dean may provide a positive recommendation for advancement in those cases where a candidate displays an exceptionally high level of accomplishment in some matters that outweighs lesser accomplishments in other areas. 
       

      Table 3-1. Faculty Performance Standards/Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

      Category

      Minimum Required Performance

      Scholarship

      Teaching

      University Citizenship

      Tenure

      Excellent

      Very Good

      Meets Obligations

      Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor

      Excellent

      Very Good

      Meets Obligations

      Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor

      Outstanding

      Very Good

      Exceeds Obligations

  6. Scholarship

    1. Scholarship includes the process of creating and disseminating new research-based knowledge within the candidate’s field or a closely related field. Scholarship also includes the creation and dissemination of new and multi-disciplinary knowledge that extends beyond the traditional boundaries of their discipline. It also involves the rethinking of current knowledge in order to present new understandings or interpretation of theoretical and practical information that exists in their field. 
    2. Scholarship is an essential and critical component of University activity. The originality, quality, impact and value of the work must be assessed. To assist this process, the tenure or promotion candidate shall submit to the Dean the names of at least three experts in her/his field who are considered capable of judging the candidate's work. Recommended reviewers must be approved and contacted by the Dean and other reviewers may be added by the Dean in accordance with University policy. Moreover, the candidate must provide the ad hoc RTP Committee with ample descriptive evidence of his/her scholarly activity. A faculty member's specific area of specialization may be a factor in the number and size of grants received and in the scope and time required for research and the resulting publications. 
    3. In addition to funded research and scholarly publications, other scholarly activities including but not limited to serving on national grant review bodies, presenting at refereed professional meetings, chairing society committees, and presenting papers before learned societies should be considered. These later activities complement scholarly publications and grant funded research. Faculty members are encouraged to hold membership in professional societies, attend and participate in institutes and seminars, organize institutes, seminars, and workshops, insofar as such activities enhance their professional competency. 
    4. Journals and other peer-reviewed publications and presentations are evaluated based on their scope and reputation, and on the refereeing process to which submissions are subjected. Candidates for tenure and promotion must describe how the peer review takes place and the competitiveness of the forum reviewing the work.
    5. Standards for the Evaluation of Scholarship
      1. The evaluation components for the assessment of scholarship for tenure and promotion are shown in Table 3-2A. All tenured/tenure track faculty of the College are expected to demonstrate excellence in scholarship by achieving at a minimum an “Excellent” rating in the scholarship category. The indicators used to assess the quality of scholarly activity are provided in Table 3-2B. 
      2. Table 3-2B provides a list of the scholarly activities recognized by the CAE that should be used as criteria for evaluating a candidate's performance in scholarship for tenure or promotion.
      3. Indicators of the quality of a faculty member’s research record include the quality and quantity of published work as well as the faculty member’s success in obtaining extramural funds. All faculty members in the College are expected to produce records of scholarship that reflect their disciplinary focus, and the attributes of an individual faculty member’s scholarly activity will vary across disciplines.
      4. To achieve an “Excellent” or “Outstanding” rating in the category of the scholarship at the time a faculty member stands for tenure and promotion, he/she should have established a record which demonstrates an impact upon his/her discipline. Within this context, each faculty member who will seek tenure or promotion is obligated to provide evidence supporting his/her scholarly record. This obligation will be met by providing specific information about their scholarly activities including such things as: article and journal quality and impact; funding history and plans; and/or a description in the faculty member’s materials of any other evidence of scholarship that the faculty member deems appropriate. In turn, the members of the College's ad hoc RTP Committee and the Dean shall evaluate a candidate’s record in light of the College's expectations for a successful tenure or promotion decision. 
    1. Table 3-2A Performance Levels for Assessment of Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion


      Table 3-2A. Performance Levels for Assessment of Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion

      Level

       

      Scholarship

      Outstanding

      Definition: Nationally/Internationally acclaimed scholarship. 

       

      Accomplishments: During the candidate’s review period, meets all of the following criteria.

