Tenure and Promotion | Computer Science Handbook | Kent State University

Tenure and Promotion

The policies and procedures for tenure are included in the University policy and procedures regarding faculty tenure (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-14) and the policies and procedures for promotion are included in the University policy and procedures regarding faculty promotion (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-15). Each academic year, tenure and promotion guidelines for Kent and Regional Campus faculty are distributed by the Office of the Provost.

Both the tenure decision and the promotion decision can include evaluation of accomplishments prior to arrival at Kent State University. These evaluations can include review of the candidate’s published (or “accepted for publication”) peer reviewed papers and articles, including an assessment of the quality of the publication and / or the impact of the article using citation indexes appropriate to the field; grant activity (proposals submitted, grants received); graduate students advised; teaching evaluations and peer reviews; university and professional service; and other professional activity.

Many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, are considered in recommending a faculty member for tenure and promotion. 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 Department.

Tenure and promotion are separate decisions. The tenure decision is based on all of the evidence available to determine the candidate’s potential to pursue a productive career that will likely result in eventual promotion to full Professor in the Department and will contribute to the development of the Department. The promotion decision, in contrast, is recognition based only on a candidate’s accomplishments to date.

  1. Tenure

    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 tenure decision is based on all of the evidence available to determine the candidate’s potential to pursue a productive career that will likely result in eventual promotion to full Professor in the Department and will contribute to the development of the Department.

    As such, the awarding of tenure must be based on convincing documented evidence that the faculty member has achieved a significant body of scholarship that is likely to have an impact on her / his discipline and that will ultimately result in the establishment of a nationally and internationally recognized research program (Level I in Table 5), demonstrated effectiveness as a teacher and mentor (Level II in Table 6), and meeting the normal obligations for university service (Level II in Table 7). The candidate should also be likely 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.

  2. Promotion

    Separate from the tenure decision, promotion is recognition based on a candidate’s accomplishments to date. Promotion to Associate Professor recognizes an emerging nationally or internationally recognized research program (Level II in Table 5), as evidenced by a demonstrated record of publications, grant activity, and professional service. For promotion to Associate Professor, the faculty member must also have demonstrated effectiveness as a teacher and mentor (Level II in Table 6), and must have met the normal obligations for university citizenship (Level II in Table 7).

    Promotion to Professor recognizes the establishment of a nationally and internationally recognized research program that has had an impact on the field (Level I in Table 5). A candidate for promotion to Professor must also have demonstrated effectiveness as a teacher and mentor (Level II in Table 6), and must have met the normal obligations for university citizenship (Level II in Table 7).