i. A candidate for tenure must have the doctoral degree in political science or cognate field.
ii. A candidate for tenure will normally be reviewed during the sixth year of service, although years of credit toward tenure may be granted at the time of the initial appointment and specifically stated in the letter of appointment. A faculty member may apply for early tenure consideration, but the faculty member should be able to meet the criteria for promotion to the next rank.
iii. Presentation of Supporting Materials
(a) Candidates for tenure are responsible for presenting the necessary documents for consideration by the Ad Hoc Tenure Committee.
(b) Specific guidelines for the tenure file are provided at the end of this tenure section of the Department Handbook.
(c) Materials reviewed for tenure for persons hired at the instructor or TT assistant professor rank shall consist primarily of those items generated since the initial hiring. The vitae submitted in applying for the position should be used as a baseline, with materials already published or listed as forthcoming being given less weight than those produced after the submitted vitae. Exceptions will be made when incoming faculty are explicitly given credit toward tenure for prior experience.
iv. Regional Campus Application
(a) These criteria for tenure apply to Political Science Department faculty at both the Kent campus and the regional campuses. The Department’s Ad Hoc Tenure Committee makes recommendations for all members of the Department, regional campuses as well as the Kent campus.
(b) Application of the same set of criteria does not imply, however, that the criteria must be given the same weights for the two situations. In particular, it may be expected that in evaluating regional campus faculty for tenure, greater weight may be accorded to teaching and university citizenship.
i. The value of scholarship
While all members of the Political Science Department are expected to maintain a record of effective undergraduate and graduate teaching, it is recognized by the Department that for purposes of achieving tenure a strong record of accomplishment in the area of research is essential. This policy is consistent with our belief that a university must be a place which generates knowledge as well as disseminates it. Further, this policy is consistent with our belief that active involvement in research activities enhances the quality of classroom performance and other instruction-related activities.
ii. Evidence of Scholarship
(a) Only documented evidence of scholarship will be used to assess a faculty member’s eligibility for tenure.
A general note on quality: with respect to the professional activities of the candidate in scholarship, it is important for both candidate and reviewing bodies to note that not all activities are equally meritorious. In keeping with the standards of a Ph.D. granting department, both quantity and quality of scholarly activities shall figure into the evaluation of the candidate’s record.
With respect to scholarship, published research carries greater weight than non-published. Further, some published materials carry greater value than others. In general, quality will be evaluated as a combination of the nature of the scholarship (e.g., theoretically informed work); the stringency of the review process to which that work of scholarship has been submitted (e.g., journals with strict refereeing processes and low acceptance rates as opposed to those with less rigorous procedures and higher rates of acceptance); and the prestige/visibility of the medium in which the work appears.
With respect to scholarship, published research within the discipline of political science, across its sub-disciplines, and across disciplines is valued. It is expected that candidates for tenure demonstrate a range of publication outlets, publishing articles not only in specialized journals read only within their community of expertise but also articles in broader journals in their subfields broadly defined.
Unpublished research or technical reports that are distributed locally or informally are not to be considered “publications.”
With respect to jointly authored works of scholarship, the degree of the candidate’s contribution will be considered. Thus, candidates should indicate the degree and nature of their contributions to co-authored works.
With respect to applications for extramural funding, the department expects applications for external funding from faculty members receiving start-up funds and encourages applications from all faculty members. Applications to the National Science Foundation and other highly prestigious funding sources are encouraged, but all extramural applications are considered meritorious.
Primary evidence of scholarship may include:
(1) peer-reviewed (refereed) books, articles, book chapters, and monographs;
(2) seeking and/or securing grants, especially extramural funding.
Additional evidence of scholarship may include:
(3) recognition of outstanding achievement, such as awards;
(4) presentation of papers at professional meetings;
(6) book reviews
(7) research and technical reports which are distributed locally or informally;
(8) organizing, conducting, and participating in workshops and panels;
(9) reviewing manuscripts for journals and/or publishers;
(10) reviewing grant proposals and/or reports for external granting agencies and foundations;
(11) consulting contracts with governmental, non-profit, or private sector organizations;
(12) on-going involvement, based upon professional expertise, in community-based or professional organizations;
(13) publishing of op-eds and articles in newspapers and similar non-academic publications;
(14) instructor’s manuals and instructional software.
i. Acceptable evidence of effective teaching may include:
(a) peer review and evaluation of teaching;
(b) course syllabi, examinations, and handouts;
(c) student evaluations;
(d) supervision and mentorship of graduate student teaching;
(e) direction of and participation in thesis and dissertation committees;
(f) recognition of outstanding achievement, such as awards;
(g) seeking and securing professionally reviewed, instruction-related grants, especially extramural funding;
(h) significant creative activity such as publications on the act of teaching or the development of new methods and materials for instruction;
ii. Note that simply teaching classes is not, by itself, a credential toward tenure. The candidate should provide evidence bearing on the quality and extent of the pedagogical effort. Poor teaching may result in the denial of tenure to a candidate who otherwise might meet the criteria for tenure. By contrast, a record of somewhat limited scholarship may be partially offset by evidence of exceptional teaching.
iii. Finally, because we are a Ph.D. granting department, candidates for tenure on the Kent Campus are expected to demonstrate regular participation of high quality in the graduate program through teaching graduate courses, serving on Ph.D. examination committees, serving on thesis and dissertation committees, MPA capstone research projects, and directing M.A. theses and Ph.D. dissertations once appropriate graduate faculty status has been received.
d. University Citizenship
i. Acceptable evidence of university citizenship may include:
(a) membership on University, College, or Department committees and councils;
(b) service to the community beyond the University but in which service is representative of the University, College, or Department.
