NORTHERN
COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND SCIENCES
POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND CRITERIA CONCERNING PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
I. College policies governing all personnel recommendations concerning the faculty
A. Professional Responsibilities
1. General responsibilities regarding research
2. Responsibilities regarding scholarly productivity
3. Responsibilities regarding instruction
4. Responsibilities regarding professional service
B. Recruitment expectations
C. Annual recommendations concerning appointment and retention
D. Recommendations for tenure
E. Early tenure
F. Recommendations for promotion in academic rank
G. Early promotion
H. Confidentiality in personnel deliberations
II. College procedures on promotion and tenure matters
A. The promotion/tenure papers
B. The preliminary recommendation of the college
C. Reconsiderations of promotion and tenure recommendations
D. Appeals of promotion and tenure recommendations
III. Additional departmental criteria in personnel recommendations
IV. Recommendations concerning salary matters
A. Related to merit
B. Related to promotion in academic rank
C. Evaluations of chairs/directors
V. Procedures for reconsidering evaluations of professional performance in connection with salary increments
VI. Guidelines for ranking applications for leave of absence with pay
VII. Allegations of discrimination or violation of academic freedom
VIII. Revision of these policies
NORTHERN
COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND SCIENCES
POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND CRITERIA CONCERNING PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
In all its personnel recommendations the college shall act in accordance with policies, practices, and directives of the Board of Trustees and the university, and is committed to achieving the goals of excellence, due process, and affirmative action.
The college has two types of responsibilities in the personnel process. It establishes academic standards and procedures for the college as a whole, and it ensures that departments conform to them as well as to their own established standards and procedures. While each department bears the principal responsibility for establishing professional standards and for evaluating the professional competence of its own faculty members in accordance with these standards, the college is responsible for overseeing this process and for applying its own academic standards. Hence the college must be satisfied that such evaluations are in accordance with high academic standards in each discipline as well as with departmental and college policies and procedures. Accordingly the college council shall review all departmental personnel recommendations to ensure (1) that appropriate professional standards of evaluation have been applied; and (2) that college guidelines, policies, and appropriate procedures have been followed. The college retains the right to reject a departmental recommendation if the college is not persuaded of its validity.
Recommendations for retention, tenure, promotion, and salary originate in the academic department in which the faculty member holds rank. Academic departments shall establish their own policies (including those governing departmental personnel committees) for making personnel recommendations. Such policies are subject to approval by the dean and the college council. In the event that a department changes its personnel document in a way it judges to be non-substantial, it is free to do so, provided the department notified the college office of the change. Unless otherwise provided in particular cases by a vote of the college council, the only person authorized to communicate to departments the council's personnel recommendations and the reasons for them is the dean of the college. If additional information is required in order to make a personnel recommendation, the information shall be sought by the dean or by a college council member specifically charged by the council with this responsibility. This latter policy should in no way be interpreted as precluding a department chair from making routine formal communications to the affected candidate or to the departmental personnel committee regarding a personnel recommendation.
If a departmental personnel committee makes a recommendation with which the chair does not concur, the chair shall advise the departmental committee of this dissent and shall forward both recommendations to the dean.
Each personnel recommendation submitted to the college council shall be documented with a resume of the faculty member's educational background and professional experience. In tenure and/or promotion recommendations, the resume forms part of the recommendation itself. For annual merit recommendations, departments shall submit updated resumes of all faculty at the same time they submit their annual merit recommendations. The resume should also include information on publications, other professional contributions, and teaching obligations. Except for tenure recommendations personnel recommendations shall be based on the candidate's record up to the beginning of, but not including developments during the academic year in which the recommendation is being made. The candidate's complete record may be considered for tenure recommendations. This policy shall not be construed as prohibiting the college council from taking into account unprofessional conduct on the part of a tenured faculty member occurring during the academic year in which the recommendation is being made.
A written report on a recommendation concerning promotion, tenure, or a sabbatical leave shall be sent in a timely fashion to the faculty member affected by recommendations made at the departmental and college levels after each level has acted on the recommendation. A written notice of merit ratings for pay increment purposes shall be sent to the affected faculty member from the department. All such notices shall contain pertinent information regarding the opportunities for and regulations governing requests for reconsideration or appeal. The annual evaluation of progress toward tenure of a probationary faculty member shall not itself be subject to appeal to the college.
