School of Government: Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Policy

This document sets forth the School of Government at UNC-Chapel Hill's policies and procedures governing the appointment, reappointment, and promotion of its faculty members. It establishes the standards and criteria by which faculty are evaluated, grounding them in the School's distinctive mission of engaged scholarship in service to North Carolina public officials.

Unit Policy

Title

School of Government: Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Policy

Introduction

Purpose

This document sets forth the School of Government at UNC-Chapel Hill's policies and procedures governing the appointment, reappointment, and promotion of its faculty members. It establishes the standards and criteria by which faculty are evaluated, grounding them in the School's distinctive mission of engaged scholarship in service to North Carolina public officials.

Scope

This policy applies to all faculty members of the School of Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, including tenure-track, fixed-term, and adjunct faculty.

Policy

This document sets forth the School's policies and procedures governing the appointment, reappointment, and promotion of its faculty members.

Section 1. University Policies and Procedures

The School must comply with the most recent editions of the following policies and procedures adopted by the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees and by the UNC Board of Governors.

1. The Code of the Board of Governors, The University of North Carolina. 
2. Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 
3. Equal Opportunity Plan, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

The criteria and guidelines contained in this document conform to the above policies without repeating all of them. In particular, the School's policy emphasizes the substantive performance standards for faculty that will reinforce our distinctive mission. Faculty members and others should consult the preceding documents as necessary to address questions about their appointment, reappointment, and promotion.

Section 2. Mission of the School of Government

General

The mission of the University explicitly includes the extension of "knowledge-based services and other resources . . . to the citizens of North Carolina and their institutions to enhance the quality of life for all people in the state. . . ."¹ Carolina's genuine commitment to serving its own state has distinguished it from other major public research universities. This did not happen by accident. In 1915, President Edward Kidder Graham declared that University service is "the radiating power of a new passion" that goes beyond "thinly stretching out its resources" to the state.² According to Graham, "[t]he State of North Carolina is the constituency of the University of North Carolina; therefore, its needs and aspirations are that University's chief concern."³ This passion for service influenced the work of Frank Porter Graham, Albert Coates, William Friday, John Sanders, and many others throughout Carolina's history, and the University's mission continues to emphasize public engagement with North Carolina. In 2001, Chancellor James Moeser reaffirmed that "[s]ervice and engagement must be an integral part of a university's life, not something we practice if we have extra time or if the mood strikes us or if our schedule permits or if it happens to be convenient. We must consider it an obligation and a responsibility, something that we owe society."⁴ Most recently, the University's strategic plan (Carolina Next: Innovations for Public Good) focused on commitment to service and engagement. Initiative Six, Serve to Benefit Society, includes three objectives that align perfectly with the School's mission and approach to its work:

• Engage with communities including grassroots organizations and local governments to solve problems and improve lives.
• Achieve impact by providing platforms for faculty to develop solutions that address problems with critical implications for North Carolina and beyond.
• Grow partnerships with businesses, non-profits, and government to translate and implement research-based ideas and discoveries into practical applications and public use.⁵

Carolina is a research university with a mission that has always included and rewarded public service and engagement.

The School of Government's mission flows from this rich history of engagement with the people of North Carolina. Pursuit of its mission directly advances the greater mission of the University. The School's mission is to improve the lives of North Carolinians through engaged scholarship that helps public officials understand and improve state and local government.⁶ Throughout its 90-year history, the School of Government (formerly the Institute of Government) has pursued its mission while adhering to core values of nonpartisanship, nonadvocacy, policy neutrality, and responsiveness. The School of Government is unique both within Carolina and nationally because its mission of statewide public engagement is carried out through the work of tenure-track and other faculty members. A commitment to North Carolina government enables the School's faculty members to understand deeply the special challenges facing state and local officials and encourages them to work closely with officials over time in addressing those challenges. In addition to possessing expertise in their academic disciplines, the School's faculty members must be able to make complicated subjects understandable without sacrificing subtlety and complexity.

The University created the School of Government in 2001 in recognition of the role of the former Institute of Government and the quality and impact of its faculty's scholarship.⁷ Creation of the School was not intended to change the longstanding mission of service to North Carolina exemplified by the Institute. Rather, the intent was to enhance the standing of the faculty by "building upon the Institute's reputation as a premier public service institution focused on the concerns of state and local government."⁸ The charter creating the School recognized that its mission "differs from other professional schools" and acknowledged "that its criteria for reappointment and promotion also will be different."⁹ To avoid any possible future misunderstanding about those criteria, the charter further provided that "[t]he University has recognized these differences for the Institute of Government and it will continue to recognize them for the School."¹⁰

The School's highly specialized and valued academic role at the convergence of scholarship and practice will continue only if promotion criteria and practices continue to reinforce its unique mission.¹¹ Its charter recognizes the School's ongoing value by providing that its faculty will continue to be reappointed and promoted on the basis of excellence in engaged scholarship for North Carolina public officials. In accepting the University's invitation to become the School of Government, the faculty renewed its commitment to the Institute of Government's original mission and promised vigilance to ensure its continued strength.

Core Faculty Work for North Carolina Public Officials

Each faculty member specializes in areas of public law or public administration and management. Approximately two-thirds of the School's faculty members have law degrees, and many of these lawyers have other advanced degrees related to their fields of work. This emphasis on law as a core discipline is a distinctive feature of the School—no other school of government is built upon a foundation of public law. The School has expanded and complemented its public law expertise for state and local officials over the years by appointing faculty members in the academic disciplines of public administration and management. The result is a multidisciplinary faculty that works in a comprehensive way to improve North Carolina government.

The School's faculty are experts in their academic fields—whether law, public administration, or related fields—and they apply their scholarship to help North Carolina public officials. Faculty must convey knowledge from complex academic fields in ways that are practical without being superficial. Furthermore, because public officials may serve for an extended period of time—perhaps an entire career—the School's faculty members must work with them in ways that become more sophisticated over time in order to remain helpful. The School of Government's faculty work very effectively at this convergence of scholarship and practice.

Faculty members carry out the School's mission for North Carolina public officials by working in three basic scholarly dimensions: teaching, advising, and research and publication. Responsiveness to the needs of North Carolina public officials is an important core value of the School, and it applies to all dimensions of faculty work in advancing the School's mission. In deciding which courses to offer or which publications to create, for example, faculty members choose those that will be the most helpful to public officials. The School's faculty can make those choices wisely because they are in regular contact with officials through advising and teaching. For instance, multiple telephone and email inquiries from across North Carolina on a difficult topic may prompt a faculty member to write a monograph or offer a special seminar on that subject. Or a faculty member may anticipate an emerging issue for public officials and address it through teaching or a publication before it becomes a day-to-day challenge. The School's faculty members choose their work because it responds to the needs of North Carolina public officials.

Teaching

The School of Government's faculty members annually offer more than 200 courses for over 12,000 North Carolina public officials and teach in hundreds of programs sponsored by professional associations. Courses for public officials range in length from one day to several weeks. Some courses prepare newly elected and appointed officials to assume their upcoming responsibilities, but most address the continuing need of public officials for developing knowledge in their professional fields. In addition to classroom teaching, faculty members reach their students through various other formats, such as webinars, modules, and online conferences.

Advising

Faculty members advise North Carolina public officials and others who are interested in government. A faculty member may work closely with a legislative study commission, for example, or with an agency committee developing model policies. This dimension of the School's work might include drafting legislation or working with a governing board over time to improve its effectiveness. In addition to longer-term advising, each year the School's faculty members provide immediate assistance by answering thousands of telephone and email inquiries from state and local officials, media, and private citizens. This daily contact ensures that faculty members are responsive to the officials' needs and also keenly aware of the practical issues facing the officials in their fields of expertise.

