Non-Tenure Track (NTT) Faculty - Renewal of Appointment and Third-Year Review | Management & Information Systems Handbook | Kent State University

Non-Tenure Track (NTT) Faculty - Renewal of Appointment and Third-Year Review

  1. Renewal of Appointment

    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, continued maintenance of professional qualifications according to AACSB guidelines, and budgeted resources to support the position.

    Reappointment review of NTT faculty is either simplified or full depending on the candidate’s length of service. Procedures for these reviews are contained in Article X, Section 8.A and Addendum B of the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) effective at the time of the review of a member of the bargaining unit.

  2. Third-Year Full Performance Reappointment Review

    Each academic year, guidelines for the third-year full performance reviews for NTT faculty at the Kent and Regional Campuses are distributed by the Office of the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs. The third-year full performance review concludes with the College or, if applicable, the division of the Regional Campuses’ level of review and determination. The period of performance to be reviewed is the three (3) full academic years of appointments including that portion of the third appointment, which is subject to evaluation and assessment at the time of the review.

    Review of NTT faculty at both the Kent and Regional Campuses is based primarily on instructional effectiveness. In general, and at the very least, the Three-Year Review file will include the following items:

    • A self-evaluation providing an assessment of the candidate’s teaching during the period under review, as well as the candidate’s performance of other responsibilities, if any;
    • An up-to-date curriculum vita;
    • The syllabi for courses taught during the period under review; and
    • The evaluation summaries of Student Survey of Instruction (SSI) for all courses taught during the period under review.

    The NTT faculty will submit an updated file of these items to the Chair who will make the materials available to the Ad Hoc RTP Committee. The specific criteria for assessing teaching effectiveness are presented in Table 2.  Other assessment criteria as they relate to AACSB’s guidelines for the deployment of faculty resources, and classification of faculty members as either SP, IP, SA, or PA and guidelines for faculty sufficiency and classification of a faculty member as either participating (P) or supporting (S), are delineated in Section II (G) of this Handbook.

    NTT faculty members are reviewed by the Ad Hoc RTP Committee.  The Chair, in consultation with the FAC, assigns two (2) faculty members to visit the classes of NTT faculty members, interview students in the classes, and generally evaluate teaching performance.  One of the faculty members assigned to visit the classes must be a member of the Ad Hoc RTP Committee.  A written report is submitted to the Chair for placement in the faculty member's review file.  NTT faculty will also submit an updated file that is presented to the Chair who will make these materials available to the Ad Hoc RTP Committee. Each NTT faculty member is discussed by the committee which votes on a recommendation for renewal of the faculty member’s appointment.  The Chair independently assesses the accomplishments of each NTT faculty member and forwards to the Dean her/his recommendation and the committee's recommendation.  The Chair informs the NTT faculty member of the Ad Hoc RTP Committee's deliberations and provides the faculty member a copy of the recommendation that the Chair sends to the Dean.  NTT faculty members whose appointments will not be renewed must be notified by the timelines established in the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement whether lack of adequate satisfaction with performance or the absence of anticipated continuing programmatic need or budgeted resources to support the position is the reason.

    The overall evaluation during the third-year full performance review shall include consideration of the faculty member’s personal integrity and professional behavior as recognized by the University community.  A sound ethical approach is expected of all NTT faculty members who seek renewal of appointment in the Department.

  3. Promotion Review

    Consideration for promotion in rank is available to members of the bargaining unit, with responsibilities for the reviews resting with the college Dean. Procedures for the promotion of FT-NTT faculty may be found in Article X, Section 11 and Addendum D of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) effective at the time of the review for a member of the bargaining unit.

  4. Reappointment of Part-Time Faculty

    The appointment and renewal of appointment for part faculty are based on the programmatic needs of the Department, satisfactory performance of previously assigned responsibilities, continued maintenance of professional qualifications according to AACSB guidelines, and budgeted resources to support the position.