RTP criteria and the criteria and processes relating to other faculty personnel actions | Management & Information Systems Handbook | Kent State University

RTP criteria and the criteria and processes relating to other faculty personnel actions

The Department’s appointment and employment procedures are governed by the university policy as outlined in the University Policy Register and applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement. All faculty are expected to be familiar with pertinent provisions of this policy.

  1. Faculty Appointments

    Normally, an earned doctoral degree in a related discipline is required for all faculty appointments to a tenure-track position in the Department. 

  2. Faculty Ranks

    The basic definitions of faculty ranks are the following:

    1. Instructor

      This rank is intended for persons initially hired with a master's degree.  Normally, the Department does not hire at the rank of Instructor except for full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty positions.

    2. Assistant Professor

      This rank is normally the entry-level rank for tenure-track or non-tenure-track faculty holding the doctorate in an appropriate discipline. 

    3. Associate Professor

      Initial hire, or promotion, to this rank presumes prior service as an Assistant Professor, significant academic achievements, and possession of the doctorate in an appropriate discipline.

    4. Professor

      Promotion to this rank requires credentials and achievements beyond those required for promotion to Associate Professor, and is reserved for senior faculty members who have achieved significant recognition in their discipline. 

    5. Research Associate and Research Assistant

      These ranks are reserved for individuals who are engaged in research and who are not normally assigned teaching responsibilities.  Such positions are typically supported by extramural grant funds and are not tenure-track appointments.  Faculty who hold these ranks do not vote on Department committees and do not participate in Department governance.

    6. Adjunct Faculty Appointments

      These appointments are held primarily by faculty from other institutions or persons on the staffs of community-based agencies and organizations. Adjunct faculty appointments are made at the discretion of the Chair in consultation with the FAC. Adjunct faculty members do not vote on Department Committees and do not participate in Department governance.

    7. Visiting Faculty Appointments

      Visiting faculty appointments at an appropriate faculty rank may be made when leaves of absence occur or special needs arise and funds are available.  A visiting faculty member is typically a faculty member from another institution who is employed by the Department for a period not to exceed one (1) year.  In the event that a Visiting faculty member is employed in that capacity for a second consecutive year, the visiting faculty member will then become a full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty member.

    8. Full-Time Non-Tenure Track Faculty (NTT) Appointments

      Full-time non-tenure track faculty (NTT) appointments are made on an annual basis.  NTT appointments are not included under the umbrella of the University policy and procedures regarding faculty tenure (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-14) and NTT faculty members are not entitled to any rights with regard to tenure.

    9. Part-Time Faculty Appointments

      When the Department cannot meet its teaching needs from the ranks of its full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty, full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty and graduate students, part-time faculty appointments will be made from an established pool of qualified applicants not currently on regular appointment at the University. 

    10. Graduate Faculty Status

      As a doctoral degree-granting department, the Department normally requires that all faculty hired for tenure-track positions be eligible for appointment to the graduate faculty as associate or full members.  The Administrative policy regarding graduate faculty is included in the University Policy Register.  (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-15.1).

      The College defines criteria for membership on the Graduate Faculty. These criteria and procedures are revised and recommended to the Dean every five years by an Ad Hoc Graduate Faculty Status Committee and govern the Department’s criteria and procedures.

      The Chair, in consultation with the M&IS Graduate Programs Committee (GPC), evaluates M&IS faculty members for graduate instruction and mentorship of graduate students, and recommends them to the Dean of the College for final approval or denial through the Graduate Faculty Review Committee.

      An adjunct or other non-tenure-track faculty member may be granted temporary graduate faculty status for special purposes.

    11. Required Qualifications for Full Time and Part-Time Faculty Appointments

      All faculty teaching M&IS courses are required to engage in academic and professional activities that can earn them requisite classification under AACSB guidelines. For a tenure track appointment, the candidate must have or be close to completing the terminal (doctorate) degree in an appropriate major field. The candidate must demonstrate requisite aptitude and ability for quality teaching at both the graduate and undergraduate levels and for publications in quality refereed journals. For a non-tenure track full-time or part-time appointment, the candidate should have at least a master's degree in an area commensurate with his/her teaching interest, some years of work experience in a related field, with experience teaching at the college level preferred.