Research and Publication

Consistent with the School's mission, all faculty members conduct research and create publications that focus on issues faced by North Carolina public officials. Faculty members' research adds to the body of knowledge in their individual fields and has a local, state, and sometimes national audience, depending on the area of focus. Faculty members in public law fields are experts in North Carolina and federal law and in its implications for public officials, governments, and government agencies in this state. Their work integrates federal and North Carolina law and emphasizes its impact on North Carolina officials through publications that reach these officials. Faculty members in public administration and allied fields focus on research that is relevant and valuable to North Carolina public officials and often equally applicable to national academic and practitioner audiences.

Faculty members produce a variety of written products that share original research findings, offer insights on pressing issues in government, and inform public officials. Faculty members produce books, articles, and monographs and also blogs and other forms of electronic scholarship. Sometimes their writing involves work that is not formally attributed to a particular faculty member. Examples include bench books for judges, committee or commission reports, model policies and procedures, state legislation, and local ordinances. Online publications share equal standing with print publications.

For all faculty, the School places great value on publications focused on North Carolina practitioner audiences. Such publications directly advance the School's mission because of their targeted audience. Thus, School faculty members produce many specialized publications, including comprehensive guidebooks and web-based resources for government officials in multiple roles within the judicial system and throughout state and local government. The School publishes multiple bulletin series, including the Administration of Justice Bulletin, which reaches public officials in the court system, and the Local Government Law Bulletin, which reaches local government officials. The School also hosts several blogs, which provide a convenient and timely venue for the dissemination of short substantive pieces. Blogs sometimes contain news and commentary, but many blogs focus on substantive research and analysis, including analysis of legislation and judicial decisions at the state and federal level.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Diversity, equity, and inclusion are important issues in our society and communities, at the University, and in the work of the School.¹² The September 2020 Report of the UNC-Chapel Hill Task Force on Promotion and Tenure Policies and Practices (Report) specifically recommended steps to promote recognition of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the appointment, promotion, and tenure process.¹³ The Report recommended that faculty members be given the option of including on their CVs a section related to their work in this space and that review committees should afford it special attention. The Report also clarified that the purpose of highlighting this type of work is not to pressure faculty members to conduct certain types of work but, rather, to validate and reward those who are doing so.

Consistent with the Task Force's recommendation, School faculty may include in their reappointment and promotion documents a CV section on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. This section would describe how the work of the faculty member has affected issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion. The work here may overlap or be separate from work described as part of teaching, advising, research and publication, and service activities. We fully recognize that what individual faculty do in this area will vary significantly.

Faculty Participation in the Master of Public Administration Program

The School assumed responsibility for the Master of Public Administration (MPA) program in 1997.¹⁴ Most School of Government faculty members do not teach in the MPA program because they work in specialty areas that are not core or elective subjects for public administration students. Those who do teach in the program combine scholarship and practice in carrying out the School's mission for North Carolina public officials, which makes them ideally suited to offer professional education for MPA students. Faculty members work with public officials every day on real-world issues and then draw on that practical experience to enrich the teaching in their MPA classrooms.

The School has worked hard to avoid creating two rigid categories of faculty—faculty working exclusively with MPA students and faculty dedicated exclusively to North Carolina public officials. The concern is that creating a separate category of MPA faculty would introduce and institutionalize a false dichotomy between scholarship only for the academy and engaged scholarship for state and local officials. The School is strongly committed to continuing the combination of scholarship and practice that has made it successful, and as a result its approach to participation in the MPA program is consistent with the School's larger mission.

No faculty members teach in the MPA program full time. A small number of faculty members at the School have primary assignments in the MPA program with the understanding that they will have a significantly greater responsibility for the MPA program than most of their colleagues. They typically teach two MPA courses each year rather than the normal full load of four courses per year for nine-month faculty in other academic units. Like all of their colleagues at the School, these faculty members also are expected to work with North Carolina officials in their areas of public administration expertise. In collaboration with colleagues and in consultation with the Dean, faculty members with primary assignments in the MPA program will develop their own combination of activities that likely will include more teaching and advising for MPA students than for public officials. They also are expected to write for refereed public administration journals. Having faculty work published in these journals and in books by leading publishers is important for the MPA program's standing as a national leader. There is no prescribed number of refereed publications necessary for promotion, however, and these faculty members also are expected to write for practitioners in their fields. Because of these multiple demands on their time—working with practitioners and MPA students—the School anticipates that these public administration faculty members may produce fewer peer-reviewed publications than faculty members in other academic departments.

Faculty members in public administration who do not have primary assignments in the MPA program, as well as those who work in other academic disciplines that are directly relevant to public administration students—such as budgeting, public leadership, or local government law—may contribute to the MPA program. They may teach one course in the MPA program every year or only occasionally, and they may advise and support students and review student thesis substitutes. Faculty members who do not have primary assignments in the MPA program focus most of their attention on the School's core mission for North Carolina officials. Like all faculty members at the School, these faculty members engage in teaching, advising, and research and publication. Some of these faculty members, especially those with a Ph.D. in public administration or a related field, typically publish some of their work in refereed journals in order to contribute to the academic community, advance their professional standing in their fields, and promote the reputation of the MPA program and the School. Other faculty members in this category, especially those with different academic backgrounds or those with areas of expertise not typically addressed in public administration journals, may more frequently choose different avenues of publication. There is no single mix of publications that is appropriate for all faculty members or that is prescribed for reappointment, tenure, or promotion. (See "Scholarly Research and Publication" in Section 6 for specific criteria.)

Section 3. The Scholarship of Engagement—A Broader Context for Understanding the School

After World War II, "scholarship came to be viewed as synonymous with basic research and publication."¹⁵ Ernest Boyer's classic report, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate,¹⁶ challenged universities to embrace a more expansive and flexible definition of scholarship. Collectively, faculty members offer a wonderful "mosaic of talent," and counting more of their diverse contributions as scholarship could bring "renewed vitality to higher learning and the nation," according to Boyer. He encouraged institutions of higher education "to support and reward not only those scholars uniquely gifted in research, but also those who excel in the integration and application of knowledge . . . ."¹⁷ School of Government faculty members are involved in both kinds of work—original research and its application. This view of faculty work has become known as the scholarship of engagement, which broadly means connecting "the intellectual resources of the academy to make the world a better place for all of us."¹⁸ It also has been called "public scholarship" and "scholarship for the common good."¹⁹ The engaged faculty member is one who "draws on the expertise of the discipline, makes connections with audiences beyond the campus, and connects the faculty career to the community."²⁰

Like all University faculty members, the School's faculty members conduct original research. Teaching and advising by School faculty members involves the subtle and complex application of their research to practical issues confronting public officials. "To be considered scholarship," writes Boyer, "service activities must be tied directly to one's special field of knowledge and relate to, and flow directly out of, this professional activity."²¹ This definition of service as scholarship includes "serious, disciplined work that seeks to interpret, draw together, and bring new insight to bear on original research."²² Scholarship involves asking, "'How can knowledge be responsibly applied to consequential problems? How can it be helpful to individuals as well as institutions?' And further, 'Can social problems themselves define an agenda for scholarly investigation?'"²³ In discussing possible forms of scholarly publications, Boyer noted that "[w]riting for nonspecialists . . . also should be recognized as a legitimate scholarly endeavor. . . . To make complex ideas understandable to a large audience can be a difficult, demanding task, one that requires not only a deep and thorough knowledge of one's field, but keen literary skills, as well."²⁴ These descriptions of engaged scholarship describe the work of faculty at the School of Government.

