Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

The ad hoc RTP Committee shall consider the following areas of faculty performance when making recommendations on tenure and promotion. 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 tools should be used for developmental assistance and projection of future success in achieving tenure and promotion.


Tables 1 (A and B), 2, and 3 provide guidelines for the assessment of a faculty member’s performance and a rating scale for use in the evaluation of candidates. For promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor the faculty member must meet the criteria for an “excellent” rating in either scholarship or teaching with at least a “very good” rating in the other category. University citizenship must at least meet the minimum School criteria as outlined in Table 3. These same categories and assessment tools apply for tenure decisions.


A candidate for promotion to Professor must meet the criteria for an “excellent” rating in scholarship and teaching.  University citizenship must exceed the minimum School criteria. A candidate for promotion to Professor may not necessarily have equal activity in scholarship, teaching and service as he/she becomes more specialized.

  1. Scholarship and Creative Activity

    Scholarship, research and creative activity 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. 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. 


    In addition to creative activity, 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 creative activity, 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. 

    1. Standards for the Evaluation of Scholarship and Creative Activity

      All faculty of the School are expected to seek excellence in scholarly activity. Indicators on which the assessment of the quality of scholarly activity is based are provided in Table 1.


      Indicators of the quality of a faculty member’s research and creative activity record include the quality and quantity of performances, exhibitions, installations and published work as well as the faculty member’s success in obtaining extramural funds. All faculty members in the School are expected to produce records of scholarship and creative activity that reflect their disciplinary focus and the attributes of an individual faculty member’s scholarly activity will vary across disciplines.


      To achieve “excellent” in the category of scholarship at the time a faculty member stands for tenure and promotion, she/he should have established a record of research and / or creative activity which demonstrates continued and sustained accomplishment.


      Within this context, during annual reappointment reviews, 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 the significance of performances, exhibitions and installations, article and journal quality and impact, funding history and plans, and description in the faculty member’s supplementary materials of any other evidence of scholarship that the faculty member deems appropriate. In turn, the members of the School’s ad hoc RTP Committee and the Director shall evaluate a candidate’s record in light of the School’s expectations for a successful tenure decision.   


      Responsibilities of music faculty may include teaching courses in both academic and performance areas. In these cases, scholarly activities may be reported separately or together. Evaluation of such portfolios will be based on the proportion of assigned responsibilities as indicated by load credits.


      Table 1. Kent Campus Faculty: Evaluation Components for Assessment of Scholarship for Promotion and Tenure.




      Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score


      Sustained focus with nationally and/or internationally recognized research program, and/or body of creative activity

      Demonstrated record of publications1 and grants2, and/or performances, exhibitions and installations, invitations to give presentations, research-related service to federal/state organizations, awards, recognition from artistic and/or  scientific societies3

      Very Good

      Emerging nationally

      recognized research program, and/or body of creative activity

      Demonstrated record of publications and ”seed” grants, and/or performances, exhibitions, installations and presentations at well recognized  meetings or venues with rigorous review criteria.


      Active research program and/or body of creative activity

      Some peer-reviewed

      publications or ”seed” grants, some performances, exhibitions, installations or presentations at meetings/seminars


      Limited research program and/or body of creative activity

      Occasional publications, performances, exhibitions, installations or

      meeting presentations


      No research program and/or body of creative activity

      No publications, performances, exhibitions, installations,

      presentations, or grants

      Note: definitions in footnotes below refer to the meaning of “publications,” “grants,” and “recognition” throughout Table 1.


      1Publications include: papers in peer-reviewed journals of recognized quality, as well as journals, 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 particular consideration. 

      2“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, including, as appropriate funds for supplies, materials 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. 

      3Recognitions from scientific, artistic and scholarly 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.

      See Appendices 5.B and 5.C for additional music criteria for Reappointment / Tenure/ and Promotion