Each department member shall be given an opportunity to examine evaluations and recommendations of tenure, annual appraisals of progress toward tenure, the formal summative evaluation of progress toward tenure, promotion, and non-retention by the department and chair concerning himself or herself before they are submitted to the college office, to discuss such evaluations and recommendations with the personnel committee or its designee, as well as the department chair, and to be allowed a reconsideration. Each year the department chair shall counsel probationary faculty members, both orally and in writing, concerning the quality of their overall professional performance and suggest, when needed, opportunities for improvement.
In making personnel recommendations concerning an individual faculty member's professional qualifications, each department shall base its evaluations exclusively on reasons directly related
to the performance of
the faculty member in teaching, research, and other professional service. Care must be taken to
exclude extraneous information such as gender, marital status, age, race,
color, national origin, citizenship, disability, sexual orientation, status as
a disabled or
For individuals holding a joint appointment between two or more units, each unit shall evaluate the person using the standard evaluation criteria within that unit. The final evaluation, however, shall be based on a procedure specified in writing prior to the acceptance of the joint appointment. In all cases responsibility for tenure and promotion recommendations resides in the academic departments. This process shall be consistent with college and university policies and procedures regarding joint appointments.
For directors of graduate or undergraduate studies, assistant chairs, supervisors of student teaching, and others whose responsibilities within a department differ significantly from normal responsibilities, the department chair, in consultation with the personnel committee, shall negotiate in advance of the beginning of the appointment (a) the time commitments expected of those holding such positions; (b) the proportion of time to be spent on research, teaching, and service, relative to the special responsibility; and (c) the relative weightings for each category of professional activity. All facets of such agreements are subject to approval by the dean. Prior to assigning such responsibilities, a copy of a letter to the individual shall be placed in the individual's personnel file, with a copy to the dean, specifying agreements reached. The criteria for evaluating research, teaching and service (other than the special responsibility) shall be the same as for other colleagues. The final evaluation shall be based on combining the two separate components (i.e., the special responsibility and teaching/research/service) in accordance with the negotiated weightings for each category of professional activity.
I. College Policies Governing All Personnel Recommendations Concerning the Faculty
A. Professional Responsibilities
The mission of the college is to generate, transmit, and apply knowledge; moreover, the college acknowledges the mutually supportive roles played by teaching, research, and professional service.
1. General responsibilities regarding research:
In addition to the imaginative use of research in assisting students in obtaining a liberal education, responsibilities regarding research include the search for, and the sharing of, new understandings and new knowledge. The sharing of understanding and knowledge may occur in a variety of ways: through publication of books, monographs, and articles; through leadership in colloquia on this and other campuses; through presentation of papers at professional meetings; through participation in other scholarly activities; and through classroom, laboratory, or other instruction. In assessing the overall quality of a faculty member's research, the college and its departments should bear in mind that scholars who publish in journals, particularly refereed journals, and present papers at major professional meetings share their work with a wide variety of specialists and expose their conclusions to expert critical judgment, while scholars who present their thought primarily in the classroom reach a restricted audience which may not be qualified to judge some aspects of their performance. Far from equating "faculty scholarship" exclusively with research that communicates new discoveries, the college's mandate to transmit and apply knowledge obliges it to acknowledge the central importance of research that integrates existing knowledge in new ways or applies existing knowledge to solve practical problems. The college also views teaching and research in all its forms as mutually supportive modalities of faculty work. Essential to both teaching and original research is a commitment to personal learning and to the ideals of scholarly inquiry, which includes:
a. Keeping critically aware of developments in one's field
b. Assessing such developments and using them to improve one's understanding and one's ability to communicate major advancements in the field
c. Commitment to the scholar's obligation to consider alternative views and to rethink conclusions
2. Responsibilities regarding scholarly productivity
A significant component of the mission of each department in the college is the production, transmission, and application of scholarly knowledge. In fact, the reputation of the department, college, and university depends in large part on the quality of the research published by departmental faculty. To ensure that these obligations are effectively being met, it is the responsibility of the college and of each department to establish rigorous evaluation standards for assessing not only scholarly works that communicate new discoveries, but also scholarly works that integrate existing knowledge in new ways or apply existing knowledge to solve practical problems. Moreover, it is the professional obligation of the college and each department to engage in regular assessment of the quality of all scholarly work and to use this assessment to recognize and reward faculty performance. For this reason it is essential that faculty maintain high standards of research and recognize that excellent teaching must be based upon excellent research. For this work to be assessed, recognized, and rewarded, it must be submitted in a timely fashion to the appropriate departmental committee for evaluation. This assessment shall take into account such factors as:
a. First-hand evaluation by departmental colleagues of the quality of scholarly contributions
b. Dissemination of scholarship through professionally significant peer-reviewed channels
c. Acceptance of scholarly contributions by experts in the discipline
d. Significance and impact of scholarly contributions
e. Level of professional expertise involved in scholarly contributions
One major factor in differentiating "applied research" from "public service" is that the former must result in a research product submitted to the departmental personnel committee in order to be recognized and rewarded as research.
