Weighting of Reappointment, Tenure & Promotion Criteria & the Criteria and Processes Relating to Other Faculty Personnel Actions

The Department requires that the scholarship and relevant professional activity of candidates for tenure be reviewed by scholars knowledgeable in the candidate's field or sub-field who do not hold academic appointments at Kent State University.  The candidate's file must contain a minimum of three letters from outside evaluators. After discussion with the Department Chairperson, the candidate for tenure supplies the Chairperson with a list and short scholarly biography of at least four persons who might serve in this capacity.  These scholars are to be specialists in the candidate's field and must carry at minimum the rank of associate professor; undergraduate and graduate advisors or mentors are excluded from the list of possible reviewers.  The Department Chairperson will select and contact reviewers from that list.  To preserve the professionalism of the process, the candidate will not communicate with the reviewers, but will supply the Chairperson with sufficient copies of his/her C.V., scholarly publications and presentations, and work in progress.  The Chairperson may also seek additional information and material that bears on the candidate's qualifications and performance.

In terms of scholarship, candidates for tenure in the Department will be expected to provide evidence of ongoing scholarship, usually the receipt of a book publication contract from an appropriate press (after a process of scholarly review) for a historical monograph based on original research.  The scholarly monograph may be, but is not limited to, a revised doctoral dissertation.  The candidate's file must contain a copy of the book manuscript.

The candidate is also expected to continue and sustain, over the long term, a program of high quality teaching, scholarship and activity relevant to the mission of the candidate's academic unit(s) and to the mission of the University. Tenure considerations can include evaluation of accomplishments prior to arrival at Kent State University to examine consistency, as well as grant proposals submitted but not funded, proposals pending, papers “in review” or “in press,” graduate students currently advised, and any other materials that may reflect on the candidate's potential for a long-term successful career. The tenure decision is based on all of the evidence available to determine the candidate's potential to pursue a productive career.

In accordance with University Policy as set forth in the Collective Bargaining Agreement the Department of History recognizes that there can be differences in mission and teaching load at the Regional Campuses.  These variations will be considered when evaluating faculty for reappointment and tenure purposes.

Candidates for review are not evaluated along single, isolated dimensions of performance, but rather on their whole performance, viewed as a unified, integrated record of a teacher, scholar, and university citizen. Because of the emphasis on teaching at the Regional Campuses the Department of History has determined that much greater weight will be given for excellent teaching with a record of scholarship and service also expected.

Teaching is the primary goal at the regional campuses and faculty members have a special responsibility to demonstrate excellence in teaching. High quality teaching can be evaluated in a variety of ways, including but not limited to, curriculum development, student evaluations, peer observations, participation in professional development, innovative teaching practices, and engagement of students in research and service learning.  Excellence in teaching may also be demonstrated by pedagogical research related to the discipline and disseminated for peer review publication and presentation. 

Scholarship with the discipline is necessary to remain current in teaching and a successful candidate for tenure must demonstrate scholarly activity. Scholarship can include, but is not limited to, peer reviewed publications, refereed presentations at professional meetings, research in oral histories, and internal and external grants.

University Citizenship is also expected of all tenure-track faculty. By the time of the tenure review, the candidate must show a significant role in service at the campus, unit, and university levels. These activities can include, but are not limited to, participation on committees, involvement in community or university events, effectively chairing committees, specific administrative assignments, community outreach, and contributions to regional, national, or international professional organizations related to pedagogy or history.

The promotion to Associate is recognition based on a candidate's accomplishments completed during the review period and promotion decisions are usually based upon the publication of a historical monograph from an appropriate press after completion of a process of scholarly review. Publication is defined as either “in press” -- meaning that the manuscript had been peer reviewed, revised, and is at least at the copy-editing stage -­ or “in hand.” If the manuscript is at this point in the “in press” stage, the Department requires the candidate to request a letter from the press expressing its dedication to the final publication of the project. The original scholarly monograph may be, but is not limited to, a revised doctoral dissertation. The Promotion Committee also considers  a candidate's active scholarly performance (articles, book reviews, grant applications/funded, conferences) and excellence in the act of teaching as well as university citizenship as necessary in order to support the case for promotion to the rank of associate professor.

For promotion to the rank of Professor, candidates are expected to  have  attained, beyond the achievements used to attain previous promotion, additional achievements in their area of scholarship, which should be demonstrated either in the publication of a second scholarly historical monograph based on original research, or the publication by a peer-reviewed publisher of a combination of previously published articles based upon primary sources augmented by new scholarship. The Department considers letters requested from outside experts who carry the rank of professor as the basis for the assessment of significance in these categories of scholarship.

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 personal integrity and 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.

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 candidate shall submit the names of at least five (5) experts in her/his field who are considered capable of judging the candidate's work. Moreover, the candidate  must provide the Ad Hoc RTP Committee with ample descriptive evidence of his/her scholarly activity.

In addition to scholarly publications listed above in Section V, B, other scholarly activities including articles, chapters in books, 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 expected 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.

All faculty of the department are expected to seek excellence in scholarly activity. The Department insists, to the extent possible, on documented evidence of the peer evaluation of all scholarships. It is the duty of the candidate for reappointment, tenure, and/or promotion to provide that documentation. Scholarly monographs, edited collections, and synthetic works must be published by appropriate presses that conduct anonymous scholarly reviews (vanity presses are not considered appropriate). The same criterion holds true for chapters or portions of books. The Department is sensitive to the fact that budgetary difficulties are having a serious impact on university presses and commercial presses with scholarly lists and reducing the number of scholarly publications in hard copy. Therefore, other outlets for publication of works in the various scholarships, such as online publication, public history related presentation, or documentary film production, are acceptable if subjected to the same scholarly peer review described above. To achieve "excellent" in the category of the scholarship at the time a faculty member stands for tenure and promotion, she/he should have established a research program which demonstrates an impact upon his/her discipline, which can be evinced by citations, reviews, and invited presentations. Within this context, during annual reappointment reviews, each faculty member who will seek tenure or promotion is obligated to provide some evidence supporting his/her scholarly record.  In turn, the members of the Department's Ad Hoc RTP Committee and the Chair shall evaluate a candidate's record in light of the Department's expectations for a successful tenure decision.

Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching are listed in Table 3. Course revision is defined as making a substantial modification to a course such as developing several new laboratories, addition of distance learning options, formally proposing to change course content/format, etc.

Other information such as written comments from students, colleagues within and beyond the Department, College or University administrators shall be considered when available. Peer reviews and summaries of Student Surveys of Instruction (including all student comments) must be submitted as part of a candidate's file for reappointment, tenure and promotion. Copies of representative syllabi, examinations, and other relevant teaching material should also be available for review. Documentation related to graduate student, undergraduate student, and post-doctoral student training should be included in materials provided by a candidate for reappointment, tenure and promotion. Faculty members are expected to mentor graduate students (particularly at the doctoral level) and/or postdoctoral students. Evaluation of teaching will account for differences  in missions and expectations across campuses.

A faculty member's contributions as a University citizen include service to the Department, the Campus, the College, and the University as outlined in Table 4. The merits of University service 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 department events such as faculty and graduate student recruitment, seminars, department meetings and seminars, etc.

Being an active and useful citizen of the Department, 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. Expectations in service for promotion to Professor are higher than for promotion to Associate Professor.

Appointments for full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty are governed by the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement and are made annually. Renewal of appointment is contingent upon programmatic need, satisfactory performance of previously assigned responsibilities, and budgeted resources to support the position.

Pending Review