Not all research activities are equally meritorious. Both the quantity and the quality of research scholarship shall figure into the evaluation of the candidate’s record. Published research scholarship carries far greater weight than non-published. Further, some published materials are more valuable than others.
Quality of research scholarship will be evaluated as a combination of the following characteristics: research that contributes to theory-building is given more weight than descriptive work; data-driven research is given more weight than descriptive work; the relative stringency of the review process that publications have undergone. Journals with strict refereeing processes and low acceptance rates are given more weight than those with less rigorous procedures and higher rates of acceptance. The prestige/visibility of the medium in which the work appears is also relevant; for example, university presses are generally given more weight than trade publishers.
Published research within the field of Peace and Conflict Studies and related cognate fields is valued. It is expected that candidates for tenure and promotion 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, including those serving the field of Peace and Conflict Studies.
The School welcomes, encourages and values collaborative research work and co-authorships. Nonetheless, the record of all candidates for tenure and promotion ought to also include sole-authored peer-reviewed publications. With respect to jointly authored works of scholarship and collaborative grant applications, the degree of the candidate’s contribution will be considered. Thus, candidates should indicate the extent and nature of their contributions.
“Early online” publication of journal articles shall count as published articles. A book contract is valued and may be considered as a component of an application for tenure, but does not count in nearly the same way as published material does.
With respect to applications for extramural funding, the School expects applications for external funding from faculty members receiving start-up funds. It also encourages applications from all faculty members. All submitted proposals for extramural funding are meritorious; however, successful grant applications carry more weight.
In contrast to the above, a scholarly record of sporadic publications, publishing primarily in low-quality journals, no or low levels of extramural grant activity, minimal engagement in the profession, and weak external letters are evidence of deficiencies in a candidate’s record of research scholarship.
Primary evidence of research scholarship includes:
- peer-reviewed (refereed) books, peer-reviewed journal articles, peer-reviewed book chapters, and peer-reviewed edited books
- publications undergoing double-blind peer review are more meritorious than other sorts of peer-review processes
- seeking and/or securing grants, especially extramural funding
Additional evidence of scholarship includes:
- presentation of papers at professional meetings
- review essays
- encyclopedia/handbook chapters or entries
- book reviews
- research and technical reports which are distributed locally or informally
- organizing, conducting, and participating in workshops and panels
- reviewing manuscripts for journals and/or publishers
- reviewing grant proposals and/or reports for external granting agencies and foundations
- consulting contracts with governmental, non-profit, or private sector organizations
- on-going involvement, consulting work, or the provision of services and training based upon professional expertise, in community-based or professional organizations, including the production of training manuals and related materials
- op-eds and articles in newspapers, online platforms, and similar non-academic publications
- instructor’s manuals and instructional software
- collegial recognitions of outstanding achievement, such as awards