       

      1) At least five peer-reviewed publications in the discipline. At least two instances must be in a peer-reviewed journal.1

       

      2) At least one significant externally-funded grant (funding, equipment, software, in-kind support, etc.) 1

       

      3) At least two poster/oral presentations at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

      4) Completes at least 40 instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least 15 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      5) Possesses the terminal degree, as defined in Appendix A (Required/Terminal Degrees) of this Handbook, in the candidate’s primary academic program area or in an appropriately-related field.

      Outstanding

      Definition: Nationally/Internationally acclaimed scholarship. 

       

      Accomplishments: During the candidate’s review period, meets all of the following criteria.

       

      1) At least five peer-reviewed publications in the discipline. At least two instances must be in a peer-reviewed journal.1

       

      2) At least one significant externally-funded grant (funding, equipment, software, in-kind support, etc.) 1

       

      3) At least two poster/oral presentations at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

      4) Completes at least 40 instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least 15 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      5) Possesses the terminal degree, as defined in Appendix A (Required/Terminal Degrees) of this Handbook, in the candidate’s primary academic program area or in an appropriately-related field.

      Very Good

      Definition: Emerging nationally recognized scholarship.

       

      Accomplishments: Meets all of the following criteria.

       

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: At least three peer-reviewed publications in the discipline. At least one instance must be in a peer-reviewed journal.1

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: At least one peer-reviewed journal publication in the discipline.1

       

      2) At least one significant externally-funded grant proposal (funding, equipment, software, in-kind support, etc.) 1

       

      3A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: At least one poster/oral presentation at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

       

      3B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: At least one poster/oral presentation at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

       

      4A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      4B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least three instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      5) Possession of the terminal degree, as defined in Appendix A (Required/Terminal Degrees) of this Handbook, in the candidate’s primary academic program area or in an appropriately-related field.

      Good

      Definition: Active scholarship.

      Accomplishments: Meets all of the following criteria.

       

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: At least two peer-reviewed publications in the discipline. At least one instance must be in a peer-reviewed journal.1

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: At least one peer-reviewed publication in the discipline.1

       

      2) At least one significant externally-funded grant proposal (funding, equipment, software, in-kind support, etc.) 1

       

      3A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: At least one poster/oral presentation at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

       

      3B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: At least one poster/oral presentation at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

       

      4A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 15 instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least three instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      4B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least eight instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least two instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      5) Possession of the terminal degree, as defined in Appendix A (Required/Terminal Degrees) of this Handbook, in the candidate’s primary academic program area or in an appropriately-related field.

       

      Weak

      Definition: Limited scholarship.

       

      Accomplishments: Meets all of the following criteria.

       

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Only one peer-reviewed publication in the discipline. 1

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Only one peer-reviewed publication in the discipline.1

       

      2) One or less significant externally-funded grant proposal (funding, equipment, software, in-kind support, etc.) 1

       

      3A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Only one poster/oral presentations at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

       

      3B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: One or less poster/oral presentation at a regional/national/ international conference, meeting, symposium, workshop, seminar, etc.

       

      4A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least two instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      4B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least five instances of the items listed in Table 3-2B (Criteria for Evaluation of Scholarship), to include at least one instance of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      5) Possession of the terminal degree, as defined in Appendix A (Required/Terminal Degrees) of this Handbook, in the candidate’s primary academic program area or in an appropriately-related field.

       

      Poor

      Definition:  No scholarship.

      Accomplishments: Does not meet all of the criteria for the “Weak” level of Scholarship


      1Exceptions may be granted to those faculty whose primary responsibilities are in the Air Traffic Control, Aviation Management, Aviation Human Factors, or Aviation Safety academic areas.