    12. Orientation of New faculty and Ph.D. Students

      The university is committed to its teaching and research mission and takes steps to provide new faculty and teaching fellows with the tools they need to succeed in these two arenas through orientation. For new faculty, the university sponsors a Faculty Orientation Program while for teaching fellows, the Orienting New Teaching Assistants Program (ONTAP) is provided. At the department level, newly hired faculty and graduate students are provided guidance on department policies and other tools they need to make their transition to the Kent State University culture and northeast Ohio. The existing faculty and students contribute to the orientation and mentoring of new faculty and graduate students.

  3. Recruiting Faculty

    The Department supports the goals of equal opportunity and affirmative action in recruiting and in making appointments to the faculty and strongly encourages minority candidates to apply.  The Department seeks to hire faculty members who have proven track records in teaching and research, or have potential to engage in quality research and teaching. Full‑time tenure-track faculty positions are advertised nationally. It is the responsibility of the Chair and the search committee to provide the job description for the open position(s) and design advertisements. Search Committees are appointed by the Chair after consultation with the FAC and faculty members in the specific area or discipline for the hire.

    All appropriate candidate information received will be made available in the department office to all full-time department faculty. Following the search, the committee recommends to the Chair several candidates to be invited to campus for interviews.  Each candidate who is invited to campus for an interview will present a seminar before the Department to which all faculty and students are invited.  After campus interviews the search committee, with input from the faculty, may recommend its choice of candidates to the Chair. Committee recommendations are advisory to the Chair who makes a recommendation to the Dean, after seeking advice from faculty with cognate research and teaching interests as the candidates.  If the Dean concurs with the Chair, a recommendation is forwarded to the Office of the Provost.  If the Chair's recommendation is different than that of the search committee and the faculty, the Chair shall inform the Dean of all recommendations and the reasons for the disagreement.

    In the event of a vacancy to be filled by a temporary part-time appointment on the Kent campus, the Chair seeks to meet the need by offering the position to a qualified person chosen from an established pool of applicants maintained for this purpose.  Required qualifications for appointments to the several disciplinary areas of the department are detailed in this section of the Handbook.  The Department Chair will annually invite applications from persons qualified to teach.

    1. Regional Campus Faculty Recruitment

      Full time tenure-track (TT) and non-tenure track (NTT) recruitment for M&IS faculty at the Regional Campuses is a joint effort between the Regional Campus faculty and the M&IS faculty at the Kent Campus. Although the mission of the Regional Campuses is different from that of the Kent Campus, the M&IS Department’s involvement in the hiring process is to ensure that faculty hired to teach M&IS courses have the requisite qualifications to do so, especially in light of AACSB requirements that the preponderance of full time faculty be academically and professionally qualified, and can withstand the rigors of the reappointment, tenure and promotion review processes.

      1. The M&IS Department Chair, in consultation with the FAC, will select a department representative to serve on the search committee for the Regional Campus faculty recruitment.
      2. The M&IS representative should work with the Regional Campus Dean or his/her designee in crafting the job description for the position for which a search is underway.
      3. After the search committee reviews the applicant pool to select a short list of those they wish to consider further, the files of the applicants on the short list are sent to the M&IS Department for approval/disapproval screening. Applicants not approved receive no further consideration.
      4. As part of the interview schedule, candidates will be interviewed at the Kent Campus by members of the M&IS Department. Whenever, appropriate, formal presentations and colloquia to which all faculty and students are invited will be part of the interview process.
      5. After the campus visits by all candidates the M&IS Department evaluates and reports to the search committee which candidates are acceptable and which are unacceptable, and may rank order acceptable candidates. Candidates that the M&IS Department does not find acceptable will not be approved for rank in the department.
  4. Role and Responsibilities of the Faculty

    Each faculty member is expected to contribute to the Department, Campus, College and the University according to the terms and condition of her/his letter of appointment.  Some faculty members make their primary contribution in teaching while others emphasize research.  High quality teaching and scholarly activity are expected of all faculty members.  Service to the Department, Campus, College, and the University is also expected of each faculty member.

    The minimal expectation for each faculty member is to maintain qualifications according to AACSB guidelines that are based on initial academic preparation and professional experience, and sustained engagement activities.

    The Department provides diverse curricula that includes several undergraduate major and minor programs, MBA concentrations, an MSBA, doctoral concentrations in Management and Information Systems, and several core courses at the undergraduate, master’s and doctoral levels. Clearly, the Department’s diversity in academic programs invariably requires a mixed portfolio of research, teaching and service from its faculty.

