Senate Document #42 4/24/86 Executive Committee Document #3 1985 - 1986 The Executive Committee of the UNCA Faculty Senate recommends the adoption of the following statement regarding standards for tenure and promotion: The UNCA Faculty Senate recommends that the "Guidelines for Making Recommendation for Tenure and Promotion" prepared by the Committee of Tenured Faculty for 1985-86 be adopted as a continuing document to guide the Committee of Tenured Faculty and the Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs in making decisions regarding tenure and promotion at UNCA. GUIDELINES FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION: This document has been prepared by the Committee of Tenured Faculty for 1985-1986, with the intention of assisting the faculty in understanding the considerations involved in the tenure and promotion process. It is to everyone's advantage that criteria for tenure and promotion be identified as clearly as possible without, however, being made overly rigid. The candidate for tenure or promotion is expected to present his or her chairman with a well documented report on his accom- plishments in the catagories described below. The department chairman must review and evaluate each faculty member's level of accomplishment, and may make recommendations for tenure and/or promotion at any time during the faculty member's career. Such recommendations are carefully reviewed and scrutinized by the Committee of the Tenured Faculty and by the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. The decision for granting tenure may be separated from the decision to promote. On these occasions the candidate for tenure should demonstrate a strong commitment to, and a record of, highly effective teaching, and, at least, a minimum level of scholarship. A minimum level of service is also expected; however, the university recognizes the need for beginning professors to emphasize teaching and scholarship during their early years. Promotion to Associate Professor requires accomplishments beyond that minimum expected for tenure. It is not expected that an individual will be outstanding in all three categories (i.e., teaching, scholarship, and service). It is normally expected that candidates for promotion to Associate Professor will have achieved excellence in one of the three areas, with some significant contributions in the other two categories. In all cases, there must be clear evidence of highly effective teaching. In judging scholarship and service, the quality of accomplishment is the most important consideration. Service in this context is defined as academic program development or off campus service activities recognized at the regional, national or international level. It is normally expected that promotion to full Professor requires an outstanding level of achievement in either teaching or scholarship, with, at least, a significant level of contri- bution in the other area as well as in the service category. While the evaluation will focus on accomplishments since the last promotion, the candidate's whole career will be taken into consideration. 2 Because promotion is based largely on accumulated accom- plishment while in rank at UNCA, time spent in rank will vary according to the rate of achievement. However, longevity per se is not considered grounds for promotion. In the interests of fairness it is desirable that fairly even standards prevail across the university. However, differences among departments and disciplines, as well as differing responsibilites among individual faculty members, require that these guidelines be implemented with some flexibility. 3 GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING TEACHING; As an undergraduate, liberal arts-oriented institution, UNCA values outstanding teaching above all other faculty accomplish- ments. Teaching is the art of helping students to learn. Consequently, it extends beyond the classroom to include individ- ual teacher-student interaction, availability to students, and readiness to assist them. It is seldom measurable in quantita- tive terms; numerical summaries of student evaluations, by themselves, can never adequately measure the quality of teaching. Superior teaching may be most recognized by students only after they have graduated. There is no one style, nor any all-inclusive measure, of excellent teaching. For all these reasons, guidelines can be only approximate. some idicators of superior teaching are: [not ranked in any order of priority] -- excellent student evaluations from semester to semester (summaries of student evaluations should always reflect student comments as well as numerical rankings) -- reports from students during senior exit interviews that repeatedly identify a faculty member as making a major contribu- tion to their education -- a teaching award given in open competition by the university -- interdisciplinary teaching activities -- significant curricular contribtuions (e.g., developing new courses for the major or general education) -- involving students in special academic projects (e.g., research, internships) -- outstanding extramural achievement by a student, in which the instructor was instrumental in the student's success -- unusual effort given to help students individually -- an outstanding commitment to advising. GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING SCHOLARSHIP: Candidates for tenure and promotion are expected to engage in research and scholarship. These activites should be evaluated by their contribtuion to an academic field. Peer evaluation is important in this process. Scholarship cannot be measured solely by the quantity of publications. As an undergraduate, liberal arts-oriented institution, a "publish or perish" environment is not appropriate; however, research and scholarship are especially valued as they enhance teaching. Research and scholarship which involve students and/or interdisciplinary work is noteworthy. Faculty members with released time for research are expected to be more productive than those without released time for research. Among the recognizable activities for evaluating research and scholarship are: [not in any order of priority] -- publications reflecting original research, such as journal articles, monographs and books -- other forms of writing, such as textbooks, reviews and editing -- papers presented at conferences to professional colleagues -- participation at conferences as a discussant, moderator or organizer -- grants for research, prizes and other formal recognition that a scholar's work has special merit -- creative activity, including production or performance of art, music or drama -- professional activity as judged by selection to boards offices and committees 5 GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING SERVICE: While the faculty will ordinarily participate in university and community life, significant contributions to the campus and the broader local, regional, national or international community are noteworthy for tenure and promotion considerations. The service should show additional commitment, contribution and recognition. It should be significant in scope and quality, and have impact over the years. Service activities which involve the faculty member's professional competence will be most relevant to the evaluation. Faculty members with released time for service activities are expected to accomplish more in the area of service than those without such released time. Among the recognizable activities for evaluation services are: [not in any order of priority] -- administration of programs and tasks which contribute to the cultural, educational and social welfare of the university and community -- election or appointment to committees, task forces, commissions, boards or public office -- writing of funded grant proposals or the development of resources for programs -- awards and prizes given in recognition of service -- positions of leadership -- public lectures, workshops and consulting