    2. Table 3-2B Criteria for Evaluation of Performance in Scholarship

      1. Table 3-2B. Criteria for Evaluation of Performance in Scholarship
         

        CAE Guidelines

        Criteria for Evaluation of Performance

        Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty

         

        Scholarship

         

        Reviewers will base their evaluation upon the documented degree of excellence achieved in Scholarship for those activities that are related to the applicant’s discipline. The candidate is expected to provide a clear explanation of the nature and importance of accomplishments, initiatives taken, leadership roles, etc. Reviewers will be looking for specifics.

         

        It is the responsibility of the candidate to demonstrate the significance of their scholarly efforts and activities. Documentation of those efforts should demonstrate the degree of application to Scholarship such as the impact on the profession or discipline, professional growth, etc.  It is the candidate’s responsibility to identify the nature and importance of an activity, their role in the activity, and their level of participation and contribution to the activity. For publications and presentations, the candidate should describe the importance of the organization/group involved, the publication medium, and/or the meeting forum.  For peer-reviewed items the candidate should describe the peer-review venue/forum and should describe the review process, the review panel composition, the number of articles received, and the number of articles accepted. For research efforts, the candidate should describe the significance and importance of their research.

         

        The activities listed below are not all-inclusive and the committee may consider items submitted by the faculty member that are not listed, but are relevant.

         

         

        Viewed as Exemplary:
         

        • Membership as a board member, officer, official, or consultant in professional standards, regulatory, or advisory organizations
        • Refereed/peer-reviewed papers published in the highest-tier journals in the discipline
        • Refereed/peer-reviewed papers published in the middle-tier journals in the discipline
        • Refereed/peer-reviewed papers published in the proceedings of highest-tier conferences/symposiums in the discipline
        • Refereed/peer-reviewed papers published in the proceedings of middle-tier conferences/symposiums in discipline
        • Authorship of a professional/scientific/technical book
        • Authorship of chapter(s) in a professional/scientific/technical book
        • Professional experience (e.g. consulting, paid or unpaid) related to the discipline
        • Membership by invitation in professional/scientific honor societies
        • Awarding of a patent within one's discipline
        • Establishment of a nationally/internationally recognized research program
        • Extramural/externally funded research or development grants; research or development seed grants
        • Research-related service to national, international, or regional organizations
        • Awards, recognition from national and international professional or scientific societies
        • Impact of scholarship in the profession as measured through an exceptional level of citations of published work
        • Membership as a board member, officer, official, or consultant in professional standards, regulatory, or advisory organizations
        • Chief editor of a professional or scientific journal or monograph
        • Panel moderator/director at a professional conference or meeting
        • Commercialization of a product or services related to one’s discipline
        • Leader and major contributor in establishing a new academic program
        • Leader and major contributor in establishing a nationally/internationally recognized research area/program
        • Leader and major contributor for the initial accreditation of an academic program
        • Keynote speaker at a professional conference/symposium/meeting
        • Advising/directing students in graduate research
        • Advising or sponsoring student design or engineering efforts in regional, national, or international competitions
        • Integration of new and emerging knowledge, technology, or methods into research or curriculum
        • Invited or refereed/peer-reviewed presentations or posters at professional or scholarly meetings, conferences, symposiums, or other forums
           


        Viewed as Favorable:
         

        • Authorship of non-refereed items publications such as technical reports, contractor reports, white papers, etc.
        • Book review of technical/professional/scientific books
        • Contributions to non-refereed professional newsletters, websites, blogs, and other forums
        • Unfunded grant proposals (including RFPs)
        • Pending grant proposals (including RFPs)
        • Awarding of patents outside one's discipline
        • Textbook reviewer or author of supplemental materials for an existing textbook
        • Papers published in the lower-tier journals in the discipline
        • Papers, articles, professional publications, and other scholarly publications in the discipline (non-refereed)
        • Editing a refereed journal, or reviewer of refereed journal articles or monographs
        • Advising students who present at Kent State University undergraduate or graduate research symposiums
        • Advising students who present at student national or regional conferences
        • Advising/directing students in undergraduate research
        • Advising students who present at Kent State University undergraduate or graduate research symposiums
        • Advising students who present at international, national, or regional conferences/symposiums
        • Advising/directing students in undergraduate research
        • Research or consulting partnerships with business, government, or industry that are discipline related
        • Significant participation in establishing a new academic program
        • Significant participation in establishing a nationally/internationally recognized research area/program
        • Significant participation in the initial accreditation of an academic program
        • Research-related service to state or local organizations
        • Impact of scholarship in the profession as measured through a significant level of citations of published work
        • Submitted papers/publications pending acceptance
        • Advising or sponsoring student design or engineering efforts in state or local competitions
        • Technical presentations at other departments or institutions
        • Non-refereed/non-peer reviewed presentations or posters presented at professional or scholarly meetings, conferences, symposiums, or other forums