    Scholarly activity is expected of all faculty members, although the extent and/or type of activity may vary with the terms of each faculty member’s assignment and campus location. Faculty involved in research and the graduate program are expected to present evidence of their endeavors as witnessed by publications, and dissemination of research in various venues as appropriate to the discipline. Activity in professional organizations and the training of graduate students is also expected.

    Service to the University is a responsibility of each faculty member.  Department, Campus, College, and University committee or task force membership is expected as a normal part of a faculty member’s workload and contributions.  Special or outstanding service above and beyond that which is typical may be considered during the review of a faculty member, but service alone will not reduce the expectations of quality teaching and scholarly activity.  Public service is encouraged and recognized as a part of the professional responsibilities of each faculty member, although contributions in this area can be expected to vary widely due to the nature of the various disciplines within the Department. Service responsibilities should be distributed as equitably as possible to all members of the department.

    1. Evaluation of Instruction

      Faculty members are expected to provide students with a syllabus which includes the subject matter to be covered in a course, the approved list of learning objectives, a listing of assignments and/or reports, approximate dates of examinations, grading standards, attendance requirements, and other pertinent details of the conduct of the class.  Students must be given opportunity to evaluate each course they are registered for in each semester. The evaluations will be conducted under the auspices of the Chair pursuant to applicable University policies and procedures.

    2. Faculty Code of Ethics

      All members of the Department faculty are expected to maintain the highest ethical standards as teachers, scholars, university citizens and colleagues.  The University policy regarding faculty code of professional ethics can be found in the University Policy Register.  (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-17). Also, the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement states in part that “faculty members are entitled to freedom in research and in publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties…freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce in their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.”

    3. Sanctions

      A sanction is a documented corrective action in response to a faculty member's unsatisfactory performance of her/his duties and responsibilities as a member of the faculty. (See, “Sanctions for Cause” in the Collective Bargaining Agreement

    4. Faculty Information System

      All faculty members are required to provide current curriculum vitae (CV) to be kept on file in the Department office. The faculty member’s CV must be updated annually using the electronic system supported by the College or University, and in line with the College’s requirements for AACSB accreditation.

    5. Faculty Leaves

      All leaves, sponsored or unsupported, personal or professional, are subject to the approval of the Chair, the Dean and the Provost.

      University leaves include but are not limited to:

      1. Research leaves.
      2. Leaves of absence without pay.
      3. Faculty professional improvement leaves.
      4. Research/Creative Activity appointments.
      1. Research Leave and Leaves of Absence

        The Chair, with the approval of appropriate university officials, may grant a one-year or less leave of absence without pay. Such an absence may be requested by a faculty member for a legitimate professional or personal reason including research, travel, and medical. Time on an unpaid leave of absence does not count toward meeting promotion or tenure time limits.  Requests for unpaid leave are subject to approval of the Dean and the appropriate university officials, and will be accompanied by a recommendation of the Chair for or against the request, with the advice of the FAC.

        Leave may also be granted for teaching or research at another institution, provided the faculty member accepts such appointment as visitor, and not as a regular appointment, and provided further that the faculty recognizes an obligation to return to the university for the next year of service. Leave for the purpose of eventually accepting regular appointment at another institution is not permitted, nor may a faculty member hold tenure concurrently at the university and another institution. Further guidelines on unpaid leaves of absence can be found in the University Policy Register, Section 3342-6-11.9.

      2. Professional Improvement Leaves (PIL)

        Professional improvement leaves are available to tenured faculty members who, at the time of application for the leave, are at least in the seventh full year of full-time employment in a tenure-track position or in the seventh full year since the completion of the academic year in which the faculty member most recently engaged in a professional improvement leave; see University Policy Register, 3342-6-12 and 6-12.101. While a faculty member with the necessary service years is entitled to apply for professional improvement leaves, the granting of such leaves is not automatic.

        Requests for professional improvement leaves should be initiated as early as possible in order to permit scheduling of courses and hiring replacement faculty.  All requests for professional improvement leave are subject to approval by the Chair, the Dean, and the Provost. Professional improvement leave may be granted for either one semester at full pay, or one academic year at half pay. Other forms of leaves of absence such as due to disability can be found in the University Policy Register, 3342-6-11.3.

