Body
Unit Policy
Title
College of Arts and Sciences: Music Policies on Faculty Personnel Actions
Introduction
Purpose
This document outlines the Department of Music’s comprehensive policies and procedures for faculty appointments, reappointments, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure review, detailing standards in research, teaching, service, and evaluation. It serves as a supplemental guide to broader University and College policies, ensuring consistent, fair, and rigorous personnel decisions within the department.
Scope
This document applies to all faculty in the Department of Music, including tenure‑track, tenured, and fixed‑term (teaching track) faculty, as it outlines the standards and procedures governing their appointments, reviews, promotions, and personnel actions. It also applies to department leadership and review committees responsible for evaluating faculty under these policies.
Part I. Policies for tenure-track and tenured faculty
I. Introduction
The principal aims of the Department of Music are to preserve, increase, and transmit knowledge and understanding of music. These aims are furthered by the scholarly, creative, and performance activity of the faculty, and by their teaching of a variety of courses at different levels to undergraduate and graduate students. In hiring and promoting faculty, the Department seeks to maintain its high standards of scholarship, artistic endeavor, and teaching. It also encourages service to the Department, the University, the professional community, the state, the nation, and the world. As appropriate, it also encourages engagement with groups outside academia. The Department of Music seeks to be objective, fair, and honest in matters of hiring and promotion. It reaffirms at this time its goal of quality combined with diversity.
All hiring and promotion take place within the context of departmental needs and resources. The Department subscribes wholeheartedly to the guidelines of Affirmative Action, and commits itself to make personnel decisions with all possible justice to both the University and the individuals concerned.
II. Standards
The Department, College and University continually aspire to enhance their academic stature. Such stature is achieved primarily through the continual recruitment, development, and retention of outstanding faculty.
Some of the standards that this Department applies to the evaluation of candidates are qualitative and cannot be expressed quantitatively. Therefore, they inescapably entail subjective judgment. As a result, it is not possible to reduce the evaluation of academic personnel to a purely objective enumeration of expected accomplishments within a specific period of time.
The Department may recommend a candidate for promotion and/or permanent tenure before the expiration of his or her probationary term if the quality of the candidate’s record meets the standards and makes a compelling case for an early recommendation. A candidate’s prior record in a tenure-track or equivalent position at another institution of higher education may form part of a compelling case for an early recommendation.
Prerequisite to the appointment or reappointment of any candidate is the continuing need by the Department, College and University for the services that he or she, as a scholar-teacher-artist- performer in a particular field, is qualified to carry out. An appointment of an individual to a tenure-track position is based on the belief that the appointment meets a continuing need of the Department. However, where this need is found not to exist, or has disappeared, or may disappear, or where program change or curtailment of funding obliges the University to discontinue support, appointment or reappointment is precluded.
Quality research, creative activity, teaching excellence and a commitment to service are important areas of evaluation of faculty by the Department of Music. In addition to long- standing criteria for such evaluation, innovative faculty work in these areas should also be considered when germane. Thus, tenure and promotion guidelines must balance the need for precedent and consistency with openness to new approaches and ideas for which establishing criteria for evaluation may be difficult, at least at first. Candidates for promotion and their departments share the responsibility for effectively evaluating innovative contributions. Candidates should help articulate the nature and value of their new work. Departments should continually educate themselves on the changing landscape of the profession, and they should consider when to seek evaluations of the candidate’s work that inform and can help explain particular innovations. Some of the prominent areas in which innovation occurs include engagement, digital technologies, and interdisciplinarity.
As a public university, we recognize the importance of faculty engagement. Engagement may be embedded in one or more aspects of a faculty member’s research, teaching, and service activities. Faculty engagement refers to scholarly, creative, pedagogical, and service activities directed toward persons and groups outside UNC-Chapel Hill and outside the usual spheres of professional academic work. Such activities typically take the form of collaborative interactions, include partners outside the University, and seek to enhance the “public good” or “public life” of the state, nation, or wider world.
When present, engagement should be recognized as a significant component of a faculty member’s professional achievements. Engagement may play a more prominent role at different phases of a faculty member’s career, and it should be supported at any phase if it is consistent with the Department’s practices and priorities. However, faculty whose work does not include engaged activities should not be penalized or denied tenure or promotion on those grounds.
Digital technologies are reshaping every profession. Digital technologies shape not only how we communicate new knowledge, but also how we perceive and develop knowledge in the first place. Since digital technologies influence every aspect of professional life, including research, teaching, and service, the Department of Music should, therefore, regularly evaluate this changing landscape in the context of its mission and of colleagues’ contributions to it. Candidates for promotion or tenure whose work engages digital technologies should help articulate the nature and reception of their digital work.
Interdisciplinary work provides opportunities for creating knowledge in new and unanticipated ways, often representing cutting-edge scholarship and teaching. Since many challenges and problems require skills and perspectives from multiple academic and professional disciplines, evidence of innovative inter- and cross-disciplinary research, teaching, and service should therefore be valued in a candidate’s promotion and tenure dossier.
A. General standards
The following standards will be employed in evaluations for reappointment, promotion, and tenure:
- A demonstrated commitment to, and achievement of, research excellence or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity as appropriate to certain disciplines is required for consideration for tenure and/or promotions in rank.
- A demonstrated commitment to, and achievement of, teaching excellence is required for consideration of tenure decisions and/or promotions in rank, and while its presence without the other two general standards also being met will not bring tenure or promotion, its absence is sufficient to deny tenure or promotion.
- Service to the Department, University, community, state, nation and world, and to one’ s academic profession, is a further, additional consideration in the overall assessment of a faculty colleague. Service is not a substitute for excellence in research and excellence in teaching.
B. Standards of research
The Department of Music expects its faculty to be actively involved throughout their careers in achieving scholarly research excellence and/or its equivalent form in creative artistic activity. Scholarship is understood as the advancement of knowledge and understanding and consists substantially of original research or interpretation that is part of a coherent project.
The central result of scholarship is publication. The Department of Music requires such publication as an obvious way of extending knowledge and of sharing the fruits of scholarly thought and investigation with a wider audience that can be both critical and appreciative.