        Viewed unfavorably and/or not considered:
         

        • Minimal activity with respect to scholarship
        • Poorly explained and/or poorly documented citations of any scholarly activity
        • Articles submitted for review but not accepted or in print
        • Scholarship in areas not related to discipline/assignment

         

        Notes on Scholarly Activities:

        • Publications include: papers in refereed/peer-reviewed journals of recognized quality, peer-reviewed conference proceedings, books, and book chapters.  Evaluation of publication record will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field as well as quantity.  Papers of exceptional length, impact and quality are given increased recognition. 

         

        • “Grants” refers to extramural funding where the role of the faculty member in securing the funding is clearly demonstrated and which are of sufficient magnitude to support research at a level and duration appropriate for the discipline. Grant support includes funding, software, equipment, materials, supplies, and personnel (graduate students, research technicians and/or post-doctoral associates).  “Seed Grants” are extramural grants that are not of sufficient magnitude to fully support doctoral students or are intramural grants.  "Seed Grants" should be designed to lead to successful applications for “Grants.” Grantsmanship should be commensurate with the field of research with the recognition that the dollar amount of awards varies among fields.  Faculty should identify their portion of the grant funding/support received for any grants that are awarded to multiple recipients.  

         

        • Recognitions from scientific societies include, for example, election to office, editorial board membership, editorship, etc.  Service to federal/state institutions includes service on federal proposal panels, site visits, and other research related activities.

         

        • Forthcoming and in-press works may be considered as part of the evaluation of a candidate’s work for tenure.
           
        • Integration refers to assimilating the emerging knowledge/technology in a new manner, using it in a new way, thereby contributing to new knowledge and new scholarship which must be demonstrated in the record.
  7. Teaching

    1. Teaching involves activities that promote the development of effective strategies to better communicate information to students. Teaching involves planning and examination of pedagogical techniques, dissemination of such information in peer-reviewed contexts (e.g. publications in refereed journals, juried papers or conference presentations, juried proceedings and/or abstracts), as well as the act of teaching itself.
    2. Candidates for reappointment will be expected to demonstrate strong commitment to and growth in their teaching skill through the duration of their probationary years. Candidates for tenure and promotion will be expected to demonstrate a mature level of competence and effectiveness in teaching. 
    3. Evidence of the commitment to competence and effectiveness in teaching could include such things as development of a broad teaching repertoire, course revisions, new courses developed, innovative use of instructional technology, attending conferences and workshops on teaching, seeking peer mentoring, mentoring students, etc. Peer reviews must be a part of the submitted record of candidates for reappointment, tenure, and promotion. Other information such as written comments from students, colleagues within and beyond the candidate’s Academic Program Area or College, or from University administrators, shall be considered when available. Copies of representative syllabi, examinations, and other relevant material should be available for review.
    4. Standards for the Evaluation of Teaching  
      1. The performance levels for the assessment of teaching for tenure and promotion are shown in Table 3-3A. All tenured/tenure track faculty of the College are expected to achieve a minimum of a “Very Good” rating in the teaching category. The indicators used to assess the quality of teaching activity are provided in Table 3-3B.
      2. Table 3-3B provides a list of the teaching activities recognized by the CAE that should be used as criteria for evaluating a candidate's performance in teaching for tenure or promotion.
    1. Table 3-3A Performance Levels for Assessment of Teaching for Promotion and Tenure

      Level

      Teaching

       

      Outstanding

      Definition:  Outstanding teacher; provides leadership in instructional development.