        Requests for professional improvement leaves, take the form of a letter of request to the Chair.  The candidate is to attach to this letter:

        • updated curriculum vitae,
        • a 300-1000-word proposal that clearly describes:
          • the purpose of the leave project,
          • how it will advance both the professional growth and development of the individual and the mission of the department and university,
          • type of scholarship involved in the leave,
          • location of the leave, 
          • whether other appointments will be held during the leave period
        • a statement of how the project relates to the applicant’s professional growth and development,
        • a statement on results planned or anticipated from the current project,
        • a statement must also be given as to what was accomplished during previous PIL, if any. Such accomplishments and results must be highlighted on the applicant’s updated resume.

        Applications for professional improvement leaves are generally due to the Chair by mid-October. The Chair, in consultation with the FAC, determines how the staffing needs of the department would be met if the leave were granted and prepares a recommendation to the Dean.

        A faculty member who accepts a PIL is obligated to return to the university in active service for a period of at least one academic year following the completion of the PIL. Furthermore, a faculty member is required to submit a summary of her/his activities during the PIL within one semester of return from the leave.

    6. Copyright Restrictions

      All faculty members should be aware of current copyright laws which restrict the copying of published materials.  For further information, contact the University’s Office of Legal Affairs.

    7. Academic Misconduct

      The University policy regarding misconduct in research and scholarship and the Administrative policy and procedures regarding allegations and instances of misconduct in research and scholarship is included in the University Policy Register. (See, University Policy Register 3342-3-05 and 3342-2-05.01)

    8. Sexual Harassment

      The Department does not condone sexual harassment, or harassment of any kind, and supports the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) Sexual Harassment Guidelines and the Kent State University policy on Sexual Harassment. (See University Policy Register, Section 3342-4-13.1)

  5. Faculty Absence and Travel Policy

    Faculty members who will be absent from campus for professional or personal reasons must submit a Request for Absence Form, together with estimated budget for the travel, with the Chair.  The request should be made at least one (1) month prior to the planned absence and is subject to the approval of the Chair and the Dean.  Arrangements for any classes to be missed during the absence must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Chair before approval will be granted.

    Attendance at professional meetings is encouraged and approved travel expenses incurred in attending such meetings will be reimbursed when approved prior to travel according to the University's travel policies and are subject to the availability of Department funds.  In general, greater amounts of support will be granted to meeting participants (i.e., those presenting a paper or chairing a session) than to faculty members who simply attend professional meetings. Faculty members are strongly encouraged to seek travel funds from outside the Department.

    1. Faculty Sick Leave

      The Chair is responsible for keeping complete records of faculty sick leave; however, faculty members are also required to submit the appropriate sick leave forms to the Chair.  Sick leave forms should be completed and submitted to the Chair within forty-eight (48) hours after an absence. The university policy governing faculty sick leaves may be found in the University Policy Register, Section 3342-6-11.1. The university provides paid sick leave for the faculty for the following reasons:

      • illness or injury of the employee or a member of the employee's immediate family;
      • death of a member of the employee's immediate family
      • medical, dental or optical examination or treatment of the employee or a member of the immediate family;
      • when, through exposure to a contagious disease, either the health of the employee would be jeopardized or the employee's presence on the job would jeopardize the health of others; and
      • disability due to pregnancy and/or childbirth and related conditions. Upon request, a pregnant employee shall be permitted to use any or all of the employee's accumulated sick leave credit only for the period of time that the employee is unable to work as a result of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. This period may include reasonable pre-delivery, delivery, and recovery time as certified by a licensed physician. An employee using sick leave credit shall not be prevented from receiving a leave of absence without pay for the remainder of the recovery period.
    2. Outside Employment and Other Outside Activities

      Faculty members may engage in professional activities outside the university provided the activities do not interfere with the faculty member's teaching, research, or service responsibilities to the Department, Campus, College or University (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-24). These activities must not compete with University activity or the faculty member’s employment with the University and must be approved in advance by the Chair and the Dean. Each academic year, each faculty member must disclose and seek approval for all outside employment or other outside activities on the form provided by the University.  Any outside employment or other outside activities are subject to the Faculty Code of Ethics and the University’s conflict of interest policies.  (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-17 and 3342-6-23)

      Furthermore, according to University Policy Register regarding outside enterprises including employment of faculty and academic administrators (Policy # 3342-6-24), the university “recognizes that one mark of an individual’s distinction is the esteem in which he or she is held by those outside the university who may request her/his expertise.” For a second “teaching activity at neighboring institutions or other external organizations, it is considered inappropriate for a full-time faculty member or full-time academic administrative officer to accept a teaching employment while under contract, if it conflicts with his or her primary responsibly to the university.”