ii. Note that simply holding a position as a committee/task force member or as a consultant is not, by itself, a particularly strong credential toward tenure. The candidate also should provide evidence bearing on the quality and extent of the contributions which have been made to the organization in question.
e. Tenure Files
i. The candidate’s file for tenure is the primary means for conveying the activity and productivity of the candidate to the Ad Hoc Tenure Committee and to subsequent review bodies. The primary purpose underlying a well structured tenure file is to provide a continuum of development throughout all reappointment review periods. Thus, the candidate is encouraged to build and maintain a file structured so as to allow a simple updating with each new annual review procedure.
ii. File contents
(a) Statement of Accomplishments
The candidate shall provide a written overview of her/his career, highlighting his/her accomplishments during the period under review. This is the first item in the file.
(b) Curriculum Vitae
This is the second item in the file.
The CV should provide full information on each publication and should clearly differentiate between peer-reviewed publications and non-peer-reviewed publications.
(c) Supporting Documentation
Publications, presentations (copies of papers; abstracts with dates, announcements, etc.), grant proposals (transmittal form with budget and abstract, evidence of submission (such as signature page), and reviewers’ comments if available), any additional documentation deemed necessary.
Student evaluations (including scores for norming group for each course); copies of course syllabi, examinations, and handouts; peer reviews of teaching; evidence concerning supervision of theses and dissertations; evidence of service on student committees; evidence of extraordinary advising; any additional documentation deemed necessary.
(3) University Citizenship
Service contributions (appointment notices to committees, task forces, etc.), any additional documentation deemed necessary.
(d) Supplementary Materials
The candidate may add any documentation or evidence of additional activities which he or she may want the relevant reviewing bodies to view.
(e) Letters of Reference
Outside letters of reference are required for tenure reviews. The specific means for acquiring these letters are detailed in the University Policy Register. The Chair is responsible for meeting this requirement and for placing these letters in the candidate’s file.
(f) List of citations of the candidate’s works.
(g) Published reviews of the candidate’s books in scholarly journals.
(h) The file should be submitted electronically, using the format and interface in use at the university at the time the file is submitted.
(i) The candidate’s file is reviewed with the Chair for completeness and accuracy prior to acceptance for review.
a. The University Policy Register (See, relevant section) dictates that promotion is based on two major sets of criteria: (1) academic credentials and university experience and (2) academic performance and service.
b. Academic Credentials and University Experience
i. Minimal Requirements. Departmental requirements as to credentials and experience are as follows:
(a) TT Assistant Professor: must have the doctoral degree in political science or cognate field.
(b) TT Associate Professor: must have the doctoral degree in political science or cognate field and normally have served four years at the Assistant Professor rank before she or he is eligible for promotion to Associate Professor;
(c) TT Professor: must have the doctoral degree in political science or cognate field and normally must have served five years at the TT Associate Professor rank before she or he is eligible for promotion to TT Full Professor.
ii. General Principles
(a) The above-listed requirements are understood to be necessary but not sufficient conditions for promotion in rank.
(b) While the general criteria for promotion to TT Associate Professor and to TT Full Professor are the same for both, promotion to the latter rank is understood to involve a more stringent application of those criteria.
iii. Presentation of Supporting Material
(a) Candidates for promotion are primarily responsible for presenting the necessary documents for consideration by the Ad Hoc Promotion Committee.
(b) Specific guidelines for the promotion file are provided at the end of this section of the Department Handbook.
(c) Materials reviewed for promotion for persons hired at the instructor or TT Assistant Professor rank shall consist primarily of those items generated since the initial hiring. The vitae submitted in applying for the position should be used as a baseline, with materials already published or listed as forthcoming being given less weight than those produced after the submitted vitae. Exceptions will be made when incoming TT faculty are explicitly given credit toward promotion for prior experience. For promotion from TT Associate to TT Full Professor, materials reviewed for promotion shall consist primarilyof those items generated since promotion to TT Associate Professor.
iv. Regional Campus Application
(a) These criteria for promotion apply to political science TT faculty at both the Kent campus and the regional campuses. The Department’s Ad Hoc Promotion Committee makes recommendations for all members of the Department, regional campuses as well as the Kent campus.
(b) Application of the same set of criteria does not imply, however, that the criteria must be given identical weights for the two situations. In particular, it may be expected that in evaluating regional campus TT faculty for promotion, greater weight may be accorded the scholarship of teaching and university service.
c. Academic performance and service
i. For promotion to TT Associate Professor:
(a) Documented evidence of suitable achievement in scholarship and teaching appropriate for the rank of TT Associate Professor is required.
(b) Documented evidence of suitable achievement in university citizenship is required. This shall be understood to mean contributions beyond minimal participation in departmental service functions, such as mere attendance at departmental meetings.
ii. For promotion to TT Full Professor
(a) Documented evidence of significant, sustained achievement in scholarship and teaching appropriate for the rank of TT Professor is required.
(b) Documented evidence of suitable achievement in university citizenship is required. This shall be understood to mean contributions beyond minimal participation in departmental service functions, such as mere attendance at departmental meetings. In addition, extra-departmental service to the University and/or College generally shall be expected as well as service to the profession in the candidate’s field of expertise.
iii. For the types of evidence appropriate in making a case for promotion, see sections C.1.b. (“Scholarship), C.1.c. (“Teaching”), and C.1.d. (“University Citizenship”) above.
iv. Files for promotion should follow the same guidelines as files for tenure, which are described in section C.1.e. (“Tenure files”) above.