A Kent Campus Faculty member must meet expectations in all three areas (research, teaching, and service) to receive a positive recommendation for tenure and promotion to Associate or Full Professor (see Table V.1).  For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, the quality and number of publications, and grant activity in the form of grant applications and external grant support, will be primary concerns.  However, excellence in research cannot compensate for poor teaching or a lack of quality service; such a profile would not result in a positive recommendation. 

Because tenure implies a life-time commitment to a Faculty member, the potential of the Faculty member to make a positive contribution to the discipline, Department, University, and community over the long term is carefully assessed.  To that end, it is possible, in rare instances, that a Faculty member may not have the potential to be a positive influence in the Department, even though research and teaching accomplishments are adequate.  In such cases, the detrimental influence of a Faculty member would be grounds to recommend against tenure.

As noted in the University Policy, promotion to Professor necessarily requires significant accomplishments in the area of research. In evaluating candidates for promotion to Professor, a substantial record of accomplishment in publications, grantsmanship and professional contributions are key considerations.  However, greatest weight is placed on the Faculty member’s scholarly reputation in evaluating a candidate for promotion to Professor.

TABLE 1  Criteria for Tenure and Promotion of Kent Campus Faculty*




[1] Exceptional performance in research may be justification for considering a candidate for early Promotion and Tenure.





Professional Activity



Substantial number of first authored publications in high quality journals since hire

PI on multiple

major grants

Typical examples  

include editorships,

officer in professional organization(s)

Outstanding external letters, evidence of substantial  

impact (e.g., citation counts,

high caliber publications,

special awards, editorships)



Evidence of an independent program of research that is resulting in a clear record of empirical publications in

quality journals

PI or Co-PI on a  funded major grant  or sustained effort to obtain major  extramural grants

Typical examples  

include ad hoc journal reviews, presenting at meetings, serving on professional committees

Strong external letters, some evidence of  impact/

recognition (e.g., citations, publication outlets and reviewing)


Sporadic publications; and/or lack of evidence of an independent program of research and/or lack of quality publications

Lack of sustained effort to obtain major extramural grants

No engagement  in profession

Lackluster external letters, minimal impact


[1] Note that reputation is weighed much more heavily for promotion to Full than for Tenure and Promotion to Associate






          Classroom Instruction

                    Student Supervision [1]


Evidence of outstanding teaching (based on  peer reviews from Ad Hoc P&T committee    and student evaluations); teaching awards

Exceptional mentorship as evidenced by productive graduate students (excellent progress, publications) and enthusiastic evaluations by supervisees



Solid evidence of  good teaching (based on   peer reviews from Ad Hoc P&T committee    and student evaluations) 

Has attracted graduate students to lab, evidence of active and effective research and/or Clinical Psychology supervision as evidenced by student progress and supervisee evaluations


Consistent evidence of  poor teaching performance

Consistent evidence of poor quality mentorship and/or supervision 


[1] For faculty who participate in practicum supervision, their performance in clinical supervision is also considered here.


*For a complete description of criteria, please see Tenure and Promotion Policy.






Extensive, high-quality service; leadership roles, outreach activities

Meets Expectations

Consistent and responsible service on departmental and/or University committees


Minimal and/or low quality service