      In general, an average of one day per week is the standard amount of time allowed for such consulting activities or employment.  For outside remunerative employment of a continuing nature, faculty members must obtain the approval in writing of the Department Chair, Dean and Senior Vice President and Provost for Academic Affairs. Such approval process must be repeated at the beginning of each academic year. Outside activities must be scheduled so that they do not interfere with a faculty member's teaching, research, and service responsibilities to the university.

  6. Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion Consideration for Tenure-Track Faculty

    All tenure-track faculty undergoing review for reappointment, tenure, and/or promotion are required to provide their portfolio for evaluation during the fall semester, save for those undergoing first year reviews, who are reviewed in the spring. In addition to the specific criteria for reappointment, tenure, and promotion noted below, candidates for reviews are required to demonstrate:

    • an up-to-date curriculum vita,
    • candidate’s letter of application and statement of teaching, research, and service objectives and self-evaluation of same,
    • instructional effectiveness,
    • publication in high quality academic journals recommended in the Department’s journal list and maintenance of academic qualifications as defined by the AACSB,
    • performance of service responsibilities in the Department, College and University,
    • involvement with external and professional organizations,
    • syllabi for courses taught during the period under review,
    • evaluation summaries of Student Surveys of Instruction (SSI) for all courses taught during the period under review, and
    • three external letters of reference (tenure and promotion only).
    1. Reappointment

      The policies and procedures for reappointment are included in the University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-16).  Each academic year, reappointment guidelines for Kent and Regional Campus faculty are distributed by the Office of the Provost.  Probationary tenure-track faculty members are reviewed by the Department’s Ad Hoc RTP Committee comprised of the tenured members of the Department. The annual review also provides each untenured faculty member opportunity to receive feedback from the members of the Department Ad Hoc RTP committee as to the ways in which her/his performance, strengths, weaknesses, and contribution to the department mission are perceived.

      At least once before the 3rd year, the FAC, in consultation with the Chair, assigns two (2) faculty members to visit the classes of each probationary faculty member, interview students in the classes, and generally evaluate the faculty member’s teaching performance.  A written report of the evaluation is submitted to the Chair for placement in the faculty member’s reappointment file. Probationary faculty will also create an updated file that is presented to the Chair who will make these materials available to the Ad Hoc RTP Committee. Each probationary faculty member is discussed by the committee which then votes on the faculty member’s reappointment. The Chair also independently assesses the accomplishments of each probationary faculty member. She/he informs the probationary faculty of the committee's recommendation and forwards her/his recommendation and that of the committee to the Dean.  Probationary faculty members who are not to be reappointed must be notified according to the schedule established by the Office of the Provost. For faculty members, whose appointment is at the Regional Campuses, recommendations on reappointment from the Chair are forwarded to the Dean and the appropriate Regional Campus Dean.

      For probationary faculty, reappointment is contingent upon demonstration of adequate progress toward the requirements for tenure.  Moreover, the faculty member must have established and articulated short and long term plans for achieving these goals.  For faculty members following the traditional tenure clock for Assistant Professors, the review after completion of three (3) full years in the probationary period at Kent State University is particularly critical. Upon completion of the third year of the probationary period, faculty reviewing a candidate for reappointment should consider the record of the candidate’s achievements to date.  This record should be considered a predictor of future success.  The hallmark of a successful candidate is a record of compelling evidence of impact upon the discourse of her/his discipline. This record can be demonstrated through review of the candidate’s peer reviewed work including assessment of the impact (as measured by the quality of the journal publishing the paper) or citation indices such as Google Scholar. Specific concerns expressed by the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and/or the Chair during this stage of the probationary period should be addressed by the candidate in subsequent reappointment reviews. Finally, the overall evaluation of a candidate for reappointment must 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 is expected of all who seek reappointment in the Department.  A candidate who fails to demonstrate likely success in the tenure process will be notified promptly that she/he will not be reappointed.

      In the event that concerns about a candidate’s performance are raised during the reappointment process, the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and the Chair shall provide detailed, prescriptive comments to serve as constructive feedback.  If such concerns arise during a review that occurs after completion of three (3) full years in the probationary period, the Chair, in consultation with the FAC, will advise and work with the candidate on a suitable, positive plan for realignment with the Department’s tenure and promotion expectations; however, the candidate is solely responsible for her/his success in implementing this plan.

