Expectations for Reappointment
It is expected that faculty standing for reappointment in University Libraries will demonstrate an appropriate level of accomplishment in job performance/teaching, scholarship, and service as defined by the subsequent rubrics. Given that the nature of faculty work varies widely within UL, and that teaching is not the primary job responsibility of most UL faculty members, UL defines the teaching aspect of reappointment to include both job performance and teaching, with emphasis on the candidate's job performance. "Scholarship" is broadly defined to include research, scholarly and creative work. "Service" is broadly defined to include service to the university, professional service to the faculty member's discipline, and the provision of professional expertise to public and private entities beyond the university. University Libraries' faculty is comprised of experts active in numerous areas of librarianship and related fields. In addition to their specific specializations, it is expected that individuals will demonstrate a broad knowledge of the field of librarianship. Likewise, in their scholarship UL faculty shall demonstrate clarity of goals and sound methods.
A candidate's submitted record will be evaluated on the basis of the quality of the work, significance of contribution, and impact on University Libraries, the University, and the profession. The decision to reappoint a faculty member results from the assessment of the evidence available to determine the candidate's contribution to University Libraries, the University, and the profession. Reappointment decisions precede the decision to grant tenure and are intended to provide guidance to the candidate in progressing toward submitting an application for tenure.
A faculty member's appointment may include operational or administrative responsibilities that may impact scholarly productivity. This will be taken into consideration in evaluating candidates.
5.1 Criteria for Reappointment
The following categories shall form the basis for evaluation of faculty for reappointment in UL:
- University Libraries places particular value on the quality of its faculty as professional practitioners of librarianship. Accordingly, to be successful for reappointment, a candidate should have achieved a "good," "very good," or "excellent" assessment rating in the category of job performance/teaching as set forth in Section 6 of this policy. As a candidate moves closer to the tenure decision, the candidate should progress to the "very good" or "excellent" rating required for a positive tenure decision.
- University Libraries also values the engagement of its faculty in research on the diverse areas of knowledge applicable to the goals and mission of UL, the University, and the profession. Accordingly, to be successful for reappointment, a candidate should have achieved a "good," "very good," or "excellent" assessment rating in the category of scholarship as set forth in Section 7 of this policy. As a candidate moves closer to the tenure decision, the candidate should progress to the "very good" or "excellent" rating required for a positive tenure decision.
- Service which makes significant positive contributions to the advancement of the educational, scholarly, and governance goals and mission of UL, the University, the profession, or the community is expected of all faculty members. Kent State University also values service activities not necessarily tied to one's special field of knowledge. Accordingly, a candidate for reappointment in UL must achieve a rating of "fair," "good," or "excellent" in service according to the measures set forth in Section 8 of this policy. As a candidate moves closer to the tenure decision, the candidate should progress to the "good" or "excellent" rating required for a positive tenure decision.
5.2 Assessment of Scholarly Products
Only materials compiled, finished (including work "in press"), or presented since initial appointment at current rank or since the last successful application for reappointment are to be considered in the evaluation of a candidate's qualifications for reappointment. A candidate must supply official documentation for materials that are "in press."
A regular pattern of scholarly activity is more important than achieving a specific number of scholarly products. A candidate's works will be evaluated on the basis of the quality of the work, significance of contribution, and impact on University Libraries, the University, and the profession.
Works are more highly valued when they are:
Invited - Such invitations reflect recognition of the candidate within the scholarly community. High profile invitations (for example, keynote speaker) are more valued than roles such as featured speaker or panel member.
Peer reviewed - Peer reviewed or refereed works reflect a positive assessment by external experts of the value and quality of the work.
Associated with publishers, publications, or organizations of high repute or high impact. (NOTE: UL does not maintain a list of core journals.) National and international venues are valued more highly than state and regional venues.
Scholarly products can take many forms. There is no preference regarding the physical or electronic format of the work. When a work is repackaged (for example, reprinted), this should be clearly indicated by the candidate on all relevant materials in the file. Content posted on institutional repositories and blogs is not viewed as scholarly, unless it is also published or presented in a manner itemized below.
The following list is a partial survey of types of valued scholarly output. The types are in alphabetical order. The categories under each type are in order with most highly valued listed first.
1. Articles in scholarly or professional journals
b. peer reviewed
2. Bibliographies in scholarly or professional publications
a. critically annotated
b. descriptively annotated
3. Book chapters in scholarly or professional books
4. Book reviews
a. review essay
5. Book series - editor
6. Books from scholarly or professional presses
7. Columns in scholarly or professional journals
ii. proposed / submitted
b. column editor
8. Editorial role for scholarly or professional journal or book series
a. journal editor
b. guest editor
c. editorial board / reviewer of manuscripts
b. catalog published
10. Grants for scholarly or professional research
a. funded grants
11. Indexing and abstracting
12. Presentations at scholarly or professional conferences
d. poster session
13. Proceedings from scholarly or professional conferences
14. Products of advanced degree work
c. research studies
15. Reference book entries
16. Review panel for funding agencies
17. Subject, name or series authority work contributed through nationally recognized professional organizations
18. Other scholarly activity - candidate must describe / summarize