3. Responsibilities regarding instruction
a. Recognizing that among its basic functions are the search for and the transmission of knowledge, the college and its departments shall recruit, encourage, reward, and recognize scholars who are effective in the classroom and who use their scholarship to further the aims of liberal education, as well as to prepare students for useful careers and responsible citizenship.
b. The assessment of instruction ultimately rests on the professional judgment of a faculty member's peers. Although student evaluations of teaching constitute an important component in the evidence used by colleagues to render an assessment of teaching effectiveness, departments shall make use of multiple types of evidence in determining teaching effectiveness. For tenure and/or promotion recommendations, departments shall use a variety of techniques that gather information from a variety of sources over a period of time sufficient to permit adequate documentation on the quality of teaching and on the impact of any changes that have been made to improve instruction.
c. Relevant assessments of instruction might include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
1) role in student achievement, based on performance on examinations and projects
2) Faculty members' mastery of the subject matter they intend their students to learn, as well as an understanding of the misconceptions their students bring to the classroom that might interfere with their learning of that subject matter
3) contributions to the increasing maturity and intellectual development of students, encouraging their capacity for independent thought, strengthening their powers of communication and the rigor of their reasoning
4) effective organization and presentation of the subject matter and the course; clarity about what is to be accomplished in the course; appropriateness and relevance of course content; appropriate sequencing and pacing of course content
5) appropriateness of course objectives, instructional materials, evaluative devices, and teaching methodologies; effectiveness of the means for achieving course objectives
6) effective communication
7) enthusiasm for and commitment to teaching and student learning
8) flexibility in approaches to teaching; openness in the examination of a variety of views and tolerance for the expression of different views
9) positive attitude toward students; helpfulness and availability to students beyond in-class interactions
10) fairness and objectivity in evaluating student work
11) effectiveness in advising undergraduate students, in directing undergraduate honors theses, and in overseeing undergraduate research projects
12) effectiveness in advising graduate students, in directing masters theses or doctoral dissertations, or in serving on a thesis or dissertation committee
13) acceptance of responsibility for assessing and improving teaching effectiveness, including:
a) maintaining up-to-date course content by incorporating new developments in the field
b) an on-going questioning by the teacher of the effectiveness of his/her instruction for purposes of liberal and/or professional education
c) effective use of student evaluations, peer consulta tion, and other means of determining where improvements may be possible or needed
4. Responsibilities regarding professional service
The evaluation of service should include assessments of the degree to which the service yields significant benefits, to the university, the discipline, the profession, or society. Especially relevant is the extent to which the service meets the needs of clients, induces positive change, or improves performance. Service contributions considered for evaluation are those which are within a person's professional expertise as a faculty member, and performed with one's university affiliation identified.
a. service to the department, college and university
The principal focus of evaluation shall be on assessing not the quantity, but the quality, significance, and impact of one's performance in improving the work and advancing the mission of the department, college, and university, including one's overall contributions as a citizen in an academic community and one's professional contributions in rendering direct service to the institution.
b. service to the profession and to the discipline
In addition to advancing the goals of the profession and the discipline, this type of service also brings increased visibility and recognition to the university. Service to the profession and to the discipline shall be assessed primarily on the basis of the quality, significance, and impact of one's service to the profession or to the discipline.
c. professionally oriented public service
The term "public service" refers to scholarly activities in which faculty members are invited to participate because of their scholarly expertise. These activities involve, directly and explicitly, their professional competencies, which are not related to their personal membership in religious, civic, or community organizations. Moreover, public service should contribute directly to growth in a faculty member's scholarly competencies. The term "public service" does not exclude professionally-oriented activities in the private sector of society, although all instances of public service should contribute to the public welfare or the common good.