Creative artistic activity—e.g., artistic performance and professional recording, or musical composition and its performance, and other publicly accessible forms of expression— demonstrates creativity and engenders its continued growth on a distinguished professional level. The Department of Music strongly encourages such creative artistic activity as a way of sharing the fruits of artistic endeavor with a wider audience, and is for some faculty in the Department what published scholarship is for others. The Department of Music insists on regarding quality of publication and/or creative artistic activity as more important than quantity.
Engaged scholarship refers to research on projects that include collaborative interactions with partners outside the University. In order to satisfy the criterion for engaged scholarship, the faculty member’s work must meet rigorous standards. In the Department of Music, the criteria for evaluating the quality of engaged scholarship or equivalent creative activity include publication, presentation, or performance in professionally recognized national and/or international outlets, forums, or venues, external competitive funding, and peer review by experts in the field.
The Department of Music recognizes faculty who conduct or publish their research digitally for their innovation and for moving beyond traditional formats. The standard for excellence is the same for digital and non-digital work and may include influence on a scholarly field or its equivalent in creative activity, and rigorous peer reviews or other evaluation by experts in the area. The overall quality and contribution of the work must be measured against the University’s long-standing high standards, which should be independent of the mode or medium of publication.
The research of faculty engaged in innovative interdisciplinary research shall be given formal consideration and due credit, although the overall quality and contribution of the interdisciplinary work should be measured through appropriate means against the University’s well-established high standards. For faculty with interdisciplinary interests hired within the Department of Music, the main criteria for review and judgment lie within, rather than outside, our discipline broadly defined. In the case of joint appointments, reviews must include multi- departmental evaluations. For faculty hired as joint appointees, the main criteria for review and judgment of scholarship and/or equivalent creative activity shall encompass work across the units of appointment and related interdisciplinary work, assessed according to appropriate high standards.
C. Standards of teaching
The Department of Music expects and encourages teaching of the highest quality. Although it is not possible to enumerate here all criteria of highly effective teaching, such teachers prepare their courses with discrimination and skill. They responsibly formulate the objectives of the courses and use imaginative pedagogical methods to achieve their goals. Effective teachers engage their students, stimulate their interests, broaden their perspectives and improve their thinking. To the extent that it is possible, they also make their students active rather than passive participants in the learning process. Excellent teachers demand substantial accomplishment and high standards of work, grade all work fairly, and base what they teach on evidence and sound method. They are articulate, resourceful, and reflective. In addition, where appropriate, such teachers conscientiously provide advice and guidance to both graduate and undergraduate students on an individual basis; they also direct theses, dissertations, and/or artistic projects, and serve on committees that critically examine and evaluate them. In short, the Department expects colleagues to be generously involved in teaching and training.
Engaged teaching refers to pedagogical practices that typically take students outside the traditional classroom. Such teaching may include courses that help students engage with non- academic communities, participate in service-learning programs, or interact with public schools and government policymakers. To satisfy the criterion for “engaged teaching” and for engaged teaching to be considered in evaluations for reappointment, promotion, and tenure, the faculty member’s courses should include analytical and reflective components and carry academic credit. Such teaching should be evaluated by students, by academic peers, and also by individuals who participate in these courses from a position outside the University.
One of the most prominent areas of recent pedagogical innovation is the integration of digital technologies within the traditional classroom as well as online. When faculty members employ new technologies to enhance teaching and learning, evaluation of teaching excellence should include assessments of this use.
Evaluation of teaching excellence should also consider faculty contributions to different forms of interdisciplinary teaching where appropriate. Such endeavors greatly enhance the intellectual life of the University and provide a sense of common purpose and community among students and faculty. All levels and forms of interdisciplinary teaching should therefore be considered, including: interdisciplinary teaching within one’s home unit; participation in team-taught, multidisciplinary courses that cross department and unit boundaries; undergraduate, graduate, and post-doctoral mentoring; and involvement in cross-disciplinary learning experiences outside the University. As with all forms of teaching, rigorous standards of evaluation should be applied.
D. Standards of service
A service assignment should be pursued diligently, imaginatively, and responsibly, with concern for deadlines and appropriate results. Conscientious and efficient performance combined with collegiality, tact, and resourcefulness bring credit to the individual and the Department and will be recognized.
Assistant and associate professors without permanent tenure are expected to undertake those service functions the Department Chair may assign. Although they should focus primarily on teaching and research, untenured members of the Department will be called upon to perform a number of service activities such as work on departmental or appropriate University committees, or other service areas relevant to the Department’s mission. Associate professors with tenure and full professors may be expected to undertake a wider range of service functions.
Engaged service refers to activities that are informed by the faculty member’s scholarly and/or creative expertise and include interactions with groups and projects outside the professional and scholarly organizations of academia. In the Department of Music, we value engaged service related to the faculty member’s professional expertise, such as community engagement, lectures, performances, competition adjudication, and other services offered to non-academic audiences or groups not considered and evaluated under “research or creative artistic activity” above (Section II.B).
Groups and communities increasingly connect and identify themselves through online resources, electronic networks, virtual spaces, and social media. Therefore, in the Department of Music, faculty service involving digital technologies may be recognized as an important contribution to academic life and to communities outside the University. Candidates for promotion or tenure should help articulate the nature of their contribution in this area where appropriate.
Faculty may be involved in interdisciplinary service in one, two or more units, depending on the nature of their appointment(s) or interdisciplinary approach. In cases of interdisciplinary service, the Department of Music, the other units involved and the faculty member will establish standards and expectations clarifying the extent of service expected from the faculty member for the Department and the other unit(s). These standards and expectations shall be reviewed, evaluated and, if necessary, modified on a regular basis. The same general standards of evaluation shall be employed for interdisciplinary service as for service within a single unit.
III. Criteria for specific personnel actions
The projected needs and resources of the Department, the College and the University shall be considered in recommending initial appointments, reappointments, promotions to associate professor with tenure, and promotion to full professor.