      Accomplishments:  During the candidate’s review period, meets the following criteria.

       

      1) Completes at least 50 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 25 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      Excellent

      Definition:  Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional development.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 40 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 20 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

      Very Good

      Definition:  Innovative teacher.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 30 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 15 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 15 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least eight instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      Good

      Definition:  Meets teaching obligations well.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

      Weak

      Definition:  Substandard teacher.

       

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes at least five instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), to include at least three instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

      Poor

      Definition:  Substandard, ineffective teacher.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

      1A) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor: Completes less than 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), and/or less than five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      1B) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor: Completes less than five instances of the items listed in Table 3-3B (Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching), and/or less than three instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

    2. Table 3-3B Criteria for Evaluation of Performance in Teaching

      CAE Guidelines

      Criteria for Evaluation of Performance

      Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty

       

      Teaching

       

      Reviewers will base their evaluation upon the documented degree of excellence achieved in Teaching for those activities that are related to the applicant’s discipline. The candidate is expected to provide a clear explanation of the nature and importance of accomplishments, initiatives taken, leadership roles, etc. Reviewers will be looking for specifics.

       

      It is the responsibility of the candidate to demonstrate the impact of their teaching efforts and activities. Documentation of those efforts should identify the nature and importance of an activity, their role in the activity, and their level of participation and contribution to the activity.

       

      The activities listed below are not all-inclusive and the committee may consider items submitted by the faculty member that are not listed, but are relevant.

       

      Viewed as Exemplary:

      • Recipient of University or external teaching award
      • Nominee for University or external teaching award
      • Consistently exceptional peer reviews of instruction based on actual classroom observation
      • Achieving significant improvements in teaching based upon peer review of instruction comments and feedback
      • Innovation in pedagogy and/or use of technology for teaching
      • Authorship of a new course or a major revision to an existing course
      • Leadership in creation of a new degree, major, or concentration area
      • Initiation and pursuit of a successful grant application resulting in funding of lab development, equipment, software, or other instructional/research items
      • Teaching an exceptional breadth and/or variety of courses
      • Course preparations and/or new course development requiring a significant learning curve
      • Course preparations and/or new course development requiring substantial creation of new course materials
      • Development of online learning tutorials
      • Developing research projects for students
      • Instructional creativity
      • Leadership in curricular revisions
      • Extensive lab development
      • Authorship in pedagogical research in peer-reviewed publications
      • Adaptation of innovative technologies, instructional tools, or teaching methods in the classroom
      • Extensive upgrade or acquisition of academic or professional credentials (Including advanced degrees, certifications, licensures, etc.)
      • Introduction of emerging subjects/materials into courses and curricula
      • Direction of an undergraduate student research project that leads to student presentation or publication
      • Establishment of regional, national, or international alliances in the field or discipline
      • Training program development
      • Directing a thesis, Honors project, or dissertation
      • Supervision of graduate students assigned as research assistants
      • Supervision of culminating experience or capstone course work

       

      Viewed as Favorable:

      • Thoughtful statement of teaching philosophy and self-assessment
      • Favorable peer reviews of instruction based on actual classroom observation.
      • Evidence of responding to an unfavorable peer review of instruction resulting in course and/or teaching improvement
      • Nomination for, or recipient of, campus teaching award; Nomination for University or external teaching award
      • Effective innovation in pedagogy and/or use of technology
      • Active participant in the redesign or restructuring of a degree, major, or concentration
      • Development of a new certificate program
      • Lab development or management
      • Serving on a thesis, Honors project, or dissertation committee
      • Maintenance of professional credentials (certifications, licensures, etc.) as evidence of maintaining currency
      • Professional development (attending courses, conferences, workshops, webinars, internships; obtaining new certifications or licensures, etc.)
      • Courses taught via distance learning
      • Courses taught for the first time, or that require significant revision, modification, and/or preparation
      • Actively participating in curricular revisions
      • Establishment of state or local alliances in the field or discipline
      • Training program, webinar, workshop, or seminar instruction

