a) Procedures to be followed in an evaluation.

b) General criteria for promotion to the different ranks and for awarding of tenure.

c) Functional categories to be used in an evaluation with specific examples of activities.

d) Manner in which a recommendation is to be documented.

e) Relative expected level of activity to be given to the different categories.

a) Associate Professor Rank: For candidates aspiring to the rank of Associate Professor, the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee shall comprise all tenured members of the faculty in the department of the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.

b) Professor Rank: For candidates aspiring to the rank of Professor, the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee shall comprise all tenured members of the faculty in the department of the rank of Professor.

2.2.1 Chronology
 

The timing of the steps described below is determined by the Dean of Engineering.

 

 

Each year, the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee shall review the qualifications and performance of each member of its faculty below the rank of full Professor with a view toward nomination as a candidate for promotion and/or the awarding of tenure. Early in this process, the Department Committee shall meet with each potential candidate for promotion and/or tenure award to determine whether that person wishes to proceed through the process or to defer consideration of the matter to another year. The person’s decision in this matter shall be honored. However, a mandatory tenure review will be made for any tenure-track appointment during the last year (sixth year if no prior service is present) of the allowable duration before attaining tenure. It is suggested that the review process be initiated in the spring preceding the academic year in which the nomination shall be considered. Such early consideration will provide ample time for the candidate to develop a complete promotion and/or tenure dossier. The Committee may delegate the review and may be represented in the meeting with each potential candidate by the Department Chair and the Chair of the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee. Each candidate shall, however, have the right to meet with the full Department Promotion and Tenure Committee.

 

An individual faculty member shall always be entitled to recommend himself or herself, or others, for promotion and/or tenure outside the regular departmental review procedure. The rules governing this are detailed in the Rules and Regulations of the Faculty Senate.

 

 

Once a person has agreed to become a candidate for promotion and/or tenure award, it is the candidate’s responsibility to supply the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee with such materials as he or she believes will support the nomination.

 

Suggested documentation is described in Sections 7 and 8. The Department Promotion and Tenure Committee should supplement the materials provided by the candidate whenever this would be useful in assessing the nominee’s qualifications for promotion and/or tenure. All materials so collected shall be assembled in a dossier.

 

 

The Department Promotion and Tenure Committee shall review the assembled dossier, provide the evaluations requested in the University’s forms, and determine whether promotion and/or tenure should be recommended affirmatively. If the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee, by majority vote of its members, gives an affirmative recommendation, it shall forward its recommendation on the University form, along with the dossier, to the Engineering Senate’s Promotion and Tenure Committee.

 

Action to be taken in the event of a negative recommendation is specified in Section 2.2.6.

 

After arriving upon recommendations, the Department Committee, via its chair, shall provide written feedback to all candidates on the committee’s vote, ratings, and rationale for ratings.

 

 

If the nominee fails to receive an affirmative recommendation by the Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee, he or she shall be promptly informed in writing by the Chair that their dossier will be forwarded for consideration to, respectively, the Engineering Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee, the Dean and subsequently the UCPT only if the nominee specifically so requests, except in the case of the mandatory review year for tenure. Even in a case of affirmative recommendation by the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee or the Engineering Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee, the nominee may at any time request that the nomination be withdrawn except in the case of the mandatory review year for tenure. In the mandatory review year for tenure, the dossier will be automatically forwarded to the next level of review.

 

 

Should the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee receive a request for information letter from a higher level committee, the committee shall invite the candidate to assist with the response or to include his or her own response.

 

 

No new information may be added to the initial review, except for the inclusion of a written statement by the candidate and/or in response to a request for information from the intermediate review committee.

 

If a candidate receives a negative recommendation or a final rating of teaching, research or service below the level of “good”, the candidate can submit a written response to the next level of review to be added to the dossier.

a) Teaching

b) Research and Scholarship

c) Service and Administration

 

Teaching refers to classroom instructional activities and to small group or individual activities related to classroom instruction.

 

Student advising is also considered a part of the teaching function. At the graduate level, teaching is defined additionally to include supervision of theses and dissertations, direction of individual studies, graduate student committee membership, and student evaluation activities such as Ph.D. qualification and comprehensive examinations. Activities which involve the development of teaching aids and materials such as course syllabi, textbooks, class notes, etc., are also a part of the teaching function.