A. Instructor with Special Provision
The candidate approved by the Department to be recommended for an appointment as an assistant professor but who, when approved, is still completing a doctoral dissertation, will be recommended for an appointment as instructor for one year with the special provision that upon conferral of the doctorate he or she will be reappointed at the rank of assistant professor, and with the further provision that the effective date of his or her appointment at the rank of assistant professor will be retroactive to the effective date of his or her current appointment as instructor, or to the July 1 or January 1 immediately preceding the date of conferral. Such an appointment will carry the title “instructor with special provision.”
B. Assistant Professor
The rank of assistant professor denotes a tenure-track position, with an initial appointment for four years, the possibility of reappointment for three additional years, and a review for the conferral of tenure and promotion to the rank of associate professor.
1. Standards for initial appointment
Clear promise of excellence in teaching and scholarship and/or equivalent creative artistic activity, and completion of all requirements for the doctorate or other terminal degree and the degree’s conferral are required.
2. Reappointment for a second probationary term
The initial review and recommendation for reappointment occur by the end of the third year of the initial probationary appointment. For an assistant professor already serving in the Department, reappointment is based on evidence of (a) a demonstrated commitment to, and promise of or achievement of, research excellence and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, (b) a demonstrated commitment to, and promise of or achievement of, teaching excellence, and (c) appropriate service to the Department.
C. Associate Professor
Initial appointment to a rank of associate professor may be with or without tenure. Promotion to associate professor always confers tenure. Except as otherwise provided under University policy, tenure is a permanent commitment by the Department, the College and the University.
Recommendation for tenure requires a judgment not only about the past and present achievements of the candidate but also about his or her potential for future achievements. While emphasizing proven excellence in research and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, and in teaching, the Department remains very much concerned, in questions of tenure, that a person show promise of continuing achievement in all three areas: research and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, teaching, and service. A recommendation for promotion and/or tenure by the Department Chair requires a careful assessment informed by outside references about the qualifications of the candidate, and by the professional judgment of the assembled full professors; the professional judgment of the tenured associate professors is also considered.
In evaluating past performance, present achievements, and promise for the future, the following factors will be considered:
- The candidate must have achieved excellence in research and/or creative artistic activity of demonstrable value to the candidate’s field. The candidate must have demonstrated a commitment to continued excellence in those areas.
- The candidate must have demonstrated commitment to teaching excellence and must have achieved excellence in one or more types of teaching.
- The candidate’s service to the Department, University, community, state, nation and world, and to his or her academic profession is a further, additional consideration in the overall assessment. The candidate must be recognized as a helpful and valued colleague. Service is not a substitute for excellence in research and excellence in teaching.
The Department will decide whether to recommend tenure following an initial appointment as an associate professor on the basis of the criteria outlined above for promotion to associate professor. With written advance approval of the Dean, an associate professor appointed from outside the Department may be recommended for an initial appointment with tenure if the quality of the candidate’s record meets the standards.
D. Full Professor
Appointment to the rank of full professor confers tenure. A candidate for full professor should have made significant contributions in the field beyond those expected of an associate professor with tenure.
Recommendation for promotion to the rank of full professor requires a judgment not only about the past and present achievements of the candidate but about his or her potential for future achievements. A recommendation for promotion to full professor by the Department Chair requires a careful assessment informed by outside references about the qualifications of the candidate, and by the professional judgment of the full professors.
In evaluating past performance, present achievements, and promise for the future, the following factors will be considered:
- The candidate must have a record of sustained research and high quality publication or sustained artistic creativity and distinctive achievements sufficient to have gained significant recognition in the field nationally, and if appropriate, internationally.
- The candidate must have demonstrated continued commitment to, and achievement of, teaching excellence.
- The candidate must have a record of service that demonstrates the capacity for constructive contributions to the Department and the University; a similar demonstration of capacity for such contributions to the community, state, nation and world is also valued. Service is not a substitute for excellence in research and excellence in teaching.
E. Joint tenure-track and tenured appointments
In order to be recommended for a joint tenure-track or tenured appointment in the Department of Music, a faculty member must meet the standards for the rank for which he or she is being considered and must simultaneously meet the standards for the same rank in another department, so that he or she may hold the same rank in both departments. A joint tenure-track or tenured appointment in the Department of Music is not a right or extended as a courtesy. The projected needs and resources of the departments and the University shall be considered in initiating or approving joint tenure-track or tenured appointments. Policies pertaining to these appointments differ from those for appointments across departments or units in which the faculty member holds a tenure-track or tenured appointment in one of the departments or units and holds a fixed term (i.e., adjunct) in another.
F. General recruiting procedures
The Department of Music follows University and College recruiting policies and procedures. For further details, see the Provost’s website and the College of Arts & Sciences Chair’s Manual.
IV. Summary of procedural steps in appointments, reappointments, promotion and review
(not applicable for fixed-term appointments)
A. General
Policies identified here are supplemental to, and subject to, the policies found in the most recent versions of the publications listed in the Introduction. A separate Department document, “Supplemental Policies on Faculty Personnel Actions,” provides additional procedural information.
1. Department procedures
The Department Chair will oversee all proceedings regarding appointment, reappointment, tenure, and promotion. The Department Chair will draw upon the advice of the appropriate members of the assembled voting faculty gained by way of discussion within these meetings and also by way of voting. The Department Chair will act on the basis of this advice in submitting a confidential report to the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences on any personnel action pursued through the procedures outlined in this document, and in making a recommendation or decision, in accordance with the procedures set down by the College of Arts and Sciences and the University.
Voting will take the form of a secret ballot held during a meeting of the relevant assembled faculty; the vote will be recorded by the Department Chair according to number and rank, including abstentions. The Department Chair will announce the total vote, but not vote by rank, immediately to the assembled body. The vote is advisory to the Department Chair.
Faculty may not vote in absentia, but if absent from a meeting may, if they wish, convey written opinions on the case to the Department Chair.
All documents submitted by candidates for reappointment or promotion must conform to the standards set down by the University or the College of Arts and Sciences, including for example with regard to the formatting of the curriculum vitae.
2. Letters of recommendation
Outside letters of evaluation constitute an important part of the appointment, promotion, and tenure packet. A minimum of four letters of evaluation is required by University policy for promotion and tenure, but it is the practice of the Department of Music to acquire five in the cases of promotion to the ranks of associate professor (with tenure) and full professor.