      From time to time, personal and/or family circumstances may arise that require an untenured faculty member to need to request that her/his probationary period be extended. Upon request, a faculty member may be granted an extension of the probationary period which has been traditionally called “tolling” or “stopping the tenure clock.”  The University policy and procedures governing modification of the faculty probationary period is included in the University Policy Register. (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-13)

    2. 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.

      1. Tenure

        Each spring semester the Chair shall inform faculty members of their eligibility for tenure consideration during the next academic year. Faculty members being considered for tenure are responsible for preparing and organizing their dossiers for the purpose of tenure review.

        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 a significant body of scholarship that has had an impact on her/his discipline, excellence 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. 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.

        Prima facie evidence of scholarship requisite for qualification for tenure shall be an appropriate mix of refereed journal articles, the majority of which appear in A+, A or B level journals.  The articles are expected to appear in the recommended College of Business Administration journal list or other journals demonstrated to be at least equivalent in quality.  The current College journal list is available from the department office.  The list may be updated by submitting information to the department FAC.

        Probationary faculty whose appointment carries no years of credit toward tenure shall undergo mandatory tenure review in the sixth (6th) year of their appointment. An assistant professor whose appointment carries some years of credit toward tenure will undergo mandatory tenure review in the year less the number of years of credit. The maximum number of credit toward tenure for an assistant professor is 2 years. A probationary faculty may, however, elect to apply for early tenure consideration. If unsuccessful, the candidate shall be re-evaluated at the normal time without prejudice.

      2. Promotion to Associate Professor

        Tenure and promotion are separate decisions. Promotion is recognition based on a candidate’s accomplishments completed during the review period and promotion decisions are based on papers published, grants received and graduate students graduated during the review period, as well as teaching evaluations and service to the University. 

        Promotion to Associate Professor is recognition for establishing a career likely to achieve national/international prominence as evidenced by papers published in refereed scientific literature, students graduated, etc.  As one of the senior ranks in academia, promotion to associate professor is earned by a requisite degree of effort and efficacy that goes beyond the minimum criteria for tenure. Promotion decision is governed by two major classes of criteria—academic credentials and university experience, and academic performance and service. While the former describes the nominal minimums of credentials and time-in-rank necessary for promotion consideration, the latter refers to the record of actual performance and accomplishments of the candidate.

        Under university regulations, a faculty member will usually not be considered for advancement to this rank until completion of 5 years as an assistant professor, but in extraordinary cases may be considered after completion of fewer years as an assistant professor. An initial appointment at the rank of associate professor may carry tenure. The right to early submission for promotion is provided without prejudice.

      3. Promotion to Full Professor

        Promotion to Professor recognizes the highest level of university achievement and national/international prominence. This is the most senior rank in academia. Consequently, the successful candidate for promotion to professor must have demonstrated a commendable and continuing record of activity across the domain of department criteria of professional performance and department citizenship in the time period preceding submission for promotion to professor.

        Candidates for promotion to professor are expected to show evidence of research leadership, demonstrated by sole authorship of A+, A, or B papers in recognized refereed journals, first authorship on a significant number of publications, and other similar forms of excellent professional performance. A faculty member may be considered for advancement to this rank after completing 5 years as an associate professor. An initial appointment at the rank of professor may carry tenure.

        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.

    3. 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 at the Kent Campus the faculty member must meet the criteria for a “very good” rating or better in both scholarship and teaching. At the Regional Campuses the faculty member must meet the criteria for “Good” rating or better in scholarship and a “very good” rating or better in teaching. University citizenship must at least meet the minimum Department criteria as outlined in Table 3.  These same categories and assessment tools apply for tenure decisions.

      A candidate for promotion to Professor at the Kent Campus must meet the criteria for an “excellent” rating in scholarship and “very good” or better in teaching. At the Regional Campuses the Faculty member must meet the criteria for a “very good” rating or better for scholarship and a “very good” rating or better in teaching. University citizenship must exceed the minimum Department criteria. A candidate for promotion to Professor may not have equal activity in scholarship, teaching and service as she/he becomes more specialized.

      Documentation of a Faculty member’s achievements will include a record of presentations in Department organized research seminars prior to a faculty member’s application for tenure or promotion. For Assistant Professors, this seminar will typically be presented during the faculty member’s third full year in this rank.  For promotion to Associate Professor and Professor, the seminar should be the year prior to an anticipated promotion application.