       

      Viewed unfavorably and/or not considered:

      • No statement of teaching philosophy or self-assessment
      • Unimpressive peer reviews of instruction
      • No evidence of responding to an unfavorable peer review of instruction: no evidence of improvement in class management, course content/design, or teaching method.
      • Lack of representative syllabi and other supporting documentation
      • Poorly explained and/or appropriately documented citations in any teaching activities; No evidence (or poorly documented evidence) of curricular activity or leadership
      • Poorly documented activities and/or accomplishments

       

      Notes on Teaching Activities:

      Application of new/emerging technologies refers to mastering emerging technologies and utilizing them in the classroom for pedagogical purposes or for lecture material

       

  8. University/Professional Citizenship

    1. A faculty member's contributions as a University citizen include service to the candidate’s Academic Program Area, the Campus, the College, and the University as outlined in Tables 3-4A and 3-4B. The merits of University Citizenship should be evaluated as to: 1) whether or not the candidate chaired the committee listed; and 2) the importance of the service to the mission of the unit served. Less tangible components of citizenship include active participation in Academic Program Area events such as faculty and graduate student recruitment, seminars, Academic Program Area meetings and seminars, etc.
    2. Being an active and useful citizen of the Academic Program Area, Campus, College, and University is expected and valued; however, service of any magnitude cannot be considered more important than a candidate's research and other scholarly activity and instructional responsibilities.
    1. Table 3-4A Performance Levels for Assessment of University Citizenship for Tenure and Promotion

      Level

      University Citizenship

      Exceeds Obligation

      Definition:  Significant role in school, college, and/or university service.  Significant role in academic, professional, and scientific communities and associations at international, national, state, and local levels.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria.

       

      1) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments, promotion to Associate Professor, or promotion to Professor:

      Completes at least 40 instances of the items listed in Table 3-4B (Criteria for Evaluation of University Citizenship), to include at least 20 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      2) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor:

      Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-4B (Criteria for Evaluation of University Citizenship), to include at least 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      Note: The “instances” in the University Citizenship area are defined on a semester basis (Fall/Spring/Summer).

      Meets Obligation

      Definition:  Active involvement in school, college, and/or university service.   Active involvement in academic and professional communities and professional associations at international, national, state, and local levels.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria. 

      1) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor, or promotion to Professor:

      Completes at least 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-4B (Criteria for Evaluation of University Citizenship), to include at least 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      2) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor:

      Completes at least 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-4B (Criteria for Evaluation of University Citizenship), to include at least five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

      Note: The “instances” in the University Citizenship area are defined on a semester basis (Fall/Spring/Summer).

      Does Not Meet Obligations

      Definition:  Does not actively participate in service activities or minimal record of involvement in service activities. Fails to follow-through on assigned obligations.

      Accomplishments: Meets the following criteria. 

      1) For Six-year Tenure Track appointments or promotion to Associate Professor, or promotion to Professor:

      Completes less than 20 instances of the items listed in Table 3-4B (Criteria for Evaluation of University Citizenship), and/or less than 10 instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      2) For Three-year Tenure Track appointments or accelerated promotion to Associate Professor:

      Completes less than 10 instances of the items listed in Table 3-4B (Criteria for Evaluation of University Citizenship), and/or less than five instances of the items associated with “Exemplary” activities/accomplishments.

       

      Note: The “instances” in the University Citizenship area are defined on a semester basis (Fall/Spring/Summer).

       

       

      Note: Other components of citizenship are also considered (including public outreach and public and professional service) in reappointment, tenure and promotion decisions and may differ in their importance among faculty members depending on each faculty member’s duties and responsibilities within the College. Leadership and participation in learned societies and professional organizations are reviewed as part of one's citizenship record. 