For appointments of assistant professors and instructors with special provision, these letters should be preferably from outside the institution, and also preferably from individuals at research universities with very high research activity (RU/VH institutions). They may include letters from mentors and other individuals more closely connected to the candidate.
In the case of promotion and tenure packets, it is required that all of the outside letters of evaluation be from outside the institution, and that all be from individuals independent of the candidate. Two letters must be from a list of names provided by the candidate and the remainder from individuals selected by the Department Chair, with at least two drawn from a list prepared by the Department’s Review Committee (see below). Ideally, all of the letters should come from individuals at RU/VH institutions. If, in the Chair’s view, the most appropriate reviewer is from a university or other institution that is not a research university with very high research activity (RU/VH), the Chair’s letter to the Dean should provide an explanation for the choice of reviewer. The goal is to obtain a letter from the person who will give the most discriminating review and unbiased assessment of the individual’s national and international reputation. Therefore, the request from the Department Chair to prospective writers of outside letters of evaluation should be phrased neutrally and should not solicit an affirmative response or recommendation.
In the case of outside letters of evaluation for promotion and tenure packets, the letters may not be from individuals who have worked directly with the candidate, e.g., as a collaborator, mentor, previous coworker, or former dissertation chair, but may be from individuals who know the candidate through professional interactions, e.g., having reviewed the candidate’s publications or served on review committees together.
In addition to the minimum four required independent letters, any number of additional letters from any responsible sources may also be submitted. These may be from individuals within the institution with whom the candidate has collaborated or from former colleagues, collaborators, mentors, or other individuals connected with the candidate.
All letters of evaluation that are received must be made an official part of any appointment, promotion, and tenure package and must be part of the evaluation process of the candidate under consideration. In the appointment/promotion packet, each outside letter should have a designation in its upper right hand corner indicating whether the writer of the letter was suggested by the candidate or was chosen by the Department Chair.
3. The dossier
The Department of Music will employ the guide provided by the Appointments, Promotion and Tenure Committee of the University in completing the candidate’s dossier for review for faculty reappointments, promotions, and tenure.
Notification. Untenured assistant and associate professors should be notified in writing at least three months prior to the start of the scheduled review. Tenured associate professors should be notified in writing at least six months prior to the start of the scheduled review because that scheduled review also constitutes the University’s post tenure review which requires six months’ notice. The notification should include the requirements for the dossier the faculty member must submit for evaluation.
Timing of review. Except as expressly limited, promotions in rank may be made at any time during a faculty member’s employment. [9/24/20 Amended Trustees Policies]
Review and consultation. Proceedings for promotion to associate professor with tenure or to full professor are initiated by recommendation of the Department Chair “after consultation with the assembled full professors of that department” (Trustees’ Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure, May, 2004, p. 5). Any department charged with evaluating a candidate and making a recommendation regarding reappointment of an assistant professor, conferral of tenure and promotion to associate professor or promotion to full professor may utilize an ad hoc or special committee to review the candidate and present a report to the assembled voting faculty. If this committee prepares a written evaluation of the candidate, that report must be included in the candidate’s dossier. In the Department of Music, that committee is known as the Review Committee. The Department’s assembled voting faculty must include at least four full professors. If a department has fewer than four full professors, a standing advisory committee including additional full professors shall be named by the Dean of the College in consultation with the Chair to advise the Chair in personnel matters.
The departmental vote must be recorded and reported by rank, and must list the number of votes in support and opposition, as well as any abstentions. No faculty member may vote on the question of reappointment, tenure and/or promotion for another faculty member of the same or higher rank. Tenured associate professors, therefore, may not vote for conferral of tenure or promotion for another associate professor.
B. Assistant Professor
1. Third-year reviews
Initial appointment to the rank of assistant professor is for a probationary term of four years. No less than 12 months before the end of this term, the assistant professor must be notified in writing whether he or she will be recommended for a second probationary term of three years or not reappointed.
A Review Committee will be formed consisting of three tenured faculty, two of whom represent the candidate’s division, whether Academic Studies or Performance, Composition, and Music Education (PCME). The Department Chair shall select one member of the Committee in consultation with the candidate, and will select the other two members of the Committee. The Department Chair will appoint the chair of the Review Committee from the group of three. The Department Chair will also inform the full professors and tenured associate professors and the candidate of the membership of the Review Committee.
At the Department Chair’s request, the candidate will submit all relevant materials for review. These should include a current curriculum vitae and two separate personal statements, one on past, present, and future research and/or creative artistic activity, and the other on teaching. The file shall also include supporting materials such as copies of publications, recital programs, reviews, and recordings, and (where appropriate) of current recording or publishing contracts. On receipt of the file, the Department Chair may request additional information as appropriate. The Administrative Manager of the Department will make available the candidate’s entire file (including teaching evaluations from colleagues and students) to tenured faculty.
The Review Committee will meet as often as necessary to prepare a presentation consisting, as applicable, of positive and negative aspects of the case. If necessary, before its presentation, the Review Committee may ask the Department Chair to submit a written request to the candidate to clarify aspects of the file in writing. The Department Chair may also initiate such a written request in consultation with the Review Committee. Any such request and the outcome thereof will become part of the file made available to the full professors and tenured associate professors.
The assembled full professors and tenured associate professors will meet on at least one occasion to review the assistant professor’s scholarship and/or equivalent creative artistic activity, teaching and service; if either the Department Chair or the assembled faculty deems one meeting insufficient to consider the case, a second meeting will be held. Outside letters of evaluation are not required for reappointment. These meetings will occur in a roundtable format. The first meeting will begin with the Review Committee making a presentation on the case to the faculty, but not offering a recommendation.
It is a University requirement that the Chair consult the “assembled full professors” of the unit before acting upon a recommendation. In the Department of Music, that discussion is followed by a vote of the assembled full professors and tenured associate professors regarding the proposed reappointment. The faculty’s vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends reappointment or decides against reappointment.
If the Chair decides against reappointment at the end of the initial probationary term, the assistant professor shall be notified in writing of the Chair’s decision no less than 12 months before his or her current term ends. A faculty member has the right to an administrative conference with the Chair and, if necessary, with the Dean of the College, along with such other appeal rights as are afforded under the “Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.”