In assessing public service, particular attention shall be given to the quality, significance, and impact of the public service performed, the dissemination of the public service contributions, and, as relevant, the integration of public service with one's scholarly research and teaching.
Public service is generally regarded as being of high quality when there is evidence that it has resulted in the following outcomes:
1) beneficial impact attributable at least in part to the application of relevant and up-to-date knowledge and methodologies to the real-world problems, issues, or concerns addressed by the public service
2) use of innovative approaches that are applicable to other contexts
3) high-level of professional expertise involved in performing public service
4) honors, awards, and other forms of special recognition, such as commendations that have been received on account of the performance of public service
5) election to office or undertaking important service to professional associations, including editorial work or peer reviewing for a national or international organization
6) selection for special public service activities outside the state and invitations to give talks within the faculty member's field
7) election or appointment to departmental or institutional governance bodies or to academic policy or procedure development committees, provided such activities are clearly related to public service
8) participation in some official capacity in professional associations and meetings1
B. Recruitment expectations
Since each hiring recommendation sets a standard of excellence that affects the reputation of the department and the college, considerable care must be taken in the recruitment of faculty. Moreover, departmental recruiting should be based on careful planning. Departments should not recruit faculty members in areas where current planning suggests the departments are not likely to be in a position to recommend tenure for any additional faculty. If enrollment patterns and other developments suggest that only a fraction of junior faculty can expect to receive tenure, departments should make this circumstance explicit early in the recruiting process and throughout the probationary period. In conducting faculty searches, departments should be sensitive to the curricular as well as the research expectations and needs of the department. Moreover, departments should develop selection criteria that include a solid record of teaching effectiveness, or at least evidence of promise in effective teaching.
Departments shall make available to newly hired faculty members university, college, and departmental documents governing the personnel process. They shall also be informed about the various dates and deadlines in the personnel process.
C. Annual recommendations concerning appointment and retention
1 Adapted from "A Faculty Guide for Relating Public Service to the Promotion and Tenure Review Process," by Steven F. Schomberg and James A. Fanner, Jr., (University of Illinois, 1993).
The following principles shall govern recommendations concerning the appointment and retention of a faculty member:
1. Each department has a primary responsibility for building the most capable faculty possible within its means and for maintaining sufficient staffing flexibility to be able to respond to changes in knowledge, methodology, and student demand.
2. The process of building a strong faculty entails recruiting the most promising candidates available, critically observing their professional performance in contributing to the programs and activities of the department before a recommendation is made to continue or to terminate an appointment, and giving them appropriate professional guidance and assistance in developing their capabilities.
3. Every faculty appointment for a specific term must be accepted by the faculty member with the understanding that such an appointment entails no assurance or implication, except for the provisions for notification set forth in the Board of Trustees Regulations, that it will be renewed or that tenure will be granted. In the event there are insufficient appropriated funds to continue the appointment, notice shall be given as soon as possible. Faculty on a probationary tenure-track appointment need to recognize that their appointments are probationary. During this probationary period, it is their obligation to establish that they are qualified for a tenure appointment.
4. When the quality of professional performance and growth of a faculty member does not meet the expectations of a department, the university has the responsibility to give the faculty member proper notice of termination without delay. Notification of termination or non-renewal of contract shall be in accordance with university and Board of Trustees policies and procedures.
To achieve the objectives stated in these principles, the following policies and procedures shall be followed:
1. Each department shall establish procedures for providing all probationary faculty members with an annual evaluation of their progress; the results of that evaluation shall be shared with the faculty member in writing as well as in personal consultation with the chair. A copy of each such annual report shall be forwarded to the dean no later than May 15.