      1. Scholarship

        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 her/his scholarly activity.

        In addition to scholarly publications, other scholarly activities including, but not limited to serving on national professional organizations, presenting at refereed professional meetings, chairing society committees, and presenting papers before learned societies should be considered.  These latter 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. 

      2. Standards for the Evaluation of Scholarship and Research

        All faculty of the department are expected to seek excellence in scholarly activity. Indicators on which the assessment of the quality of scholarly activity is based are provided in Tables 1A and 1B.

        Indicators of the quality of a faculty member’s research record include the quality and quantity of published work.  All faculty members in the Department 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.

        Table 1A. Evaluation Components for Assessment of Scholarship for promotion and tenure.

         

        Scholarship

         

        Definition

        Examples of Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

         

        Excellent

        Nationally/ Internationally recognized research program

        Demonstrated record of publications1, invitations to give presentations, research-related service to external organizations, awards, recognition from scientific societies2

         

        Very Good

        Emerging nationally recognized research program

        Demonstrated record of publications, presentations at well recognized meetings with rigorous criteria for paper review.

         

        Good

        Active research program

        Some peer-reviewed

        publications, some presentations at meetings/seminars

         

        Weak

        Limited research program

        Occasional publications or

        meeting presentations

         

        Poor

        No research program

        No publications, presentations, or grants

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

        1Publications include: papers in peer-reviewed journals of recognized quality (“A+, A or B” (See, Table 1-B)) and book chapters.  Evaluation of publication record will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field as well as quantity. 

        2Recognitions from scientific societies include, for example, election to office, editorial board membership, editorship, etc.

        Table 1B

        Journal Ranking for Guidance in RTP Decisions is listed in the Department’s web site at http://mis.kent.edu/jl.php, or through the Department office.

        A+ Journals

        Highest ranking journals in discipline as measured by established criteria

        A Journals

        High ranking journals in discipline as measured by established criteria

        B Journals

        Middle tier journals

        C Journals

        Low tier journals

        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 her/his discipline.

        Within this context, during annual reappointment reviews, each faculty member who will seek tenure or promotion is obligated to provide evidence supporting her/his scholarly record.  This obligation will be met by providing specific information about article and journal quality and impact, 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 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.   

      3. Teaching

        Faculty members must prepare a syllabus for distribution at the beginning of each semester in each course they are teaching. A copy of the syllabus is to be on file in Department office by the end of the second week of the semester.  The syllabus must specify course prerequisites, department-approved learning objectives, last date to withdraw, the materials to be covered in the course, grading scale, assignments, approximate dates and number of examinations, and other details relevant to the effective management of the class.

        Criteria for the evaluation of teaching are listed in Table 2.  Course revision is defined as making a substantial modification to a course such as developing of web courses and 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. 

        Table 2. Evaluation Components for Assessment of Teaching for promotion and tenure
         

         

        Scholarship 

         

        Definition

        Examples of Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

         

         

         

        Excellent

         

         

        Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional

        Development

        Develop/revise courses, develop research projects for students (undergraduate and/or graduate), excellent student and peer perceptions, instructional creativity, actively participate in curricular revisions

         

         

        Very Good

         

         

        Innovative teacher

        Develop/revise courses, good student and peer perceptions, work with graduate and/or undergraduate students in research

         

        Good

         

        Meets obligations well

        Good student and peer perceptions

         

        Fair

         

        Substandard teacher

        Below average student and peer perceptions

         

        Poor

         

        Substandard,

        ineffective teacher

        Below average student and peer perceptions, pattern of

        complaints

         

      4. University Citizenship

        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 3, and are required of all faculty members as part of their regular workload. Service responsibilities should be distributed as equitably as possible to all members of the department.  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.  Citizenship also includes active participation in department events such as faculty and student recruitment, 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.

        Table 3. Assessment of University Citizenship for promotion and tenure.
         

        Citizenship Assessment

        Examples of Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

         

        Exceeds obligations

        Significant role in Department, Campus, College and/or University as evidenced by productive service on committees, active participation in significant events, effectively chairing committees, specific administrative assignments, meaningful public outreach

        Meets obligations

         

        Meets the minimal Department/Campus Obligations

        Does not meet obligations

        Does not meet Department/Campus obligations in a timely manner or does not actively participate in significant departmental/campus events

        Other components of service 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 Department. 

         

  7. 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.