2. Review for promotion to Associate Professor with tenure
Assistant professors are reviewed during their sixth year for promotion to associate professor with tenure, non-reappointment, or (under exceptional circumstances) reappointment at the rank of assistant professor with permanent tenure.
If the assistant professor receives permanent tenure at that same rank, he or she must be reviewed every five years to meet the post-tenure review requirement of the University, and is eligible to be reviewed for promotion on the same schedule.
A separate Review Committee will be formed consisting of five tenured faculty members (full or associate professors) three of whom represent the candidate’s division (Academic Studies or PCME). The Department Chair shall select two members of the committee in consultation with the candidate and shall select the other three members of the committee. The Committee must wherever possible include at least one full professor and one associate professor with tenure. The Department Chair will appoint the chair of the Review Committee from the group of five. The Department Chair will also inform the full professors and tenured associate professors and the candidate of the membership of the Review Committee.
The Review Committee and the candidate each will submit a list of three to five external reviewers to the Department Chair. The candidate may also submit a list of up to three individuals with the request that they not be contacted for evaluation. The latter list will be given only to the Department Chair. The Department Chair then will select at least four outside reviewers from whom to solicit letters, including at least two from the candidate’s list and at least two from the Committee’s list. Additional reviewers will be selected by the Department Chair in consultation with the Review Committee, as it is the practice of the Department of Music to acquire five letters in the case of promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure.
At the Department Chair’s request, the candidate will submit all relevant materials for review. These should include a current curriculum vitae and two separate personal statements, one on past, present, and future research and/or creative artistic activity, and the other on teaching. The file shall also include supporting materials such as copies of publications, recital programs, reviews, and recordings, and (where appropriate) of current recording or publishing contracts. On receipt of the file, the Department Chair may request additional information as appropriate. The Administrative Manager of the Department will make available the candidate’s entire file (including external letters solicited by the Department Chair and teaching evaluations from colleagues and students) to full professors and tenured associate professors.
The Review Committee will meet as often as necessary to prepare a presentation consisting, as applicable, of positive and negative aspects of the case. If necessary, before its presentation, the Review Committee may ask the Department Chair to submit a written request to the candidate to clarify aspects of the file in writing. The Department Chair may also initiate such a written request in consultation with the Review Committee. Any such written request and the written response to it will become part of the file made available to the full professors and tenured associate professors.
The assembled full professors and tenured associate professors will meet on at least two separate occasions in a roundtable format. The first meeting will begin with the Review Committee making a presentation on the case to the faculty, but not offering a recommendation.
The full professors and tenured associate professors shall review the assistant professor’s scholarship and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, teaching, and service. Outside letters of evaluation are required for promotion to associate professor with tenure. It is a University requirement that the “assembled full professors” of the unit meet to discuss and vote upon a recommendation. In the Department of Music, that discussion is followed by a vote by secret ballot of the assembled full professors and tenured associate professors regarding the proposed promotion to associate professor with tenure. The faculty’s vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends promotion to associate professor with tenure or decides against reappointment.
If the Chair decides against reappointment at the end of the second probationary term, the assistant professor shall be notified in writing of the Chair’s decision no less than 12 months before his or her current term ends. A faculty member has the right to an administrative conference with the Chair and, if necessary, with the Dean of the College, along with such other appeal rights as are afforded under the “Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.”
C. Associate Professor, Full Professor, and Post-Tenure Review
Untenured Associate Professor. Initial appointment to the rank of untenured associate professor is for the probationary term of five years. An untenured associate professor is reviewed no later than the fourth year of this probationary term since no less than 12 months before the end of this term, the associate professor must be notified in writing whether he or she will be reappointed with tenure, promoted to professor or recommended for non-reappointment.
1. Review for the conferral of tenure
The full professors shall review the untenured associate professor’s scholarship and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, teaching, and service. Outside letters of evaluation are required for appointment as an associate professor with tenure, or for an appointment as full professor, which confers tenure. It is a University requirement that the Chair consult with the “assembled full professors” of the unit before acting upon a recommendation. The faculty’s vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends tenure (and, if also being considered, promotion to full professor) or decides against tenure (and, if also being considered, promotion to full professor).
The process for considering the conferral of tenure will be the same as outlined above for assistant professors being considered for promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure, with the following changes: the Review Committee shall be comprised only by full professors, and its size, nature and composition shall be similar to that for promotion to full professor described below; and, the assembled voting faculty who make a recommendation to the Department Chair shall be comprised only of full professors.
2. Review for promotion to Full Professor
An associate professor who has completed five years and has been reappointed at the same rank with tenure must be reviewed every five years to meet the post-tenure review requirement of the University, and is eligible to be reviewed for possible promotion to full professor on the same schedule. Since the University’s Tenure Regulations were revised, effective July 1, 2004, it has been possible for reviews for promotion to full professor and post- tenure reviews for tenured associate professors to take place simultaneously.
Every five years, associate professors with tenure must have an internal review that constitutes their required post-tenure review. If the faculty member wishes to be considered for promotion to full professor at that time, then recommendation letters from outside the institution are solicited as part of that review. If the faculty member does not wish to be reviewed for possible promotion at that time, only the internal review is carried out.
A separate Review Committee will be formed consisting of three full professors, two of whom represent the candidate’s division (Academic Studies or PCME). The Department Chair shall select one member of the committee in consultation with the candidate and shall select the other two members of the committee. The Department Chair will appoint the chair of the Review Committee from the group of three. The Department Chair will also inform the full professors and the candidate of the membership of the Review Committee.
The Review Committee and the candidate each will submit a list of three to five external reviewers to the Department Chair. The candidate may also submit a list of up to three individuals with the request that they not be contacted for evaluation. The latter list will be given only to the Department Chair. The Department Chair then will select at least four outside reviewers from whom to solicit letters, including at least two from the candidate’s list and at least two from the Committee’s list. Additional reviewers will be selected by the Department Chair in consultation with the Review Committee, as it is the practice of the Department of Music to acquire five letters in the case of promotion to the rank of full professor.