The School's long and successful experience with faculty engagement foreshadowed the national engagement movement.²⁵ Faculty members have been leaders in engaged scholarship for many years without necessarily describing their work as engagement—even though it is clear that the School's values and practices reflect the philosophy underlying the scholarship of engagement. According to the Institute of Government's founder, Professor Albert Coates, "[t]he officials can bring badly needed practical insight to students and teachers who in turn can bring just as badly needed theoretical backgrounds to practical officials. The book-men need the practice; the practice-men need the books; and the college campus needs the interlocking relationships of both in order to do its duty by the state in which it lives and moves and has its being."²⁶ Albert Coates relied on plain language to describe his vision for the Institute—though today he would include women in his description—and he brilliantly anticipated the philosophy behind the scholarship of engagement.²⁷

Universities have developed ways to assess the engaged scholarship of their faculty members because traditional ways of evaluating academic work—refereed publications and teaching evaluations—are not especially helpful indicia of engagement.²⁸ What counts as engaged scholarship? How is it documented? How is it evaluated? What motivates faculty members to become involved in engaged scholarship? How is its impact measured? In trying to identify standards for evaluating engaged scholarship, some have focused on universal dimensions of the scholarly process—clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation, and reflective critique.²⁹ Engaged scholarship will have credibility only if faculty can demonstrate that their work meets the highest performance standards. In other words, "[e]xcellence is the yardstick by which all scholarship must be measured."³⁰

Explicitly recognizing the School of Government's work as engaged scholarship places the School's mission in the larger context of modern academic life. Performance satisfying the standards contained in this document must also satisfy the University's standards for scholarly accomplishment, even if the particular criteria vary from those of other campus units with different missions. In other words, School faculty members do not confront two separate standards—School standards for work with North Carolina public officials and different University standards. There is one standard for scholarship at the University—excellence—and it can be satisfied in different ways depending on the mission of each academic unit. The policies and procedures in this document have evolved over time to ensure that the School's faculty members are recognized for their excellent engaged scholarship in ways that continue to advance the School's mission for North Carolina.

In 2009, the UNC Task Force on Promotion and Tenure Policies and Practices analyzed future trends in university tenure and promotion and specifically noted the trends in engaged scholarship and new forms for scholarly work. The recommendations from its report (cited in full in note 12) included explicit consideration of the faculty member's interactions and engagement with communities outside the traditional scholarly community; revision of dossier documents and CV guidelines to highlight engaged faculty work; and revision of personnel documents to include guidelines for the evaluation of new forms of scholarly communication, including review and feedback from users, students, and other audiences for the new forms of scholarly work. The University has embraced engaged scholarship and now requires it to be recognized in promotion and tenure polices. The standard format for CVs now includes categories for "products of engaged scholarship" and "digital and other novel forms of scholarship (with electronic links displayed, if relevant)."³¹

Section 4. Faculty Appointments

General

For any appointment, there must be evidence that the person under consideration understands and embraces the School's unique mission, its definition of scholarship, and its culture of responsive engagement with North Carolina public officials. This personal commitment to the strong service culture of the School is necessary for all appointments, including faculty who are expected to have significant responsibility in the Master of Public Administration Program. All School faculty members have twelve-month appointments to carry out this mission. See Section 7 for qualifications for faculty consultation on initial appointments.

Tenure-Track Appointments

Instructor

This rank is for a person who is expected to progress to the rank of assistant professor. It is used mainly as an interim designation for a new faculty member who meets all criteria for appointment as an assistant professor except the completion of doctoral degree requirements. The appointment as assistant professor becomes effective automatically upon completion of the degree requirements. The term of appointment is one year, with a maximum of four terms.

Assistant Professor

This rank is for a person who has very little or no experience in an academic position and who has demonstrated the potential to meet all of the requirements for tenure. A person usually will hold a law degree or a doctoral degree or its equivalent at the time of appointment. The initial appointment is for a four-year probationary term, with a possible reappointment for a three-year term. Review for reappointment occurs in the third year of the initial four-year appointment as assistant professor.

Associate Professor

This rank confers permanent tenure if a person is promoted from the rank of assistant professor. Review for promotion to this rank occurs in the second year of the three-year reappointment as assistant professor.

A person may be appointed to a five-year probationary term as an associate professor without tenure if the person has significant professional experience and there is a reasonable expectation that they will meet the requirements for tenure by the end of the fourth year. Review for conferring tenure typically occurs in the fourth year of the five-year appointment. Review may occur earlier if the advisory committee determines that the standards for promotion have been met. The typical profile for an initial appointment at this rank is a person who has advanced expertise in a field based on many years of practical experience and has demonstrated the potential to meet all of the requirements for tenure. An initial appointment may be made with tenure at the rank of associate professor only if a person meets all of the requirements for tenure. This might occur, for example, when someone already is tenured at another university but does not meet the requirements for full professor.

Professor

This rank always confers tenure, and in most cases the person will be promoted from associate professor. Review for promotion to this rank occurs in the fourth year of the five-year appointment as associate professor with tenure. An initial appointment as professor will be rare because it requires evidence that a person has all of the same qualifications and qualities as a person in the School who has been promoted from associate professor.

Fixed-Term Appointments

The University recognizes several categories of fixed-term faculty rank, including teaching, research, and clinical appointments. Currently, the School has no fixed-term clinical faculty. The University and the School provide a progression through fixed-term ranks as appropriate work is completed, and that progression for teaching and research appointments is described below.

Teaching Assistant Professor

This appointment is for a person who will be engaged primarily in teaching and advising activities. There is no expectation that a teaching assistant professor will engage in scholarly research and publication. Nevertheless, a teaching assistant professor may produce publications in their field, and although it is not required, this work will be recognized and rewarded. The initial fixed-term appointment and succeeding terms may be made for a period of one to five years. A person must hold at least a bachelor's degree at the time of appointment.

Teaching Associate Professor

A teaching assistant professor who has at least seven years of distinguished service is eligible for promotion to the rank of teaching associate professor. Promotion to teaching associate professor requires evidence of distinguished service beyond that which is expected of a teaching assistant professor, based on the relevant promotion criteria set forth in Section 6 of this policy, recognizing, however, that teaching assistant and associate professors are not expected to produce scholarly research and publications. This is a mid-rank appointment for fixed-term faculty, similar to the rank of associate professor for tenure-track faculty. A person may be hired as a teaching associate professor with seven years of service as a teaching assistant professor or equivalent relevant experience.

Teaching Professor

A teaching associate professor who has at least five years of distinguished service at that rank is eligible for promotion to teaching professor. Promotion to teaching professor requires evidence of distinguished service beyond that which is expected of a teaching associate professor, based on the relevant promotion criteria set forth in Section 6 of this policy, recognizing, however, that teaching assistant, associate, and full professors are not expected to produce scholarly research and publications. This is a high-rank appointment for fixed-term faculty, similar to the rank of full professor for tenure-track faculty. A person may be hired as a teaching professor with six consecutive years of service as a teaching associate professor or equivalent relevant experience.

Research Assistant Professor

This appointment is for a person who will be engaged primarily in research and publication, and advising activities. There is no expectation that a research assistant professor will engage in teaching. Nevertheless, a research assistant professor may teach in their field, and although it is not required, this work will be recognized and rewarded. The initial fixed-term appointment and succeeding terms may be made for a period of one to five years. A person must hold at least a bachelor's degree at the time of appointment.