 

Professional practice is an important part of the preparation and continuing development of a School of Engineering faculty member. Past and continuing industrial experience and consulting are not only recognized, but in fact emphasized by the engineering accrediting agency.

a) Teaching of undergraduate courses.

b) Teaching of graduate courses.

c) Direction of graduate students’ nonthesis reports, theses, and dissertations.

d) Teaching special problems courses.

e) Teaching short courses.

f) New course development.

g) Textbook or other educational publications.

h) Student advising.

i) Significant course modification.

j) Development or utilization of innovative teaching methods.

k) Laboratory development.

l) Preparation of proposals for improvement of instruction.

m) Enhancement of instruction using examples and case studies obtained through professional practice.

n) Doctoral and master’s committee membership.

o) Participation in oral examinations.

p) Preparation and grading of special graduate examinations.

f) Attending teaching effectiveness seminars and/or short courses.

 

Research and scholarship refer to activities related to the discovery and interpretation of facts, critical evaluation of available information, design, and creativity. Activities concerned with the communication of research findings and/or scholarly ideas are a part of this category. Such communication takes the form of publication in scholarly books or journals, presentation at professional meetings, technical reports, etc. Professional practice that extends and develops an individual’s research development and productivity are also included in this category.

 

 

The candidate shall demonstrate the ability to obtain extramural funding to sustain and grow their research activities. All candidates seeking promotion must demonstrate identifiable, independent, and essential research contributions to funded projects. Evidence for such contributions include but are not limited to:

a) Serving as a Principal Investigator or Co-PI

b) Significant contributions to research publications

c) Advising and graduating PhD students

d) Supporting statements from collaborating investigators

e) Supporting statements in external review letters.

Candidates seeking promotion to professor must additionally demonstrate the ability to independently obtain extramural funding.

 

Collaborative and interdisciplinary research is strongly encouraged with the candidate clearly identifying their contributions to projects in the dossier.

 

 

Publication practices vary among disciplines and sub-disciplines within civil, environmental and architectural engineering.

 

Generally, however, promotion to associate professor requires the publication of six papers in highly recognized national or international refereed scholarly journals and promotion to professor requires publication of an additional six to eight papers in the same journals. Details pertinent to each discipline may be provided in individual dossiers by the candidate, by those responsible for the initial review, and in external review letters.

 

Candidates are encouraged to describe their role in major publications in their dossier as they deem necessary.

 

Collaborative and interdisciplinary research is strongly encouraged with the candidate clearly identifying their contributions to publications in the dossier.

 

Research and scholarly activities considered in the evaluation may include, but are not limited to:

a) Preparation and submission of research project proposals to funding agencies.

b) Supervision of funded and/or unsponsored research projects.

c) Advising graduate students, completed or in progress.

d) Contributions to research publications

e) Presentation of papers and seminars at national or international professional conferences.

f) Presentation of invited lectures.

g) Receipt of special honors, fellowships, lectureships, etc.

h) Receipt of patents.

i) Publication of external technical reports.

j) Research development through professional practice, sabbaticals, participation in courses, schools, etc

l) Presentation of papers and seminars at local meetings.

 

Service includes professionally related activities that are of benefit to University, local, state, national, or international communities, but which are not teaching, research, or scholarship. Professional practice which does not directly and demonstrably enhance teaching or research productivity is considered a service activity.

 

Service in an administrative position that is related to the academic and/or research mission of the University is included in this category.

 

 

Service and Administration Activities considered in the evaluation may include, but are not limited to:

a) Service to professional and academic societies (officer, major committees, program chair, etc.).

b) Service as a member of the editorial board of professional journals.

c) Service on local, state, national, and international committees.

d) Service on major departmental, school, or university committees.

e) Service as a program director for conferences, institutes, short courses, etc.

f) Service in a major academic administrative position.

g) Service in a major research administrative position (director of laboratory or institute, etc.).

h) Service in major department administrative positions.

i) Service as an advisor to student professional and academic societies

j) Service on minor committees.

k) Service in professional and academic societies

l) Participation in KU Speaker’s Bureau

m) Speak at civic organization meetings

n) Reviews of others’ books, articles, reports and proposals.

 

a) Semester-by-semester listing of courses and numbers of students taught.

b) School, university, regional, national, or international awards for teaching excellence.

c) Reporting and assessment of current and past student evaluations.

d) Solicited or unsolicited statements by current and past students.

e) Solicited or unsolicited statements by alumni (this may be particularly important for some faculty members whose contributions are better recognized by students after they graduate than while the students are in school).

f) Statements by peers (including peer teaching reviews), within and outside of the School of Engineering, relating to the:

i) Faculty member’s instructional performance.

ii) Faculty member’s depth of understanding a particular field.

iii) Ability to relate the field of specialization to other areas.

g) Statements by the departmental Chair regarding teaching ability.