At the Department Chair’s request, the candidate will submit all relevant materials for review. These should include a current curriculum vitae and two separate personal statements, one on past, present, and future research and/or creative artistic activity, and the other on teaching. The file shall also include supporting materials such as copies of publications, recital programs, reviews, and recordings, and (where appropriate) of current recording or publishing contracts. On receipt of the file, the Department Chair may request additional information as appropriate. The Administrative Manager of the Department will make available the candidate’s entire file (including external letters solicited by the Department Chair and teaching evaluations from colleagues and students) to full professors.
The Review Committee will meet as often as necessary to prepare a presentation consisting, as applicable, of positive and negative aspects of the case. If necessary, before its presentation, the Review Committee may ask the Department Chair to submit a written request to the candidate to clarify aspects of the file in writing. The Department Chair may also initiate such a written request in consultation with the Review Committee. Any such written request and the written response to it will become part of the file made available to the tenured faculty.
The assembled full professors will meet on at least two separate occasions to review the tenured associate professor’s scholarship and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, teaching and service. The meetings will occur in roundtable format. The first meeting will begin with the Review Committee making a presentation on the case to the faculty, but not offering a recommendation.
The full professors shall review the tenured associate professor’s scholarship and/or its equivalent form in artistic performance and creative activity, teaching, and service. Outside letters of evaluation are required for promotion to full professor. It is a University requirement that the Chair consult with the “assembled full professors” of the unit before acting upon a recommendation. In the Department of Music, that discussion is followed by a vote by secret ballot. The faculty’s vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends promotion to full professor or decides against promotion.
3. "Out of cycle" reviews
If a tenured associate professor, with the concurrence of the Department, wishes to be considered for review for early promotion before his/her scheduled five-year review, an out-of-cycle review may take place. If the faculty member requests a full out-of-cycle review and the department’s full professors believe that not enough has been done to warrant consideration for promotion, the Chair has the right to recommend denying the request on the advice of the full professors and must give reasons for recommending denial to the faculty member in writing.
D. Post-tenure review
Since 1997, post-tenure review has been mandated by UNC General Administration on orders from the Board of Governors in response to a directive of the NC General Assembly that a system of periodic review of the performance of tenured faculty be implemented. The Department of Music has a separate set of post-tenure review policies (see “Policies on Faculty Personnel Actions”). Post-tenure review applies to all tenured faculty, except as otherwise specified by University or College policy with regard to its timing for faculty who are department chairs, senior associate deans, and deans.
Post-tenure review and the schedule for review for promotion to full professor
An associate professor who has completed five years and has been reappointed at the same rank with tenure must be reviewed every five years to meet the post-tenure review requirement of the University, and is eligible to be reviewed for promotion to full professor on the same schedule. Since the University’s Tenure Regulations were revised, effective July 1, 2004, it has been possible for reviews for promotion to full professor and post-tenure reviews for tenured associate professors to take place simultaneously.
Every five years, associate professors with tenure must have an internal review that constitutes their required post-tenure review. If the faculty member wishes to be considered for promotion to full professor at that time, then recommendation letters from outside the institution are solicited as part of that review. If the faculty member does not wish to be reviewed for possible promotion at that time, only the internal review is carried out.
E. Untenured faculty annual review
The Department Chair must perform evaluations of untenured assistant and associate professors every year. These evaluations are especially important for setting goals, clarifying expectations, and providing mentoring. After meeting with the untenured faculty member, the Chair must write a report of the evaluation, provide a copy to the faculty member in question, and place one in his or her personnel file.
The evaluation should provide a clear assessment of the faculty member’s work that year in research, teaching and service. It should be clear about goals on which the untenured professor and the Chair agree. It should not explicitly comment on or venture a prediction regarding any later decision to grant tenure to the faculty member. On the contrary, the evaluation should include a disclaimer: “This evaluation is not an indication of the likelihood of a positive or negative recommendation regarding tenure but rather summarizes and assesses the activities in which you have been engaged for the past year.” The Dean’s Office should be notified when these reviews are completed.
Part II. Policies on fixed-term faculty
I. Procedures Governing the Promotion of a Teaching Assistant Professor to Teaching Associate Professor
A. Eligibility for Teaching Associate Professor
A teaching assistant professor is eligible for recommendation for promotion to teaching associate professor on the following bases:
- The candidate must have a minimum of six consecutive years’ full-time (i.e., 1 FTE) service as a teaching assistant professor, or, if the candidate is from another institution, six consecutive years of full-time (1 FTE) service as a teaching assistant professor or faculty equivalent.
- The candidate must provide demonstrable evidence of distinguished teaching and service to the appointing department, beyond that which is expected of a teaching assistant professor, in accordance with standards of distinguished teaching and service defined by the unit in which the candidate is appointed.
Distinguished teaching in the Music Department demands critical thinking of students, motivates them to explore and achieve beyond the studio or classroom, and inspires them to realize their full academic and/or artistic potential. A distinguished teacher in the Music Department provides advice and guidance to graduate and/or undergraduate students on an individual basis, directs independent studies, theses and dissertations and/or artistic projects, and serves on committees that critically examine and evaluate such research and artistic projects.
In the Department of Music, evidence of distinguished teaching may include: a university teaching award, consistent teaching evaluations in the top 10% of the department, high levels of student achievement in competitions, student acceptances to summer and/or graduate performance programs, regular service on undergraduate honors theses committees, exceptionally high peer teaching reviews, success in writing and/or administering grants that improve teaching in a unit, administrative oversight and training of teaching assistants and/or other fixed-term faculty in a unit.
In the Department of Music, a service assignment is well done when its goals are pursued diligently, imaginatively, and responsibly, with concern for deadlines and appropriate results. Conscientious and efficient performance combined with collegiality, tact, and resourcefulness brings credit to the individual and the Department and will be recognized. Teaching assistant professors may be called upon, where appropriate, to perform a number of service activities: work on departmental committees, cooperation in programs benefitting North Carolina high school students, and the like.
