General Expectations

Evaluations of Kent campus probationary TT and NTT faculty members follow the School of Art guidelines (below), while evaluations of regional campus probationary faculty members follow the guidelines of their campus. Differences between criteria reflect differentials in mission, available resources, and nature of faculty appointments. Dossiers are presented through the on-line FlashFolio system.

  1. Reappointment

    In general, successful annual reappointment reviews for non-tenured TT faculty will show evidence of progress toward the requirements for tenure on three measurable criteria: scholarship and/or creative activity, teaching, and service to the profession and the institution. In addition to these, consideration is given to personal integrity and professional behavior as recognized by the University community and as demonstrated in all aspects of scholarship and citizenship. Specific concerns expressed by the RT&P review committee and/or the director during annual reviews must be addressed by the candidate in subsequent reviews.

    1. Research and Creative Activity - see table 2.A

    To attain a rating of “very good”, candidates should be professionally active as researchers or creative artists, which activity is indicated by publications or exhibitions each year, with a clear research focus emerging over time. As an external indicator of this activity, candidates will have begun to establish a strong positive professional reputation, with publications, presentations, and exhibitions at the regional, and increasingly, national and international levels over time which shows promise for having significant impact on the field (or discipline) during the pre-tenure years. Ratings of “excellent” are awarded only exceptionally at this stage, since reputation is still being built.

    2. Teaching - see table 2.B

    In order to be reappointed, candidates should attain a minimum rating of “good” in the scholarship of teaching by the end of the third year, recognizing that strong teaching takes time to develop. Candidates should demonstrate aspiration to “very good” ratings, even as differentials of assignment across the School mean that some assignments typically involve formats in which it is difficult to achieve strongly positive results.

    Teaching quality will be evidenced in official teaching evaluation forms (SSIs), reports by the teaching observation committee based on observed classroom instruction, and/or other activity related to pedagogy, such as supervision of student research or publication of pedagogical research, advising, and curricular/course development.

    3. Service and University Citizenship - see table 2.C

    In order to be reappointed, candidates will have demonstrated some amount of active and cooperative service at one or more of the following levels: the program, division, school, college, university. This service and collegiality will increase as their experience grows.

    Special Note for Reappointment

    The third-year review is particularly important: during this review, evidence for all three categories must rate minimally as “good,” with the understanding that a “very good” will be required for tenure. If at any time any criterion is assessed below the level of “good”, the candidate will, in consultation with the school director, devise plans for improvement and/or development, in order to attain levels of at least “very good.”

  2. Tenure

    Because tenure review is required in the next-to-last year of the probationary period, while promotional review is not mandated, tenure and promotion reviews require separate decisions.

    The granting of tenure is viewed as the recognition of successful completion of the probationary period of appointment, as well as the conviction, by those involved in making the tenure decision, that the individual will continue to make a positive contribution to her/his discipline, unit, campus, university and community over the long term. The decision is initiated by the candidate’s peers and eventually made by the trustees of the university. Since this decision could result in life-long employment at this institution, it involves more than a mere survey of the candidate’s minimum quantifiable activities. (University Policy and Procedures Regarding Faculty Tenure, section D, 28 November, 2001).

    For tenure, evaluation may refer to (but not count) accomplishments prior to appointment at Kent State in order to establish consistency: in addition, work under review or in press, grant proposals submitted but not funded, graduate students currently in progress, and other materials which may reflect on the candidate’s potential for long-term success and recognition will be considered.

    Many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, are to be weighed in the decision to recommend for tenure, including differentials in assignments.  In addition, consideration of the individual’s personal integrity and professional behavior will be a factor, with the expectation that School of Art faculty observe ethical standards in all aspects of the academic profession.

    Indicators of the quality of a faculty member’s research and creative activity record include the quality and quantity of performances, exhibitions, installations or 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. 

    For Kent Campus TT faculty members to receive a positive recommendation for tenure, candidates must attain at least the level of “very good” in scholarship and/or creative activity on the indicators noted. The scholarship of teaching must also, at the minimum, be rated “very good” and service as “meets obligations.”

  3. Promotion

    Many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, are weighed in the decision to recommend for promotion in rank. Differentials in assignments shall be considered in decisions concerning promotion. In addition, consideration of the individual’s personal integrity and professional behavior will be a factor, with the expectation that School of Art TT faculty observe ethical standards in all aspects of the academic profession.

    1. Promotion to Associate Professor

      On the Kent campus, promotion to Associate Professor is a recognition to an individual for having established a career which has a research focus promising sustained development and which has begun to achieve national and/or international distinction deserving of an “excellent” or “very good” rating. Such distinction in scholarly or creative activity will be evidenced by publications in refereed journals or with recognized presses; by exhibitions in prominent institutions, in distinguished company, or by selection of noteworthy individuals; by theses and projects directed; and/or by election to office in the relevant disciplinary/professional organization(s), and/or by appointment to boards or jury panels at the regional, national or international level.

      Indicators of the quality of a faculty member’s research and creative activity record include the quality and quantity of performances, exhibitions, installations or 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. 

      Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor will also have demonstrated “very good” or “excellent” ratings in teaching; no one should expect to be promoted unless s/he can present solid evidence of strong teaching. We recognize that not all TT faculty members will engage in every activity listed above but it is expected that “excellence” will be achieved in at least one of the categories above. Service activities – to the program, division, school, college, university, community, and/or profession – will have increased in significance and visibility over the probationary period and will have been carried out with recognized effectiveness and cooperation.  However, excellent ratings in service alone will not warrant promotion in rank.

    2. Promotion to Professor

      On the Kent campus, promotion to Professor is a recognition to an individual for having brought his/her career to national or international prominence, with a demonstrated record of sustained creative activity or research and increased distinction in the discipline/field, as evidenced by invitations and/or selection for service to disciplinary and/or professional organizations, based on recognition by peers so as to be rated “excellent.”

      Candidates for promotion to Professor will also have a consistent record of rating as “very good” or “excellent” in teaching and will have made effective use of their professional and academic competence in service to the program, division, school, college, university, community, and/or profession.  When scholarship, teaching and service are recognized as “excellent” or “exceeding expectations,” they contribute to the positive assessment for promotion to Professor. However, excellent ratings in service alone will not warrant promotion in rank.