The department shall establish and implement procedures to conduct a thorough and formal evaluation of each probationary faculty member's progress. This review shall include a consideration of the department's anticipated long-term need for the instructional and research capabilities of the probationary faculty member. The results of this evaluation shall be communicated in writing to the concerned probationary faculty member and the dean. For faculty members whose appointment contract stipulates that they are to be considered for tenure no later than their sixth year, this thorough and formal evaluation shall take place during their third year toward tenure. Should a faculty member be awarded credit toward tenure for previous experience, the thorough and formal review of progress toward tenure shall occur not later than the end of the penultimate academic year of the probationary period stipulated in the faculty member's letter of appointment. For faculty members awarded credit toward tenure for previous experience, the time of the thorough and formal evaluation of progress toward tenure should be agreed to by the faculty member at the time of appointment. A copy of the thorough and formal evaluation of progress toward tenure shall be forwarded to the dean no later than May 15.
2. Departments shall establish procedures to allow reconsideration of recommendations not to continue a faculty member on a probationary tenure-track contract.
D. Recommendations for tenure
1. A recommendation for tenure is a recognition of the faculty member's achievements and an expression of faith in the faculty member's continuing contribution to the university community. It should not be taken for granted that every faculty member will eventually achieve tenure; there is no inherent presumption of a right to tenure on the part of probationary faculty members. Each department has the responsibility of building the most capable faculty possible within its means. The process of building a strong faculty involves not only the recruitment of the most promising candidates available, but also the critical evaluation of their teaching, research, and service to the community and to their profession during their probationary period. In keeping with the principle of peer review, a recommendation on tenure should involve the entire body of the tenured faculty in the department. Departmental personnel policies shall indicate how this principle shall be implemented.
2. The policy of awarding-or withholding-tenure serves the university by promoting high standards. For a faculty member appointed at a rank below that of associate professor, normally a recommendation for tenure should be approved only if a recommendation for promotion to associate professor rank is made and approved at the same time. Ordinarily, the criteria for tenure are similar to those for promotion to the rank of associate professor. Only in unusual circumstances should tenure be recommended for assistant professors without the concurrent recommendation for promotion to associate professor. Faculty hired at the rank of professor or associate professor may, of course, be considered for tenure alone, without a recommendation regarding promotion.
3. While a faculty member holding a contingent appointment with the rank of instructor shall not be eligible for tenure, service under that appointment shall count toward the probationary time period prior to a tenure recommendation, provided the faculty member agreed to this at the time he/she was appointed to a tenure-track position.
4. For a faculty member appointed at the rank of associate professor or above, an initial evaluation of scholarly and professional achievement is ordinarily made at the time of appointment. Results of this initial evaluation shall be forwarded to the dean along with the appointment papers. For such a faculty member a recommendation for tenure is in effect a certification that the faculty member has fully met the expectations that the department had at the time. It is, in addition, a certification that during the probationary period no circumstances have arisen which might lead to serious concern as to the ability of the faculty member to maintain contributions to the university and academic community at a level consistent with that faculty member's rank.
5. A tenure recommendation shall normally take place in the year stipulated in the candidate's letter of appointment. All tenure recommendations and related appeals must take place no later than in the penultimate year; neither may be deferred until the final year.
6. Departments shall provide external evaluations in connection with tenure recommendations, even if these recommendations are not accompanied by a promotion recommendation. The number of external evaluations shall be comparable to that sought in connection with promotion recommendations.
7. A faculty member with an appointment in more than one campus unit shall be considered for tenure in the unit stipulated by the initial letter of
appointment. That unit shall solicit the advice of the other unit(s) prior to making its determination regarding tenure.
E. Early tenure
In general, the college supports recommendations for early tenure only when candidates have produced scholarship of outstanding quality and have clearly exceeded the usual qualitative and quantitative requirements in the area of scholarship expected in their individual disciplines. In addition, there should be evidence that these individuals have met in an effective way the standards of the department, college, and university in teaching and service. The burden of proof of extraordinary circumstances or an extraordinary record of achievement shall rest with the department. A separate letter from the department shall be appended to the recommendation stating the department's and college's criteria and how the candidate clearly exceeds those criteria. Since the college requires evidence of teaching effectiveness from all candidates, departmental recommendations for early tenure for faculty members who are in their first year at NIU must take particular care in documenting the candidate's teaching effectiveness. A recommendation for tenure shall be judged to be early if and only if it occurs prior to the year stipulated in the letter of appointment as the year in which the tenure recommendation would have been made. In preparing documentation for a recommendation for early tenure, departments shall solicit external letters of evaluation.
