Comprehensive Standards: Educational Programs 3.7.2 (faculty evaluations)
The institution regularly evaluates the effectiveness of each faculty member in accord with published criteria, regardless of contractual or tenured status.

Compliance
North Carolina State University is in compliance with this standard.

Explanation
Regardless of assignment, all NC State University faculty members are evaluated according to published criteria.  Because its faculty assignments are diverse—with duties including teaching, research and extension—the university uses multiple evaluation methods to monitor faculty effectiveness and productivity.

Faculty members at NC State University are systematically evaluated throughout their career.  Evaluation processes are flexible enough to adjust to specific faculty assignments while at the same time maintain expectations for excellence of all faculty.  Faculty assessment includes annual reviews of all faculty and periodic, comprehensive reviews of tenured and tenure-track faculty.  The following faculty assessment procedures apply equally to on-campus and distance education faculty.

Annual Review
The Academic Tenure Policy requires annual review of individual faculty performance, including all faculty members (tenured, tenure track and non-tenured).  An annual activity report is required in this policy.

Comprehensive Review
In addition to annual reviews, tenured and tenure-track faculty members undergo comprehensive reviews.   The reappointment, promotion, and tenure (RPT) process is managed by the Office of the Provost and is based on the authority of NC State University Board of Trustees policy. 

Upon hire, a tenure-track faculty member develops a Statement of Mutual Expectations in conjunction with his or her department head, who interprets the qualifications and criteria relative to the faculty member’s appointment.  Tenure-track assistant professors have a comprehensive review for reappointment decisions during the third year of their initial appointment.  If reappointment is approved, assistant professors have another comprehensive review in the second year of the second appointment period for consideration of promotion and tenure. 

When the tenure-track faculty member is preparing for tenure consideration, the faculty member prepares a dossier of his or her professional qualifications which is formally reviewed along with external evaluations of the faculty member at the department, college and university levels.  Departmental review includes consultation by the department head with the departmental voting faculty.  College review includes consultation by the dean with a college-wide reappointment, promotion, and tenure committee.  Finally, the University Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee conducts the university-level review process and an administrative decision is made.  If promotion and tenure are approved, the faculty member is awarded the rank of associate professor with tenure.

Tenured faculty members undergo comprehensive review according to appointment type and status.  Comprehensive Review of Tenured faculty occurs on a three or five-year basis as determined by academic rank.  Every tenured associate professor is reviewed every three years after having been tenured and every full professor is reviewed every five years.

Each department establishes a Comprehensive Review Committee (CRC) comprised of the tenured faculty in the department.  The CRC is charged with assessing the performance of tenured faculty members over the review period.  The CRC and the department head determine if performance criteria has been met or has not been met.  In cases where a deficiency is determined, a work-plan is developed to assist the faculty member in meeting performance expectations.

All comprehensive performance reviews include the three major areas of faculty responsibility: teaching, research and engagement.  However, given the diversity in assignments, faculty evaluation could focus on effectiveness in teaching, or research, or engagement, or some combination of these criteria.

Effective Teaching
Measures of effective teaching include student evaluations, following the university's procedures for obtaining student evaluations of teaching effectiveness.  Student evaluations are collected each semester.  For new and non-tenured faculty and for graduate teaching assistants, direct observation of classroom teaching is also part of an annual peer review process.

Other measures of teaching effectiveness may be included in the teacher evaluation process (e.g., portfolios of course syllabi and materials for instruction, student exit interviews, alumni surveys, and annual employee performance reviews). A critical component of the evaluation of teacher effectiveness is the student evaluation of instruction.  University policy specifies that each department develop or adopt a student evaluation instrument to be used in assessing the courses offered by that department.  Information obtained through these evaluation methods is then used by the faculty to implement course revisions and improvements in the teaching processes.  These evaluations are also used by the university in making decisions about tenure, promotion, and merit salary increases.

Effective Research and Scholarship
The evaluation of faculty research and scholarship embraces the approach recommended in Scholarship Reassessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997).  This approach includes such criteria as clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation, and reflective critique.  In addition, the university evaluates research and publications for appropriateness, contribution to the discipline, and contribution to society.

Effective Engagement
The evaluation of scholarly engagement focuses on the quality and impact of engagement efforts more than on the quantity.  Generally, evaluations for promotion and tenure demonstrate continued development of expertise, scholarly contributions, interdisciplinary approaches, and recognition of excellence.

Given these foci, faculty members must demonstrate that they are making significant contributions to the application of new knowledge and practice within their disciplines and society.  As policy on the evaluation of extension activities suggests, this includes activities that are cited in professional publications or the mass media, shown to have impact on public policy, and/or demonstrate innovative approaches to linking theory with practice. 

References

• Academic tenure policy (http://www.ncsu.edu/policies/employment/faculty/POL05.20.1.php) 

• Comprehensive Review of Tenured Faculty (http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/provost/academic_affairs/pp/review/faculty/rtf/policy_development.html)

• Guidelines for evaluating engagement efforts (http://www.ncsu.edu/policies/employment/epa/REG715.00.5.php)

• Materials that may be considered in evaluating effective teaching (http://www.ncsu.edu/provost/academic_policies/evaluate/reg.htm)

• Procedures and materials related to reappointment, promotion and tenure (http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/provost/academic_affairs/rpt)

• Regulations for evaluating research and scholarly publication (http://www.ncsu.edu/policies/employment/epa/REG715.00.17.php)

NC State University Home --> Accreditation Home --> Compliance Reports --> Programs 3.7.2

N.C. State University
Last Modified: Friday, 18-Jul-03 14:51:27