Research Associate Professor

A research assistant professor who has at least seven years of distinguished service is eligible for promotion to the rank of research associate professor. Promotion to research associate professor requires evidence of distinguished service beyond that which is expected of a research assistant professor, based on the relevant promotion criteria set forth in Section 6 of this policy, recognizing, however, that research assistant and associate professors are not expected to teach. This is a mid-rank appointment for fixed-term faculty, similar to the rank of associate professor for tenure-track faculty. A person may be hired as a research associate professor with seven years of service as a research assistant professor or equivalent relevant experience.

Research Professor

A research associate professor who has at least five years of distinguished service at that rank is eligible for promotion to research professor. Promotion to research professor requires evidence of distinguished service beyond that which is expected of a research associate professor, based on the relevant promotion criteria set forth in Section 6 of this policy, recognizing, however, that research assistant, associate, and full professors are not expected to teach. This is a high-rank appointment for fixed-term faculty, similar to the rank of full professor for tenure-track faculty. A person may be hired as a research professor with six consecutive years of service as a research associate professor or equivalent relevant experience.

Variable-Track Appointment

A fixed-term faculty member at the assistant professor level may be recruited and appointed with the possibility of later being moved to the tenure track. This is a different process than the potential move to tenure track described near the end of Section 5, below. This is a variable-track appointment, and it specifies consideration of changing to the tenure track or remaining on the fixed-term track at a designated time after initial appointment without the requirement of a new faculty search. It is appropriate for a faculty member who may have the potential to do the full mix of work required for tenure track who is hired for a position that does not yet require that full range of work. It is also appropriate for a faculty member who is hired for a position that requires substantial administrative or other work before beginning the full range of work required of tenure-track faculty. A track transition should be based on demonstrated excellence across all areas of required tenure-track work consistent with the accomplishments of tenure-track faculty at the School, based on the relevant promotion criteria described in Section 6 of this policy.

A variable-track appointment requires an initial national search, to avoid an additional search at the later transition stage. It requires that a possible variable-track appointment be identified in the initial search, the offer letter, and the appointment. The initial fixed-term portion of a variable-track appointment may last up to three years, whether in the assistant or associate rank. At the three-year mark, an evaluation should be made as to whether the faculty member should be reappointed and, if so, whether the faculty member should continue in the fixed-term rank or transition to tenure track. That decision should be made based on the relevant promotion criteria described in Section 6 of this policy and with the review and advice of the qualified faculty as described in Section 7.

Professor of the Practice

This appointment is reserved for a person who has been a distinguished practitioner in higher education administration or outside of higher education. It typically will be reserved for people with many years of experience. The initial fixed-term appointment and succeeding terms may be made for periods of one to five years.

Adjunct Faculty

This part-time appointment is for a person who is employed outside the University, is retired, has a primary assignment in a non-faculty position within the School, or has a primary assignment in another academic unit within the University. The person will have limited responsibilities in the areas of teaching, advising, and research and publication that are of special benefit to the School. This appointment is not honorary and it will not be extended simply as a courtesy. In many cases a person will be compensated for specific activities performed for the School, but in other cases the adjunct faculty member will serve without compensation. The initial fixed-term appointment and succeeding terms may be made for periods of one to five years.

Section 5. Standard for Reappointment and Promotion

University Standards

The Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill³² provide that tenure "requires an assessment of institutional needs and resources and evidence of service to the academic community, potential for future contribution, commitment to the welfare of the University, and demonstrated professional competence, including consideration of commitment to effective teaching, research, or public service."³³ The Trustee Policies provide further that reappointment and tenure decisions may take into account "any factors deemed relevant to total institutional interests . . . ."³⁴ The conferral of tenure represents a judgment by one's peers, as well as the institution, that a person has demonstrated a level of competence consistent with the best traditions of the University. It is an invitation to continue participating as a valued colleague in the ongoing advancement of the University and its mission.

The qualitative standard mentioned explicitly in the Trustee Policies is "demonstrated professional competence," but the policies are silent on the meaning of that critically important standard. A decision about reappointment or tenure by the School and subsequent University reviewers necessarily includes a mix of objective and subjective judgments. The specific requirements for tenure can never be described with precision. Ultimately a group of decision makers guided by clear criteria makes its best consensus judgment about whether a person's work is of the highest quality.

Each academic unit is responsible for establishing faculty performance criteria that advance its particular mission within the University. After becoming familiar with the written criteria for each academic unit (including those in this document), the University's Advisory Committee on Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure reviews each appointment, promotion, and tenure recommendation to determine whether a unit has followed its own procedures and rigorously applied its own criteria.

School of Government Standard

The standard for reappointment, promotion, and tenure at the School of Government is excellence in meeting the needs of North Carolina public officials and (if applicable) MPA students.³⁵ All faculty members, both tenure track and fixed term, carry out the School's mission of engaged scholarship. Many different combinations of the School's core activities—teaching, research and publication, and advising—can provide a successful path within the School. Each faculty member, in consultation with the Dean, and the faculty member's faculty advisory committee, in collaboration with other colleagues, determines the best way to meet the varied needs of public officials in their field and decides upon the appropriate mix of teaching, research and publication, and advising. Thus, not every faculty member produces the same amount of work for public officials in each dimension. The School expects and supports differences in the quantity of teaching, writing, and advising from its faculty members. The School demands excellence in the quality of all faculty work.

A faculty member must show clear evidence of regular, continuous, focused, and significant work to satisfy the standards for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. The decision will be based on a consideration of work completed rather than on unrealized potential. The faculty member also must show promise of continuing achievement at a very high level. This is the expectation for faculty members in tenure-track and fixed-term appointments and at every rank.

Consistent with the specific criteria for reappointment and promotion and the commitment to meeting the needs of public officials, there is no single prescription for demonstrating accomplishment sufficient for promotion. For instance, scholarly research and publication that is sufficient for promotion may take many forms and need not necessarily be manifested as a book or, for most faculty, as peer-reviewed articles. (See "Scholarly Research and Publication" in Section 6.) As stated earlier, however, faculty members with primary assignments within the MPA program are expected to publish in peer-reviewed journals. There is no prescribed number of refereed publications for these faculty members, and they also are expected to write for practitioners in their fields.

The School expects all faculty members to demonstrate progressively greater accomplishment and effectiveness at each successive academic rank. As a faculty member progresses in rank, the School expects the faculty member to show sustained productivity reflecting a continuous increase in breadth and depth of expertise in the faculty member's field(s). This standard of accomplishment and productivity is evaluated across all aspects of faculty work: teaching, advising, and research and publication. Promotion is a high faculty honor, and it signifies that its recipient has demonstrated sustained achievement and is likely to continue meeting an exemplary standard of professional ability and service.

The standards for promotion to higher rank must be applied with due consideration for the specific context of School of Government faculty work. Faculty members' work is typically driven by the needs of the public officials for whom and with whom they work. The School recognizes that the mix of work produced will vary among faculty members. The expectation is that faculty members will extend and deepen their expertise and will continue to disseminate practical scholarship in all three dimensions of faculty work (teaching, advising, and research and publication) that reflects continued mastery of the subject area(s). Evidence of greater accomplishment and effectiveness in research and publication should not be viewed as a requirement for a book or other lengthy publication or for a singular work of scholarship. Evidence of work worthy of promotion does not necessarily require a distinct or new type of publication. It could include regular updates of a key resource in the faculty member's field of expertise as well as work in multiple formats that blends publication, teaching, and advising. The standard for promotion requires a quality and quantity of work that demonstrates a high level of productivity, taking into consideration, in addition to publication, the scholarly research and expertise that informs teaching and advising. The School recognizes that the evidence of accomplishment and productivity is increasingly represented in media that are integrated into teaching, advising, and publication. The review process requires evaluation of the quantity and quality of scholarship that underlies the faculty work as reflected in all three of these main categories of work.