In the Department of Music, evidence of distinguished service may include: a university service award, service as departmental undergraduate advising coordinator, service on the UNC Faculty Council and/or its subcommittees, service on university committees (such as Teaching Award Committee, Staff Award Committee, university search committees), chairing unit committees or task forces, membership on the advisory board of a professional journal, invitations for speaking and/or performance engagement 3s at other institutions of higher learning, service through Carolina Speakers Bureau.
B. Procedure for review of candidates for teaching associate professor in the Department of Music
Only a teaching assistant professor who has completed a minimum of six consecutive years of full- time (1 FTE) service in the Department of Music is eligible to be considered for promotion to teaching associate professor.
A candidate eligible for promotion to teaching associate professor in the Department of Music will be reviewed by a unit committee appointed by the Chair. This review committee must be composed of at least three faculty members, with at least one being a tenured faculty member and at least one being in the fixed term teaching track above the rank of the candidate being reviewed. The other member(s) may be tenured/tenure track or fixed term teaching track faculty above rank of candidate being reviewed. A teaching professor may serve as committee chair. If the department faculty contains no teaching associate professors or teaching professors, a teaching associate professor or teaching professor from another department should be included on the review committee, with the approval of the Dean’s Office. This committee is responsible for reviewing any eligible candidate’s dossier and submitting a report on each candidate under consideration.
To be reviewed by the department’s review committee, eligible candidates for teaching associate professor must submit a dossier containing the following:
- the candidate’s current curriculum vitae;
- the candidate’s statement of teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research activities;
- documentation of the candidate’s teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research activities;
- list of courses taught by year for the past five years, ,
- evidence of distinguished teaching and service;
- the names of two individuals (external to the candidate’s base department who may serve as referees. The individuals may be from within UNC or external to UNC.. Referees from within the University must be able to observe at least one class taught by the candidate and substantiate the candidate’s qualifications for the rank of teaching associate professor. This review may count toward the required two peer teaching reviews. If part of the promotion determination is based on research then one (or both) of the letters will need to address this in addition to teaching and service.
- additional materials student recommendations, nominations for teaching awards, grant applications, and other materials relevant to the case.
These records should cover the prior five-year period, or the period of service at UNC if less than five years.
Upon receipt of a complete dossier, the Chair or the review committee chair will solicit letters from two referees external to the candidate’s base department, one from a list provided by the candidate and one from a list developed by the Chair or committee, as to the candidate’s qualifications for promotion to the rank of teaching associate professor. Upon receipt of the two letters, the Chair will include them in the candidate’s dossier.
At least two faculty members must each observe at least one full class session. It is recommended that they observe class sessions in different courses or for a different section of the same course.
The observation must be carried out by either tenured/tenure track faculty, teaching associate professor, or a teaching professor. Class observations carried out as part of a personnel decision are normally carried out in the 12 month period prior to the department meeting regarding the decision; they should preferably be carried out in the same semester as the department decision. Each faculty member participating in a peer faculty teaching observation is required to write a report for each class session observed, employing the peer teaching review template.
After reviewing each dossier, the departmental review committee will submit to the Chair and the assembled eligible faculty a report concerning each candidate for promotion to senior teaching assistant professor. The Chair will consult in a manner analogous to the process whereby the unit Chair consults the unit’s faculty on the promotion of faculty members on the tenure track. This consultation will result in a vote of the eligible faculty of the department, recorded by rank, on each case for promotion to teaching associate professor.
The music faculty eligible to vote on a promotion to teaching associate professor will be all tenured faculty, tenure track faculty, teaching associate professors, and teaching professors.
The Chair of the department may decide to accept or reject the advice given by the eligible faculty. In either case, the candidate’s complete dossier must be forwarded to the Dean with a letter from the Chair either recommending or denying promotion. Besides reporting the vote of the faculty, the Chair’s letter should highlight factors concerning teaching and service that most influenced the recommendation. Regardless of the Chair’s recommendation, the Chair must communicate that decision in writing to the candidate. A teaching assistant professor whose case for promotion is denied is eligible for reconsideration three years after the decision against promotion; earlier consideration by the unit requires permission from the Senior Associate Dean.
The dossier for the candidate forwarded to the Dean will contain the following:
- the chair’s letter, noting the review committee’s role and vote, and the vote of the eligible faculty, recorded by rank;
- the report of the unit review committee on the candidate;
- the candidate’s current curriculum vitae;
- the candidate’s statement of teaching and service, and if applicable, statement of research;
- documentation of the candidate’s teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research;
- student course evaluations for the past five years including summarized data;
- a minimum of two peer teaching evaluations carried out by either tenured/tenure track faculty, teaching associate professor or a teaching professor
- a minimum of two letters from referees (external to the candidate’s base department) that address the candidate’s qualifications for the rank of teaching associate professor;
- additional materials, [please specify] required by the department.
II. Department of Music Procedures Governing the Promotion of a Teaching Associate Professor to Teaching Professor
A. Eligibility for Teaching Professor
A teaching associate professor is eligible for recommendation for promotion to teaching professor on the following bases:
- The candidate must have a minimum of six consecutive years’ full-time (i.e., 1 FTE) service as a teaching associate professor, or, if the candidate is from another institution and identified in a national search, six consecutive years of full-time (1 FTE) service as a teaching associate professor or faculty equivalent. A teaching associate professor may not be appointed to the rank of teaching professor until six consecutive years of 1 FTE service at the rank of teaching associate professor have elapsed. A teaching assistant professor is not eligible for promotion to teaching professor.
- The candidate must provide demonstrable evidence of distinguished teaching and service to the appointing department, beyond that which is expected of a teaching associate professor, in accordance with standards of distinguished teaching and service defined by the unit in which the candidate is appointed.
In the Department of Music, evidence of distinguished teaching may include: a university teaching award, consistent teaching evaluations in the top 5-10% of the department, outstanding peer teaching reviews, leadership roles on unit committees concerned with teaching, success in writing and/or administering grants that improve teaching in a unit, administrative oversight and training of teaching assistants and/or other fixed-term faculty in a unit.