F. Recommendations for promotion in academic rank
1. In general, academic promotion is an honor accorded by the university in recognition of the candidate's distinguished achievement and superior contributions in teaching, scholarship, and other professional service, and of the candidate's professional integrity, maturity of judgment, and academic leadership. Candidates for promotion cannot reasonably be expected to achieve equally high distinction in every aspect of professional service; however, every candidate for promotion must present convincing evidence of excellence in the areas of teaching and research. In promotion to the rank of associate professor or professor the college and its depart ments should pay particular attention to the significance and quality of the candidate's teaching and published research since appointment to the candi- date's present rank. Recommendations for promotion to associate or to full professorship shall include external evaluations of the candidate's publications and other materials to be secured at the initiative of the department.
External evaluations shall be solicited in accordance with department, college and university policies and procedures. Although several departments provide candidates an opportunity to provide input in the selection of external evaluators, departments are not required to do this. Candidates should not directly solicit external evaluations on their own. Evaluations shall be confidential (see I.H) and potential evaluators shall be informed that a summary of the evaluation may be provided, upon application, to the person evaluated but with the identity of the writer removed, and that the writer's identity shall not be revealed to the faculty member. The evaluator shall be asked to limit the evaluation to assessment of the quality of the material sent to the evaluator as well as the faculty member's professional qualifications, performance and promise as reflected in his/her work. The evaluator shall be informed that comments on the candidate's suitability for tenure or promotion are not sought and should not be given. Departmental personnel recommendations shall be accompanied by at least four (4) letters of external evaluation. All letters received shall be submitted as part of the recommendation materials. For candidates holding a joint appointment, the letters solicited should reflect the disciplinary perspectives of experts in each of the appropriate fields.
Prior to advising or voting on a personnel recommendation, all department members who advise and/or vote on tenure or promotion should have access to the external evaluations themselves or at least to a summary of these evaluations, if external evaluations were solicited.
2. In keeping with the principle of peer review, a recommendation on promotion should involve the entire body of the faculty at the proposed rank or above in the department. Departmental personnel policies shall indicate how this principle shall be implemented.
3. More specifically, the following considerations apply in evaluating a candidate's qualifications and suitability for promotion in academic rank.
a. Criteria regarding time in rank
1) Longevity in rank does not in itself provide a sufficient basis for promotion. On the other hand, promotion should occur only after the candidate has had a sufficient opportunity to demonstrate a capacity to perform competently under a variety of circumstances and has given evidence of appropriate professional maturity.
2) The significance of academic rank is enhanced when promotion is recommended only for those with exemplary credentials. Each promotion should be recognized as setting a standard of excellence that affects future personnel recommendations as well as the reputation of the department, the college, and the university. Those holding the rank of professor are senior members of the university community. In a very real sense, the rank of professor is the highest recognition the university can bestow upon an individual. It should not be taken for granted that every faculty member will eventually reach this rank. Normally, a faculty member nominated for promotion to the rank of professor should be acknowledged as a highly accomplished scholar who has achieved the record of achievement expected by the university. For the department, the college, and the university to make an informed and reasonable judgment regarding a recommendation of promotion to the rank of professor, promotion to this rank will normally follow a period of time sufficient to permit the recognition and evaluation of a faculty member's performance and contributions.
a) For promotion to the rank of assistant professor
No prior experience is necessary.
b) For promotion to the rank of associate professor
Except in instances involving extraordinary distinction when compared with recent recommendations for promotion to this rank, a minimum of six years of successful service as an assistant professor.
c) For promotion to the rank of professor
Except in instances involving extraordinary distinction when compared with recent recommendations for promotion to this rank, a minimum of six years of successful service as an associate professor.
b. Criteria regarding formal education
1) For teachers as scholars: ordinarily the earned doctorate
2) For teachers as performing or creative artists or as instructors in professional areas: ordinarily a master's degree, plus experience and recognition in a professional field approximately equivalent to that accorded in academic life to one holding an earned doctorate. Such experience and recognition may involve, for example, a distinguished record of published poetry, fiction, or drama; national prizes for exhibitions of photography or other professional work; distinguished service as a judge in national contests involving professional work or as a leader in professional organizations.
3) In the case of faculty without the earned doctorate or appropriate terminal degree, educational requirements may be met by equivalencies appropriate to the discipline; however, appointment at or promotion to a rank above that for which individuals are educationally qualified should be limited to exceptional circumstances.