A faculty member may seek, or be asked to consider, a change to a new field of work when changes in their original field justify a reallocation of resources or when a vacancy or new position exists. Such a change must be approved by the Dean, based on considerations including the benefit of the change for faculty retention; the faculty member's demonstrated potential to provide excellent service in the new field; impact on colleagues; and (in the case of a vacancy or new position) the potential benefits, including increasing diversity, of conducting a search to fill the vacant position. When the School has approved a faculty change of field, subsequent review for promotion will be based on the entire body of work, and excellence in meeting the needs of public officials in both the original field and the new field of work will be evaluated. Such review will take into consideration the timing of the change and the extent to which the faculty member is able to develop expertise in the new field prior to the review.

A fixed-term faculty member may seek, or be asked to consider, changing to a tenure-track appointment. Such a change will typically require a search and must be approved by the Dean, based on considerations including the benefit of the change in terms of faculty retention; the faculty member's potential to provide excellent service in the new appointment; and the potential benefits, including increasing diversity, of conducting a search to fill the appointment. When the School allows such a change and the fixed-term faculty member emerges as the successful candidate following a search, subsequent review for reappointment and promotion will be based on the entire body of work completed during both appointments.

A fixed-term faculty member with a variable-track appointment may be evaluated after two years of the three-year fixed term appointment for a possible transition to a tenure-track appointment. When the School allows such a change, subsequent review for reappointment and promotion will be based on the entire body of work completed during all appointments.

Section 6. Specific Criteria for Reappointment and Promotion

General

Many factors bear on the School's evaluation of whether a faculty member is doing an excellent job of meeting the needs of public officials and (if applicable) MPA students. This section addresses a wide range of relevant performance categories and offers guidance for documenting performance. To the extent possible, this policy uses criteria that can be objectively measured. But reappointment and promotion determinations also involve subjective assessments of relative contributions in different aspects of the School's work. The approach taken by this policy is to provide the decision makers at all levels with the best information to make those decisions in as rational and objective a manner as possible.

The School encourages collaboration and partnerships, and thus collaborative contributions by faculty members are valued as much as individual contributions. Because collaborative works are not necessarily proportionally attributable, a faculty member will be asked to describe the nature of their contribution.

The effort to emphasize objective measures does not minimize the importance of assessing the extent to which faculty members promote a positive organizational culture in which all of the activities listed below occur. The culture of the School of Government values and promotes the following:

• High ethical standards
• Intellectual integrity
• Responsiveness to the needs of audiences served
• Reliability, punctuality, and responsibility in approaching one's work
• Good judgment that avoids situations that reflect adversely on the School or the University
• Commitment to the common good of the School, as reflected in a willingness to assist colleagues, teach in colleagues' classes, and work on pan-School projects—all in a manner that promotes collegiality
• Good humor
• A demonstrated commitment to professional development, including mentoring colleagues

While these characteristics cannot easily be quantified, they are important to the successful operation of the School, and the absence of any of these qualities is considered in reappointment and promotion recommendations.

Impact

The School considers evidence of the impact of the faculty member's work on the professional conduct of the public officials served. For example, has a faculty member's work resulted in the creation or development of new systems for the improvement of government in North Carolina? Have the activities affected government policies and programs? Has work in one government organization resulted in invitations from other organizations to help plan, organize, or conduct similar activities? In making these assessments, it is important to determine the extent to which the particular circumstances of a faculty member's relationship to public officials makes that kind of evidence likely to be available. As discussed in more detail in Section 7, below, the School asks officials for evaluation letters because they are in a good position to assess the impact of a faculty member's work.

The School recognizes that assessing the impact of a faculty member's work is very difficult, since exposure to School training, advising, and research and publication is only one factor in shaping the behavior of public officials and MPA students. Impact reasonably may be inferred from evidence that a faculty member is meaningfully engaged with state or local officials. This evidence of engagement with officials may take many forms—such as telephone and email inquiries, visits to a faculty member's website, strong attendance at programs offered by a faculty member, and requests for other kinds of assistance. The assessment of impact is complicated further by the School's fundamental principle of nonadvocacy. The role of a School faculty member usually is not to suggest that a particular course of action be taken but, rather, to provide an improved basis for the public official to make their own judgment.

The fact that assessing impact is difficult and that the information to do so is not always available does not diminish its value as an important indicator of the effectiveness of School work. As a faculty member is evaluated along the dimensions of teaching, advising, and research and publication, impact will be an important consideration.

Reputation

The School of Government enjoys a national reputation for effective scholarly engagement with public officials in North Carolina. To be effectively engaged, faculty members are expected to develop over time stronger and more extensive reputations in North Carolina with state and local officials in their fields. Consideration of state reputation is required for reappointment or promotion. Because the School's mission focuses on North Carolina officials rather than on a national audience, most School faculty members appropriately strive for a state reputation rather than a national reputation. Nevertheless, some faculty members develop national reputations because their work is relevant to public officials in other states. The law affecting government varies from state to state, and the work of lawyer faculty members emphasizes law that impacts North Carolina officials. If faculty members made their legal work more broadly and generically relevant to officials in other states, it would be correspondingly less helpful to North Carolina officials. Faculty members in the field of public administration, on the other hand, have the opportunity to reach a national audience without reducing their effectiveness for North Carolina officials. In fact, faculty members who have significant responsibilities in the MPA program (in general, those who regularly teach two courses in the program) are expected to publish in national refereed journals. There is a corresponding expectation that those faculty members develop a national reputation, but it may happen more slowly than for faculty in other academic departments because they also are expected to write for and advise North Carolina public officials.

Faculty members carry out the School of Government's mission through their work in the following areas. The order carries no implication of priority—each activity is important and the precise mix will vary over the course of a faculty member's career.

Teaching

The School's commitment to excellent teaching has been a significant factor in its success with North Carolina public officials and MPA students.³⁶ The evaluation for reappointment and promotion therefore includes a thorough review of a faculty member's teaching materials and peer observations of classroom teaching by the Advisory Committee.³⁷ The evaluation also includes a careful review of student teaching evaluations covering at least the past three years, as well as a faculty member's teaching portfolio.³⁸

In addition to providing direct instruction, faculty members also are responsible for organizing schools and conferences that include topics outside of their fields and require other instructors from inside and outside the School. Effective programs for public officials depend on careful planning and administration—identifying the instructional needs of officials, providing clear guidance to instructors, developing logical connections between sessions, and relating individual programs to long-term curriculum planning. Faculty members spend a significant amount of time on this important work. The review of teaching includes an evaluation of the quality of a faculty member's course planning and administration.

