Evaluation tables and documentation examples

The text in this section and the tables in the Appendix to this section are designed to facilitate assessing performance of candidates being evaluated for tenure and promotion. During the probationary period, these tools should be used for developmental assistance and projection of future success in achieving tenure and promotion and for determining the faculty member’s qualification for reappointment.

Tables 1, 2, and 3 in the Appendix provide worksheets for use in the evaluation of candidates. For promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor, the faculty member must meet the criteria for at least a “very good” evaluation in scholarly/creative activity and at least a “very good” evaluation in teaching. University citizenship must at least meet the minimum School criteria as outlined in Table 3. These same categories and assessment tools apply for tenure decisions.

A candidate for promotion to Professor must meet the criteria for an “excellent” evaluation in either scholarly/creative activity or teaching and no less than “very good” in the other category. Service must exceed the minimum School criteria. A candidate for promotion to Professor may not have equal activity in scholarship, teaching and service, as he/she becomes more specialized.

Given the wide range of venues in which scholarly/creative work may be published or presented, faculty are expected to provide clear documentation regarding publication or presentation of scholarly/creative work. Such documentation should include an assessment of its quality, impact or contribution to the body of professional or scholarly knowledge.

Conference papers and presentations, for example, generally do not carry equal weight with published articles or creative work. Original scholarship or journalism based on original reporting or research, for example, generally would be weighted more heavily than analysis or review of another’s work. In collaborations, the contributions of each author should be clear.

Assessment may be through traditional scholarly peer-review processes, demonstrated by client or external colleague evaluation, or adjudication (e.g., critical reviews, letters from acknowledged experts). Examples of acceptable assessment are provided below. Reviews by close colleagues and collaborators do not carry the same weight as dispassionate reviews by more objective, detached, external colleagues.

For peer-reviewed articles, faculty are expected to document:

  • acceptance rate
  • quality of the publication
  • targeted audience
  • impact of the article
  • citations

For peer-reviewed paper sessions, faculty are expected to document:

  • acceptance rate
  • significance of the organization
  • indication of how paper or presentation may advance to publication

For invited papers or presentations, faculty are expected to document:

  • the significance of the organization
  • significance of the presentation, cited in a letter from the person who extended the invitation
  • audience for the paper or presentation

Books also represent scholarly/creative activity. The relative weight depends on such factors as the original research behind the text, the importance of the book to the field and the candidate’s role as single author, multiple author or editor. Faculty are expected to document:

  • publishing process
  • targeted audience
  • copies sold
  • reviews or other evaluations
  • citations

For articles in professional media, faculty are expected to document:

  • the circulation of the publication
  • description of audience
  • significance of the article, cited in a letter from the supervising editor, when available
  • other external validation such as awards or contests
  • citations, references
  • description of the reporting, research and/or creative process used to produce the article
  • acceptance rate

For articles and blogs online, faculty are expected to document:

  • unique visitors or other accepted measures
  • links
  • significance of the organization that owns the web site
  • significance of the work, cited in a letter from the supervising editor, critical reviews or other evidence or in the case of a blog, qualified outside resources
  • other documented citations

For video/broadcast work in professional reporting or production, faculty are expected to document:

  • selection for distribution by a television station, network or online
  • description of audience
  • significance of the work, cited in a letter from the supervising producer, when available
  • assessment through professional or academic awards competitions
  • reviews from relevant professional or academic experts.

In addition to reporting/writing/producing, the practice of journalism encompasses such creative activities as editing, photography, and design for print and digital media. These are to be vetted in a similar fashion to the three preceding examples.

The practice of public relations, on behalf of businesses and/or nonprofit organizations, encompasses:

  • Conducting formal communication audits and/or research initiatives.
  • Developing strategic public relations campaigns or programs that produce measurable results.
  • Developing and executing substantial public relations initiatives such as websites, social-media campaigns, large-scale events, etc.
  • Providing senior-level counsel leading to the adoption of more effective and ethical public relations practices.

Although the School puts the highest value on original research and creative activity, the following also are valued as part of a candidate’s portfolio: book reviews, grant proposals, as well as reviewing manuscripts and programs.

Faculty also may apply their expertise as advisers or consultants in significant problem-solving activities for an organization and may create workshops and seminars for professional audiences. Candidates will be expected to provide evaluation and impact of their work.

Because of the heavy teaching responsibilities for tenure-track faculty members at the regional campuses, expectations for scholarly and creative activity will not be as great as they are for faculty on the Kent campus.