"Equivalency" or "exceptional" appointments or promotions should be carefully scrutinized by appropriate reviewing bodies at the department and college levels.
c. Criteria regarding teaching
Evidence of effective teaching is a prerequisite for academic promotion. In addition, candidates for promotion should be able to demonstrate that over the years they have been actively concerned about improving their own teaching and have contributed to the improvement of teaching in their department, including the effective academic guidance of students.
d. Criteria regarding research and/or creativity
1) For promotion to rank of assistant professor: promise of scholarly and/or creative achievement of distinction, and a commitment to the sharing of one's scholarly and/or cre- ative work in peer-reviewed professional outlets.
2) For promotion to rank of associate professor: evidence that the candidate is in the process of achieving professional recognition among leaders in the candidate's discipline through a commitment to shared research, which must include a record of publications and papers presented at professional meetings or other appropriate forms of scholarly and/or creative activities.
It is also expected that a candidate shall have submitted one or more proposals to granting agencies for external funding of the candidate's scholarly program.
It is
recognized by the LAS college council that opportunities for actually obtaining funding
support vary greatly among the various disciplines within the college. As such, the evaluation
that a significant effort has been made by the candidate in submitting the
proposal(s) for external funding
would be determined at the local departmental level.
In any case, it is understood that the actual funding of a grant proposal, while desirable, is not a
college requirement for the candidate to be promoted to the rank of
associate professor with tenure. However, a record of successful grantsmanship
may be a requirement in some departments, [approved on
3) For promotion to the rank of professor: evidence that the candidate has achieved national recognition among experts as a result of a superior record of continuing excellence through publications in academic journals or monographs, or the equivalent, within the particular discipline. Among the specific qualities that are expected to characterize their scholarly records are maturation of research (for example, addressing fundamental issues or demonstrating an increasing sophistication in appropriate theory or method); sustained focus in a particular area often represented by a scholarly book or a series of articles in premier journals and by positive review of the candidate's program of research by external peers.
It is also expected that, subsequent to having been promoted to the rank of associate professor or to having been hired at the rank of associate professor, a candidate shall have submitted one or more proposals to granting agencies for external funding of the candidate's scholarly program.
It is recognized by the LAS college council that opportunities for actually obtaining funding support vary greatly among the various disciplines within the college. As such, the evaluation that a significant effort has been made by the candidate in submitting the proposal(s) for external funding would be determined at the local departmental level. In any case, it is understood that the actual funding of a grant proposal, while desirable, is not a college requirement for the candidate to be promoted to the rank of professor. However, a record of successful grantsmanship may be a requirement in some departments. [This policy shall be effective for faculty who are recommended for promotion to the rank of professor during and after fall 2000.]
e. Criteria regarding professional service
1) Service to the department, college and university
Candidates for promotion should provide evidence of a willingness and ability to work effectively with fellow faculty members in efforts to improve the programs, personnel, conditions, and activities supporting the mission of the university. Such professional service might be demonstrated, for example, by effective participation on committees at any level on and off campus.
2) Service to the discipline or the profession
Candidates for promotion should provide evidence of professional service to their professional societies and groups.
3) Service to the public
Candidates for promotion may provide evidence of public service which is relevant to their primary activities of research and teaching, through such activities as public addresses, radio and television appearances, testimony before legislative agencies, and consulting work.
G. Early promotion
Generally speaking, the college supports recommendations for early promotion only when candidates have produced scholarship of outstanding quality and have clearly exceeded the usual qualitative and quantitative requirements in the area of scholarship expected in their individual disciplines. The burden of proof of extraordinary circumstances or an extraordinary record of achievement rests with the department. A separate letter from the department shall be appended to the recommendation stating the department's and college's criteria and how the candidate clearly exceeds those criteria. In addition, there should be evidence that these individuals have met in an effective way the standards of the department, college, and university in teaching and service. A recommendation for promotion to the rank of associate professor shall be judged to be early if and only if it occurs prior to the year stipulated in the letter of appointment as the year in which the tenure/promotion recommendation was normally to have been made. Since the college requires evidence of teaching effectiveness from all candidates, departmental recommendations for early promotion for faculty members who are in their first year at NIU must take particular care in documenting the candidate's