The critical question is whether the person is doing an excellent job through teaching to meet the needs of North Carolina officials and (if applicable) MPA students in the person's field of expertise. The quantity of teaching varies among faculty members based on the varied needs of public officials and students in their fields. The School expects excellence in the quality of a faculty member's teaching—regardless of the amount of time spent on teaching. The Faculty Advisory Committee, the qualified faculty, and the Dean consider all relevant information about a faculty member's teaching, including the following measures:

• Accuracy, analytical precision, and comprehensiveness of teaching materials
• Responsiveness of the oral presentation and written classroom materials to the needs of audiences served
• Coherence of the oral presentation and written classroom materials
• Incorporation of the latest information and developments in a field
• Quantity of teaching
• Evaluation by students
• Number and percentage of students in the target audience who choose to participate in class offerings, reviewed over a substantial period of time
• Development of new courses
• Service as a mentor or other contributions to the teaching of other faculty
• Effective use of audiovisual aids
• Use of innovative teaching methods, including distance education and other instructional technology
• Extent to which students are engaged by the teacher
• Extent to which the teacher fosters a respectful learning environment
• Peer observations of classroom teaching
• Nomination for or receipt of teaching awards
• Implementation of accepted adult education principles
• Participation in teaching development activities
• Ability to manage the class
• Grants awarded to carry out teaching
• Emulation of the faculty member's courses or use of the teaching materials by others
• Development and administration of successful programs, including the integration of topics outside the faculty member's area of expertise

Advising

Advising is one of the most meaningful and distinctive ways that faculty members fulfill the School's mission of improving government in North Carolina.³⁹ Unlike faculty elsewhere in the University, School of Government faculty members are expected to respond to requests for assistance by public officials as part of their regular work—and to do so in a timely, thorough, and helpful manner. Faculty members also help the media and other citizens understand North Carolina government and the actions of public officials. This work often involves original research and innovative analysis as faculty members confront novel questions in their fields. Advising is evaluated carefully in making recommendations for reappointment and promotion. The critical question is whether the person is doing an excellent job through advising to meet the needs of North Carolina officials and (if applicable) MPA students in the person's field of expertise. The quantity of advising will vary among faculty members based on the varied needs of public officials and students. The School expects excellence in the quality of a faculty member's advising—regardless of the amount of time spent on advising. The Faculty Advisory Committee, the qualified faculty, and the Dean consider all relevant information about a faculty member's advising, including the following measures:

• Accuracy, analytical precision, and comprehensiveness
• Coherence and clarity
• Feedback from public officials, MPA students, and colleagues
• Responsiveness to the needs of audiences served and timeliness
• Accessibility for advising
• Efficient time management with respect to advising
• Quantity of the activity or activities, in terms of the scope of projects undertaken as well as the overall number
• Tangible work products produced as a result of advising efforts
• Grants and contracts awarded to carry out advising projects
• Emulation by others of the methods, materials, or approaches used in consultations
• Special innovations in the manner or approach used in providing advising services
• Extent to which the clients served return to the faculty member for future advice, measured over a substantial period of time
• Any awards or other recognition received by the faculty member for advising or by a project as a result of the faculty member's advising

Scholarly Research and Publication

After considering a faculty member's publications and statement,⁴⁰ the critical question is whether the person is doing an excellent job through scholarly research and publication to meet the needs of North Carolina officials and (if applicable) other public administration practitioners and scholars in the person's field of expertise.⁴¹ The reappointment and promotion decision will be made on the basis of completed works, including published works, works that have been submitted for internal publication and are in the editorial process, and works that have been accepted for external publication.

The School has a long tradition of faculty publications that combine depth of scholarly understanding with clear and thoughtful writing. Because the School's intended audience is so different from that of a traditional academic unit, the types of publications most faculty members produce necessarily will be quite different from traditional academic publications. Original research and careful analysis are necessary, however, and so is the ability to make complicated subjects accessible without sacrificing complexity and subtlety. This combination of qualities is the essence of engaged scholarship.

The quantity of publications will vary among faculty members based on the varied needs of public officials in their fields and their involvement in the MPA program. Each faculty member is expected to be productive; however, there is no prescribed number of publications needed for reappointment or promotion. Because of their teaching and advising workloads, the School's faculty members will rarely produce the quantity of publications typical of a faculty member in another academic unit. The School expects excellence in the quality of a faculty member's publications—regardless of the amount or category.

Faculty members create publications that will advance the School's mission of engaged scholarship, but their responsibilities are not uniform. The School's expectations for faculty members therefore differ from faculty member to faculty member, depending on the nature of each individual's work, academic discipline, and degree of involvement with the MPA program.

All faculty members publish for North Carolina public officials, whether their discipline is law, public administration, or a closely-related discipline. The nature of their appointment and the academic discipline of each faculty member influence publication expectations, as outlined below:

1. Faculty members with primary assignments in the MPA program (that is, those appointed to teach two or more MPA classes each year) are expected to write not only for North Carolina officials but also for refereed public administration journals, many of which have practitioner and academic audiences.
2. Other faculty members who work in an academic discipline that is relevant to public administration students may have lesser responsibility within the MPA program. Some of these faculty members, especially those with a Ph.D., typically publish at least some of their work in refereed journals in order to advance their professional standing in their fields and to promote the reputation of the MPA program and the School. Other faculty members in this category, especially those with different academic backgrounds or those with areas of expertise not typically addressed in public administration journals, may more frequently choose different avenues of publication. There is no single mix of publications that is appropriate for all faculty members or that is prescribed for reappointment, tenure, or promotion.
3. A large proportion of faculty members, including most in public law, do not have direct responsibilities within the MPA program. These faculty members are not required to publish in refereed public administration journals for reappointment and promotion. They may contribute occasionally to law reviews, public administration journals, or journals in a related discipline, however, which counts for reappointment and promotion even though it is not required.

The form of the publication is not as important to the School as the quality of the work. "Publication" is conceived broadly to include conveying important ideas for improving government in any form (print, websites, blogs, apps, or other digital media) that communicates effectively with the School's primary audiences. Electronic publications and instructional multimedia, for example, may serve North Carolina officials as well as print publications, and in the future they may turn out to be even more important. High-quality, high-impact works, regardless of the choice of medium, count the same for purposes of reappointment and promotion. A book does not count more than a series of bulletins that demonstrates the same overall quality and impact, for example, and a high-quality video representing comparable expertise may count as much as a book or a series of bulletins. There is no categorical criterion and there is no book requirement for reappointment or promotion. Furthermore, the School does not expect or encourage faculty members to choose a book format for promotion purposes when a different format would be more effective for the intended audience. The School's faculty members are encouraged to experiment with innovative ways of reaching public officials. The same assessment measures that apply to traditional print publications apply to electronic publications.

In assessing a faculty member's contribution to the scholarly research and publication function of the School, the Faculty Advisory Committee, the qualified faculty, and the Dean will consider measures such as the following:

• Extent to which the written material reflects a careful, accurate, and systematic analysis of the subject matter field in which the faculty member is writing
• Coherence and clarity
• Extent to which the written material reflects original research and creative approaches to issues
• Appropriateness and effectiveness of the form selected for reaching the intended audience
• Responsiveness to the needs of audiences served
• Number and scope of publications and other writings produced
• Published evaluations of written work
• Extent to which the written work is reproduced or cited in other published works or other public records
• Works in which the faculty member serves as editor
• Awards and recognition of the quality of the work by entities other than the School
• Special innovations in the presentation of material in published form

Service to the School, the University, and the Profession

Faculty members must share in the work necessary to maintain and improve the School, the University, and their profession. These types of service generally are not related to a faculty member's substantive fields of work. However, a faculty member's effectiveness in carrying out the School's mission ultimately depends on the strength of these other institutions. Not every person will have the same opportunity or ability to provide this kind of service, and the opportunities to do so tend to increase with experience. The key question is whether a faculty member willingly has served the School, the University, and the profession consistent with those opportunities.