 

 

a) Evaluation by graduate students. This may be done better on an individual basis than by surveys where the number of graduate students per class is small.

b) Documentation of quantity of individual student guidance (problem courses, master’s theses, dissertations).

c) A measure of the quality of individual student guidance. This may be provided by peers or by careful evaluation of the student comments.

d) Evaluation of the quality of theses, dissertations, and master’s non-thesis problem work.

e) Statements by the department’s Chair or other faculty on the performance of the individual as a member of graduate student committees and an examiner in oral examinations for graduate students.

 

 

a) Documentation on the authorship of textbooks or courses including information as to the quality, originality, and amount of effort involved.

b) Statements by the department on the breadth of courses taught by the individual and the importance of this breadth to the department.

c) Description of short courses and seminars, including evaluations where appropriate.

d) Description of innovative teaching methods with comments as to quantity and quality of effort.

e) Documentation of development of new laboratories or improvements of existing laboratories.

a) Statements relative to special advising activities.

 

a) Listing of peer-reviewed papers, including an indication of the type and prestige of the journal or other publication venue, the type of paper (e.g., letter to editor, review or invited paper, new material).

b) Listing of papers submitted for peer review but not yet accepted (rejected papers must not be included), with a review by School or other peers if possible.

c) Listing of non-peer reviewed presentations and publications including an indication of the prestige of the venue, method of selection of papers, etc.

a) Listing of reports, including an indication of the newness and importance of the material, thoroughness of treatment, breadth of distribution, extent of review by research sponsor or others, and candidate’s contribution in the case of a report with multiple authors.

b) Listing of reports published as a government document or a part of a report series.

c) Indication of references made to candidate’s reports by other researchers.

 

Listing of research or scholarly books, including an indication of the prestige of or the “series” of which the book is a part, and extent of adoption by other universities or other research or scholarly organizations. Textbooks or other educational materials are to be documented in the teaching portion of the candidate’s dossier.

 

Listing of patents and a statement by peers as to the importance of the patents.

 

a) Listing of submitted research project proposals indicating titles, funding agencies, requested amounts, whether awarded or not, and the participation of the candidate in preparation of the proposal (e.g., PI, Co-PI, Co-I, etc.).

b) Listing of completed and ongoing research project titles including, where appropriate, an indication of the quality of work, dollar amount of projects, number of students working on and funded by the projects, and degree of satisfaction by the sponsor, and the participation of the candidate in completion of the project.

c) Statement of the relation of the research to the frontier of knowledge (i.e., position in the spectrum of research from conventional to frontier).

d) Statement, where appropriate, regarding national and international cooperation involved in the candidate’s research.

e) Statement regarding the degree to which the candidate cooperated with other faculty in his or her research.

 

A listing of any awards received by the candidate for papers, research projects, or general research, scholarly, or related professional development merit.

 

a) A statement relative to the quality of the consulting. This probably will require exterior judgment by someone associated with the work.

b) Statement as to whether the consulting is routine or involves frontier areas of knowledge.

c) Statement regarding any publications that resulted from the consulting.

d) Statement as to whether the consulting enhances teaching and research, and if so, in what way.

 

 

Prior industrial service or industrial service during leave is of great importance to the School of Engineering faculty. However, this must be evaluated to the extent possible. Documentation might include the following:

a) Statement from appropriate outside persons regarding both the quality and the level of the work.

b) Statement as to whether the industrial work is, in some manner, equivalent to a comparable amount of teaching and research at a university. This is important because of the need to evaluate equivalent times spent in universities and industrial or government organizations.

c) Statement regarding the importance of the position held by the candidate, preferably supported by referees external to the University.

d) Statement regarding the relevance of the outside work to the University position held by the candidate.

a) Specification of committee work with statements highlighting special accomplishments (e.g., indication of committee responsibility such as Chair, Secretary, etc.).

b) Service for student organizations with supporting statements from students or peers where appropriate.

c) Documentation of minor administrative responsibilities.

a) Specification of the nature and value of the service.

b) Statement, from persons outside the University, indicating the importance of the service and the time commitment.

c) Documentation of special professional society service, such as committee activities, program and/or conference organization, etc.

a) Documentation of the nature of the administrative position, including primary responsibilities and time commitment.

b) Evaluations of performance by the person’s supervisor and others who dealt with him or her in their administrative capacity. Special accomplishments should be described.

a) To encourage a certain minimum effort in all three categories.

b) To recognize, insofar as reasonable, variation of individual capabilities and/or interests.

c) To encourage the development of teaching effectiveness by junior members of the faculty and an increasingly broad range of activities on the part of senior members.