In the Department of Music, evidence of distinguished service may include: a university service award; leadership on committees and task forces at the unit, College, or University levels (such as educational policy, teaching award, staff award, or search committees); service as unit undergraduate advising coordinator or director of undergraduate studies; outstanding service on the UNC Faculty Council and/or its subcommittees; leadership in national or regional professional organizations; membership on the advisory board of a professional journal; invitations for speaking engagements at other institutions of higher learning; professional consulting.
B. Procedure for unit review of candidates for Teaching Professor in the Department of Music
Only a teaching associate professor who has completed a minimum of six consecutive years of full-time (1 FTE) service in the Department of Music is eligible to be considered for promotion to teaching professor.
A candidate eligible for promotion to teaching professor in the Department of Music will be reviewed by a unit committee appointed by the Chair. This review committee must be composed of at least three faculty members, with at least one being a tenured faculty member and at least one being in the fixed term teaching track above the rank of the candidate being reviewed. The other member(s) may be tenured/tenure track or fixed term teaching track faculty above rank of candidate being reviewed. A teaching professor may serve as committee chair. If the departmental faculty contains no teaching professors, a teaching professor from another department should be included on a review committee, with the approval of the Dean’s office.
This committee is responsible for reviewing any eligible candidate’s dossier and submitting a report on each candidate under consideration.
To be reviewed by the department’s review committee, eligible candidates for teaching professor must submit a dossier containing the following:
- the candidate’s current curriculum vitae;
- the candidate’s statement of teaching and service, and if applicable, a statement of research
- documentation of the candidate’s teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research activities;
- List of courses taught by year for the past five years;
- evidence of distinguished teaching and service;
- the names of two individuals (external to the candidate’s base department who may serve as referees). The individuals may be from within UNC or external to UNC. Referees from within the University must be able to observe at least one class taught by the candidate and substantiate the candidate’s qualifications for the rank of teaching associate professor. This review may count toward the required two peer teaching reviews. If part of the promotion determination is based on research then one (or both) of the letters will need to address this in addition to teaching and service.
- Additional materials such as student recommendations, nominations for teaching awards, grant applications, and other materials relevant to the case.
These records should cover the prior five-year period, or the period of service at UNC if less than five years.
Upon receipt of a complete dossier, the Chair or the review committee chair will solicit letters from two referees external to the candidate’s base department, one from a list provided by the candidate and one from a list developed by the Chair or committee, as to the candidate’s qualifications for promotion to the rank of teaching professor. Upon receipt of the two letters, the Chair will include them in the candidate’s dossier.
At least two faculty members must each observe at least one full class session. It is recommended they observe class sessions in different courses or for a different section of the same course. The observation must be carried out by either tenured/tenure track faculty or a teaching professor.
Class observations carried out as part of a personnel decision are normally carried out in the 12 month period prior to the department meeting regarding the decision; they should preferably be carried out in the same semester as the department decision. Each faculty member participating in a peer faculty teaching observation is required to write a report for each class session observed, employing the peer teaching review template.
After reviewing each dossier, the unit review committee will submit to the Chair a report concerning each candidate for promotion to teaching professor. The Chair will make this report available to the assembled eligible faculty of the department, whom the Chair will consult in a manner analogous to the process whereby the unit Chair consults the unit’s faculty on the promotion of faculty members on the tenure track. For cases involving promotion to teaching professor, this consultation must include the tenured faculty and any teaching professors in the department. The consultation process will result in a vote of the eligible faculty of the department, recorded by rank, on each case for promotion to teaching professor.
The Chair of the department may decide to accept or reject the advice given by the eligible faculty. In either case, the candidate’s complete dossier must be forwarded to the Dean with a letter from the Chair either recommending or denying promotion. Besides reporting the vote of the faculty, the Chair’s letter should highlight factors concerning teaching and service that most influenced the recommendation. Regardless of the Chair’s recommendation, the Chair must communicate that decision in writing to the candidate. A teaching associate professor whose case for promotion is denied is eligible for reconsideration three years after the decision against promotion; earlier consideration by the unit requires permission from the Senior Associate Dean.
The dossier for the candidate forwarded to the Dean will contain the following:
- the chair’s letter, noting the review committee’s role and vote, and the vote of the eligible faculty, recorded by rank;
- the report of the unit review committee on the candidate;
- the candidate’s current curriculum vitae;
- the candidate’s statement of teaching and service, and if applicable, statement of research;
- documentation of the candidate’s teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research;
- student course evaluations for the past five years including summarized data;
- a minimum of two peer teaching evaluations carried out by either tenured/tenure track faculty or teaching professor;
- a minimum of two letters from referees (external to the candidate’s base department) that address the candidate’s qualifications for the rank of teaching professor;
- additional materials, [please specify] required by the department.
See https://academicpersonnel.unc.edu/faculty-policies-procedures-guidelines/faculty- appointments/fixed-term-appointments/fixed-term-faculty-appt-to-a-higher-rank/ for a checklist of documents required for inclusion in the dossier of a fixed-term faculty member’s application for promotion (appointment to a higher rank).
III. Voting Information
A. College policy on voting rights of fixed-term faculty
Fixed-term faculty are not eligible to vote on the tenure and promotion of faculty within the tenured or tenure-track ranks. Teaching associate professors are eligible to vote on the promotion of teaching assistant professors to the rank of teaching associate professors. Teaching professors are eligible to vote on the promotion of teaching associate professors as well as teaching assistant professors.
B. UNC Faculty Code Definition of Voting Rights of Fixed-Term Faculty
The UNC Faculty Code includes fixed-term faculty among the General Faculty who have voting rights at UNC, provided three conditions are met. Voting rights are reserved for fixed-term faculty who hold at least a .75 FTE position, whose responsibilities include teaching or research, and whose term of appointment is for at least three years. Fixed-term faculty who have been re- appointed to a position such that the combined length of the current term and the immediately preceding term of service is at least three years are also eligible to vote.
Related Requirements
External Regulations
The Department's policies are subject to those set forth in the following University publications. The most recent edition of each document takes precedence.
This departmental document is supplemental to, and subject to, the policies found in the above publications.
Unit Policies, Standards, and Procedures
Contact Information
Primary Contact
Office: Dean's Office
Telephone: 919-962-1165
Email: artsandsciences@unc.edu