Service to the School

In assessing the degree to which an individual has provided service to the School, the Faculty Advisory Committee, the qualified faculty, and the Dean will consider the extent to which the individual participates in the following kinds of activities and the extent to which that participation contributes to the School:

• Editing a publication of interest to readers beyond the faculty member's substantive fields
• Assuming administrative responsibility for the MPA program—such as serving as director, working as a member of the admissions committee, or reviewing thesis substitutes
• Administering or assisting with the administration of a program for traditional students
• Assuming responsibility for a major course that is outside a faculty member's usual area of responsibility—such as the Municipal and County Administration course
• Chairing or serving on a committee
• Assuming responsibility for multi-author publications that serve several different groups of public officials
• Advising graduate and professional students
• Assuming responsibility for other administrative projects or assuming general management responsibility within the School
• Any other similar service to the School

Service to the University or to the Profession

In assessing the degree to which a faculty member has provided service to the University or their profession, the Faculty Advisory Committee, the qualified faculty, and the Dean will consider the extent to which the person participates in the following kinds of activities and the extent to which that participation contributes to the improvement of the institutions served:

• Serving as chair or a member of a committee on this campus or within one's professional organizations
• Serving on editorial boards of journals
• Working on projects sponsored by the University administration, either on this campus or through the Office of the President
• Serving in a leadership role in a professional organization
• Any other service that is relevant to the work of the University or to one's profession

Section 7. Review Process for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion⁴²

Faculty Advisory Committees

Upon initial appointment, each nontenured and fixed-term faculty member is appointed a three-person Faculty Advisory Committee to offer guidance on overall professional development.⁴³ If a fixed-term faculty member has a supervisor other than the Dean, that supervisor should be a member of this committee. These committees are a resource for new faculty members as they plan their work and develop their fields of expertise. One member of the committee serves as the new faculty member's teaching mentor if teaching is within the appointee's responsibilities. Advisory committees meet at least twice each year, and the committee prepares a written report after each meeting that addresses teaching, advising, and research and publication, along with an overall summary of the faculty member's progress.⁴⁴ The advisory committee also serves as the review committee in recommending whether a faculty member has satisfied the School's standard for reappointment and tenure. The Faculty Advisory Committee is disbanded after a faculty member becomes tenured or, in the case of fixed-term faculty, becomes a teaching or research associate professor. The School will reconvene the same committee (with new members if necessary to replace members who are no longer available to serve) to review faculty members for promotion to full professor or teaching professor.

A faculty member who is appointed with tenure may also be assigned a Faculty Advisory Committee to provide orientation to the work of the School and for guidance in managing and responding to external demands and opportunities. This type of Faculty Advisory Committee will continue for as long as it is deemed useful by the faculty member and the School.

Review and Evaluation

Faculty Advisory Committee

The Faculty Advisory Committee meets with the faculty member under review for reappointment, tenure, and promotion to describe the process and answer any questions or concerns.⁴⁵ The faculty member is responsible for submitting all of the documentation required for the review.⁴⁶ The advisory committee conducts an independent quality review of the faculty member's work. After reviewing its own past reports on the faculty member's progress, the committee examines the person's publications, observes their teaching, and evaluates the person's advising. It also considers the faculty member's summary assessments submitted as a part of the annual faculty reporting process.⁴⁷ The advisory committee evaluates whether the faculty member's work is both intellectually rigorous and practical, both of which are important in advancing the School's unique mission at the convergence of scholarship and practice. Committee members understand that a poorly performing colleague undermines the reputation of the School and jeopardizes its effectiveness with North Carolina public officials.

In reviews for tenure or promotion to full professor, and for promotion of fixed-term faculty, the advisory committee also considers outside evaluation letters, discussed in more detail below. The committee in any review may seek further information from anyone who has had the opportunity to observe and assess the candidate's professional performance, including other faculty members at the School, public officials and others outside the University, and other faculty members at Carolina or other universities. The information may be obtained orally or in writing. In gathering information and making its recommendation to the Dean, the Faculty Advisory Committee will be guided by the School's standard for reappointment, promotion, and tenure and the specific criteria outlined in the preceding sections.

Timing of Review

The School maintains a detailed schedule for faculty reviews, which incorporates the timing for review as required by University policies. Generally, review occurs in the year prior to the expiration of the current appointment. A decision on reappointment as assistant professor is made in the third year of the four-year probationary appointment. A decision on promotion to associate professor conferring tenure is made in the second year of the three-year reappointment as assistant professor. A decision on promotion to full professor is made, at the earliest, in the fourth year of the five-year appointment as associate professor, or in any year thereafter, should the faculty member choose to waive consideration at the earliest time.

Fixed-term teaching or research assistant professors will be reviewed for promotion to teaching or research associate professor, at the earliest, during the seventh year as teaching or research assistant professor, and for promotion to teaching or research professor, at the earliest, during the sixth year as a teaching or research associate professor.

Early Promotion

The School believes that the best course is for a faculty member to progress along the standard timeline as set out in this policy. An advisory committee may, however, recommend that a faculty member be reappointed, granted tenure, or promoted to full professor ahead of the normal schedule. This action will be appropriate to reward faculty members who demonstrate extraordinary accomplishments, beyond what is expected or typical of faculty in that rank and stage of career, and should be taken only in rare cases. Early promotion also may be recommended when necessary for retention of high-performing faculty members. A person is eligible for early promotion only if they meet or exceed the School's standards for the next rank at the time of the early promotion. Every faculty member is eligible for consideration for early promotion, and faculty members may request such consideration from their advisory committee or from the Dean.

Outside Evaluation Letters

The School depends on outside evaluation letters to help assess whether a faculty member's publications, advising, and teaching are effective in meeting the School's applied goals. A tenure-track faculty member must have a minimum of four outside letters of evaluation for promotion and tenure. A teaching or research assistant professor must have a minimum of two outside letters of evaluation for promotion. The advisory committee will consider all of the evaluation letters. Outside evaluators may include public officials and other distinguished professionals—they need not all be faculty members. A required element for all outside letters—regardless of an evaluator's background—is an impartial and objective assessment.

Typically, North Carolina officials are the most informed and best qualified people to offer guidance on whether a faculty member has satisfied the School's goals. Experience has shown that these officials provide a conscientious and critical evaluation of faculty work because they have a long-term interest in receiving the highest quality teaching, advising, and publications from School faculty members. The School asks North Carolina officials to assess all dimensions of a faculty member's professional performance, rather than focusing almost exclusively on a person's written scholarship. The assessment typically is based on the evaluator's direct experience with the faculty member's teaching, advising, and publications. Publications are important in advancing the School's mission with North Carolina public officials, but this facet of performance is not as central to tenure and promotion decisions (and thus to the outside review) as it may be in some academic departments. In assessing a faculty member's publications, the School asks North Carolina public officials about the practical value of that research and writing in their experience. There is no substitute for the kind of rigorous scrutiny that comes from public officials who rely on a publication to address the issues that arise in the course of their work.

The University's Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee believes that an impartial assessment from someone who is not a North Carolina public official will help it determine whether a faculty member's publications are effective in meeting the applied goals of the School. Accordingly, the Faculty Advisory committee, in consultation with the faculty member, will ask at least one outside evaluator other than a North Carolina public official to provide an evaluation letter. (This requirement does not apply to fixed-term faculty reviews.) The source of the letter will depend on the responsibilities of each faculty member. The School has worked hard to avoid creating two rigid categories of faculty—faculty working exclusively with MPA students and faculty dedicated exclusively to North Carolina public officials. The responsibilities of School faculty are not uniform. The School's expectations for faculty members therefore differ from faculty member to faculty member, depending on the nature of each individual's work, academic discipline, and degree of involvement with the MPA program, and the expectations in each particular case will be communicated to the Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee in the Dean's letter.

