Expectations
A Kent Campus Faculty member must meet expectations in all three areas (research, teaching, and service) to receive a positive recommendation for tenure and promotion to Associate or Full Professor (see Table V.1). For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, the quality and number of publications, and grant activity in the form of grant applications and external grant support, will be primary concerns. However, excellence in research cannot compensate for poor teaching or a lack of quality service; such a profile would not result in a positive recommendation.
Because tenure implies a life-time commitment to a Faculty member, the potential of the Faculty member to make a positive contribution to the discipline, Department, University, and community over the long term is carefully assessed. To that end, it is possible, in rare instances, that a Faculty member may not have the potential to be a positive influence in the Department, even though research and teaching accomplishments are adequate. In such cases, the detrimental influence of a Faculty member would be grounds to recommend against tenure.
As noted in the University Policy, promotion to Professor necessarily requires significant accomplishments in the area of research. In evaluating candidates for promotion to Professor, a substantial record of accomplishment in publications, grantsmanship and professional contributions are key considerations. However, greatest weight is placed on the Faculty member’s scholarly reputation in evaluating a candidate for promotion to Professor.
TABLE 1 Criteria for Tenure and Promotion of Kent Campus Faculty*
RESEARCH EXPECTATIONS[1]
[1] Exceptional performance in research may be justification for considering a candidate for early Promotion and Tenure.
|
|
Publications |
Grants |
Professional Activity |
Reputation[1] |
|
Exceptional |
Substantial number of first authored publications in high quality journals since hire |
PI on multiple major grants |
Typical examples include editorships, officer in professional organization(s) |
Outstanding external letters, evidence of substantial impact (e.g., citation counts, high caliber publications, special awards, editorships) |
|
Meets Expectations |
Evidence of an independent program of research that is resulting in a clear record of empirical publications in quality journals |
PI or Co-PI on a funded major grant or sustained effort to obtain major extramural grants |
Typical examples include ad hoc journal reviews, presenting at meetings, serving on professional committees |
Strong external letters, some evidence of impact/ recognition (e.g., citations, publication outlets and reviewing) |
|
Insufficient |
Sporadic publications; and/or lack of evidence of an independent program of research and/or lack of quality publications |
Lack of sustained effort to obtain major extramural grants |
No engagement in profession |
Lackluster external letters, minimal impact |
[1] Note that reputation is weighed much more heavily for promotion to Full than for Tenure and Promotion to Associate
Professor.
TEACHING EXPECTATIONS
|
|
Classroom Instruction |
Student Supervision [1] |
|
Exceptional |
Evidence of outstanding teaching (based on peer reviews from Ad Hoc P&T committee and student evaluations); teaching awards |
Exceptional mentorship as evidenced by productive graduate students (excellent progress, publications) and enthusiastic evaluations by supervisees |
|
Meets Expectations |
Solid evidence of good teaching (based on peer reviews from Ad Hoc P&T committee and student evaluations) |
Has attracted graduate students to lab, evidence of active and effective research and/or Clinical Psychology supervision as evidenced by student progress and supervisee evaluations |
|
Insufficient |
Consistent evidence of poor teaching performance |
Consistent evidence of poor quality mentorship and/or supervision |
[1] For faculty who participate in practicum supervision, their performance in clinical supervision is also considered here.
*For a complete description of criteria, please see Tenure and Promotion Policy.
CITIZENSHIP EXPECTATIONS
|
|
Service |
|
Exceptional |
Extensive, high-quality service; leadership roles, outreach activities |
|
Meets Expectations |
Consistent and responsible service on departmental and/or University committees |
|
Insufficient |
Minimal and/or low quality service |