    2. Table3-4B Criteria for Evaluation of Performance In University Service

      CAE Guidelines

      Criteria for Evaluation of Performance

      Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty

       

      University Citizenship

       

      Reviewers will base their evaluation upon the documented degree of excellence achieved in University Citizenship for service activities. The candidate is expected to provide a clear explanation of the nature and importance of accomplishments, initiatives taken, leadership roles, etc. Reviewers will be looking for specifics.

       

      It is the responsibility of the candidate to demonstrate the impact of their citizenship/service efforts and activities. Documentation of those efforts should identify the nature and importance of an activity, their role in the activity, and their level of participation and contribution to the activity, along with a description of the forum and/or entities involved. 

       

      The activities listed below are not all-inclusive and the committee may consider items submitted by the faculty member that are not listed, but are relevant.

       

      Viewed as Exemplary:

      • Committee membership acclaim/citations, accompanied by documentation of candidate's contributions, accomplishments, leadership roles, etc. 
      • Service awards from organizations within the field of discipline
      • Leadership in planning/organizing a campus recruiting event
      • Leadership role in successful internship and/or co-op and/or practicum programs
      • Organization of a professional conference at a regional or state level; serving as a section chair or higher at a regional, national, or international conference
      • Participation in community development activities and grants integrated with one’s discipline
      • Organization of consortia to articulate with and perpetuate one’s program or discipline
      • Office held in an organization related to the discipline at the regional, national, or international level
      • Establishment of professional or scientific alliances
      • Membership as a board member or officer/official in academic, professional, or scientific societies/organizations
      • Membership as a board member, officer, official, or consultant in government regulatory or advisory bodies
      • University-level committee, commission, or board membership
      • College-level committee chair
      • Leadership on university, college, and academic program area committees and boards
      • Leadership to the professional community and professional associations at the international, national, or regional level
      • Holding office as part of the executive board of professional or scientific associations at the international, national, or regional level
      • Leadership in professional committees and working groups at the international, national, or regional level
      • Advising a student organization related to one's discipline (e.g., a student chapter of a professional organization)

       

      Viewed as Favorable:

      • Publication of discipline-related, non-refereed articles in magazines, newspapers, web sites, blogs, etc. that are provided for the general public
      • Presentations for service or professional organizations outside of area of expertise
      • Active and regular participation in successful internship and/or co-op and/or practicum programs
      • Projects integrating and engaging students with businesses, industry, or government
      • Advising a student organization outside of one's discipline
      • Participation on advisory boards
      • Participation in campus/program recruiting events
      • Participation in campus/program marketing initiatives, e.g., creation/design of marketing materials
      • Participation in the integration of community with program activities
      • Office held in an organization related to the discipline at the state or local level
      • Membership in professional or scientific organizations/societies
      • Student retention and recruiting activities
      • College-level and/or Division-level administrative positions held
      • College-level committee membership
      • Academic Division-level ad hoc committee membership
      • Active participation on university, college, and academic program area committees and boards
      • Service awards from organizations outside the field of discipline
      • Significant participation in successful internship and/or co-op and/or practicum programs
      • Discipline-related presentations in public forums
      • Organizing University forums or exhibits
      • Active participation in noteworthy events
      • Participation on university, college, and academic program area committees and boards
      • Participation on professional committees and working groups
      • Holding office as part of the executive board of professional or scientific associations at the state or local level
      • Leadership to the professional community and professional associations at the state or local level
      • Leadership to professional committees and working groups at the state or local level

       

      Viewed unfavorably and/or not considered:

      • Minimal activity with respect to University Citizenship
      • Poorly documented citations in any University Citizenship activities; citations without evidence of candidate's contributions, accomplishments, leadership roles
      • Publication of non-refereed minor newspaper articles, letters to the editor, blogs, op-eds, etc.
      • No evidence of exemplary performance