All faculty members work with North Carolina public officials, whether the individual's discipline is law, public administration, or a related discipline. Only a portion of these faculty members are expected to publish in peer-reviewed journals and to have an evaluation letter from a faculty member doing similar work at another university, as outlined below:

1. Faculty members with primary assignments within the MPA program (that is, those assigned to teach two MPA classes or more each year) are expected to write not only for North Carolina officials but also for refereed public administration journals, many of which have practitioner and academic audiences. These faculty members are required to have an evaluation letter from a faculty member at a peer academic institution or program whose rank is at or above the rank for which the faculty member is being considered and who has expertise in the faculty member's area(s) of work.
2. Other faculty members who work in an academic discipline that is relevant to public administration students may have lesser responsibility within the MPA program. They may, for example, teach one course. These faculty members are not required to publish in refereed public administration journals for reappointment and promotion. They may contribute occasionally to law reviews, public administration journals, or journals in a related discipline, however, which counts for reappointment and promotion even though it is not required. Although these faculty members are not required to have a letter from a faculty member at another university, their outside letters must include at least one from an outstanding practitioner in their field (not a North Carolina public official) or from an academic peer whose rank is at or above the rank for which the faculty member is being considered and who has expertise in the faculty member's area(s) of work.
3. A large proportion of faculty members, including most in public law, do not have direct responsibilities within the MPA program. These faculty members are not required to publish in refereed journals for reappointment and promotion, and there is no expectation that they will have a letter from an academic peer. The School's faculty members working in public law fields do not have peers in other universities doing similar work. Rather, they will typically have a letter from a practitioner with an outstanding reputation in the field (not a North Carolina public official). These faculty members may contribute occasionally to law reviews, public administration journals, or journals in a related discipline, however, which counts for reappointment and promotion even though it is not required. They may choose to have a letter from a faculty member in another department or institution, but they will do so only if they believe the person is in a good position to independently and fairly evaluate their work.

It is especially important that all outside faculty evaluators understand that the School's publications are tailored to its mission, which will likely be significantly different from the mission of the evaluator's academic unit. All evaluators must understand and appreciate the School's mission of serving North Carolina officials through engaged scholarship, and they must be able to assess the faculty member's performance in excelling at that mission.

The faculty member's advisory committee will ask the candidate for a list of at least six people who are qualified to offer a candid evaluation. The committee, with the faculty member's knowledge, may solicit evaluations from other people who are not on the list. The evaluators may include other faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who are outside the School of Government. None of the four evaluation letters may come from anyone with a relationship that might raise questions about the person's impartiality, such as someone who has co-authored a publication with the faculty member.⁴⁸ In evaluating a faculty member's advising, it is appropriate to include letters from people who have received the advising services—they may be in the best position to assess the impact and quality of the work and provide details about the nature of the work.

The final selection of outside evaluators rests with the Faculty Advisory Committee in consultation with the Senior Associate Dean. Letters to evaluators are prepared by the Director of Human Resources and signed by the Dean. The people from whom written evaluations are requested are told that their letters routinely will be read by people outside the School and that under state law, the letters will be available to the faculty member. Outside reviewers send their letters to the Director of Human Resources, who provides copies to the advisory committee chair when they are received. The committee forwards all of the evaluation letters with its final report to the Dean and to the faculty member.

Advice of Qualified Faculty on Initial Appointments, Reappointments, and Promotions

The Dean will consult with qualified faculty members on initial appointments, reappointments, and promotions as follows:⁴⁹

Initial appointments

• Initial appointments of tenure-track assistant professors and tenure-track associate professors with or without tenure: Dean consults with all tenured faculty members.
• Initial appointment of tenure-track full professors: Dean consults with tenure-track full professors.
• Initial appointments of teaching and research assistant and associate professors: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research associate professors, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.
• Initial appointments of teaching and research full professors: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.
• Initial appointments of professors of the practice: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.

Reappointments

• Reappointment of tenure-track assistant professors: Dean consults with all tenured faculty.
• Reappointment of teaching and research assistant and associate professors: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research associate professors, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.
• Reappointment of teaching and research full professors: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.
• Reappointment of professors of the practice: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.

Promotions

• Promotion to associate professor with tenure: Dean consults with all tenured faculty.⁵⁰
• Promotion to tenure-track full professor: Dean consults with tenure-track full professors.
• Promotion to teaching and research associate professor: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research associate professors, teaching and research full professors, and professors of the practice.
• Promotion to teaching and research professor: Dean consults with all tenured faculty, teaching and research professors, and professors of the practice.

Members of faculty advisory committees will be invited to attend the meeting at which their recommendation is being considered and may participate fully in the discussion, but only faculty members qualified to consult will be allowed to vote. Retired faculty members with active part-time appointments may vote. Other retired faculty members may give advice to the Dean, but they may not vote. In discussion of any appointment, reappointment, or promotion described above, the Dean may invite faculty from outside the designated reviewing group to participate if the Dean feels that will make the discussion better. Those added participants may not vote on the action.

The faculty member under review will be notified of the date and time of the meeting. The Faculty Advisory Committee's recommendation will be distributed to the qualified faculty before the meeting for consideration, and copies of the faculty member's writing and teaching materials will be made available for review. The Dean will give the faculty member a copy of the advisory committee's recommendation before the meeting, and the faculty member may respond in writing to the committee's report before the meeting. A copy of the faculty member's response will be provided before the meeting to the faculty qualified to consult.

At the meeting, the chair of the Faculty Advisory Committee and its members will have the opportunity to elaborate on the reasons for their recommendation, and the Dean will encourage a full and active discussion in order to gain the best possible advice. In order to encourage a candid assessment, the discussion and deliberations must be kept confidential. The open vote of the faculty qualified to consult is advisory to the Dean, and it must be reported to the Provost and the University's Advisory Committee on Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure. The Dean also may seek advice on a faculty member's qualification for reappointment, promotion, or tenure from anyone who has had the opportunity to observe and evaluate the candidate's professional performance.

The Senior Associate Dean will provide notice of the meeting to vote on promotion and will solicit feedback on the faculty members under consideration from any person who is eligible but unable to attend the meeting.

Faculty members have a corporate responsibility to evaluate candidates and colleagues and to advise the Dean on these appointment and promotion decisions. In many cases, faculty members will be asked to cast votes on individuals who have different fields of expertise or work in different disciplines. These differences should not interfere with a faculty member's ability to participate in the process and to review available materials in order to provide the most complete guidance to the Dean.

The Secretary of the Faculty keeps attendance for meetings that concern voting on appointment, promotion, and tenure matters. Votes are public in the meeting, rather than anonymous. Voters may vote "yes," "no," or "abstain." Individual identity is not tied to votes in reporting on the vote. Guidelines from the Provost's office require the Dean to report the vote of voting faculty group by number, including any "no" votes and abstentions. University guidelines indicate that faculty members should be required to provide reasons for "no" votes or abstentions and that the School should present and address those concerns in its recommendation about the matter.⁵¹

The Dean will make a final decision based on all available relevant information. The Dean will prepare and submit a final recommendation letter to the Provost along with the faculty member's portfolio. The Dean will meet with the faculty member to inform them of the final recommendation and will also provide the faculty member and the Faculty Advisory Committee with a copy of the recommendation letter. The Dean also will inform the faculty member about the next steps in the campus review process after the recommendation leaves the School.

Section 8. Process for Amending This Policy

This policy may be revised when necessary to reflect changes in University requirements and as deemed necessary by the Dean. Faculty members are encouraged to propose to the Dean any changes they believe will improve the policy. The Dean will consult with faculty before amending the policy unless a change is required under University policies and the School has no discretion about how it is implemented.

Appendix: Summary Table

Faculty Groups Consulted in SOG APT Actions by Type of Review

Acronyms:

• All Tenured Faculty (ATF);
• Tenure-track Full Professors (FP);
• Fixed-term Associate Professors (FAP);
• Fixed-term Full Professors (FTP);
• Professors of the Practice (PTP)

Related Requirements

External Regulations

• The Code of the Board of Governors, The University of North Carolina. 
• Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 
• Equal Opportunity Plan, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Contact Information

Primary Contact

Name: Aimee Wall, Dean

Telephone: 919-966-4107

Email: wall@sog.unc.edu