College of Arts and Sciences: Chemistry Policies on Faculty Personnel Actions

This document outlines the Department of Chemistry's standards and procedures for faculty personnel actions, including hiring, reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions for both tenure-track and fixed-term teaching faculty. It establishes the criteria by which faculty are evaluated across research, teaching, and service, and details the procedural steps required at each stage of a faculty member's career progression.

Unit Policy

Title

College of Arts and Sciences: Chemistry Policies on Faculty Personnel Actions 

Introduction

Purpose

This document outlines the Department of Chemistry's standards and procedures for faculty personnel actions, including hiring, reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions for both tenure-track and fixed-term teaching faculty. It establishes the criteria by which faculty are evaluated across research, teaching, and service, and details the procedural steps required at each stage of a faculty member's career progression.

Scope

This policy document applies to tenure-track and tenured faculty, as well as fixed-term teaching track faculty (teaching assistant professors, teaching associate professors, and teaching professors) in the Department of Chemistry at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Policy

The Department of Biomedical Engineering (BME) is a joint academic enterprise that bridges the School of Medicine and College of Arts and Sciences at UNC-Chapel Hill and the College of Engineering at N.C. State University. Faculty members have a primary academic appointment at one university. A primary appointment in Biomedical Engineering will be in either the School of Medicine or College of Arts and Sciences at UNC-Chapel Hill or in the College of Engineering at N.C. State University. Faculty members are evaluated for appointment, reappointment and promotion based on the policies of the School or College of the primary appointment.

PART I. Policies for tenure-track and tenured faculty

I. Introduction

The principal aims of the Department of Biomedical Engineering are to preserve, increase, and transmit knowledge and understanding of biomedical engineering. These aims are furthered by the scholarly activity of the faculty and by their teaching and training of undergraduate and graduate students. In hiring and promoting faculty, the Department seeks to maintain its high standards of scholarship and teaching. It also encourages service to the Department, the universities, the professional community, the state, the nation and the world; as appropriate, it also encourages engagement with groups outside academia. The Department of Biomedical Engineering 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 universities and the individuals concerned.

The mission of the Department, which embraces the threefold mission of the universities, is to "Unite engineering and medicine to improve lives". The vision of the Department is to be the leader in real-world results: faculty productivity, student accomplishment, and entrepreneurial success. The Department's values are: Innovate, Collaborate, and Translate.

The Department's policies are subject to those set forth in the following UNC-CH publications and N.C. State University policies, regulations and rules. The most recent edition of each document takes precedence.

• The Code, Board of Governors, UNC
• Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 
• The Faculty Code of University Government, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 
• Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct Including Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment, Sexual Violence, Interpersonal Violence and Stalking.
• Personnel Policies for Academic Personnel, Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor & Provost
• College of Arts & Sciences Chair’s Manual 
• Memorandum from the Dean on Peer Faculty Teaching Observations for Tenure, Promotion and Post-Tenure Review, August 21, 2012. 
• UNC-Chapel Hill: School of Medicine Guidelines for Appointment, Reappointment and Promotion
• NC STATE POL 05.20.01 - Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure 
• NC STATE RUL 05.67.308 - College of Engineering Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures 
• NC STATE REG 05.20.27 - Statements of Mutual Expectations 
• NC State Office of the Provost RPT Website 

This departmental document (identified as Rule 05.67.309 at N.C. State) is supplemental to, and subject to, the policies found in the above publications. Each faculty member has the responsibility to become familiar with their provisions as applicable.

Faculty in the Department serve both universities, but have their primary appointment in one university for reappointment, promotion and tenure and other personnel actions. The reappointment, promotion and tenure standards and policies for the Department are consistent across both universities and are processed in a consistent manner by the Department Chair and the Department voting faculty (identified as DVF at N.C. State). For N.C. State University-based faculty, dossiers are submitted from the Department to the College of Engineering (COE) RPT Committee, and for UNC-CH-based faculty, dossiers are submitted to the School of Medicine (SOM) Appointment, Promotion and Tenure (APT) Committee (and then to the University's Health Sciences Advisory Committee [HSAC]) or to the College of Arts and Sciences Advisory Committee (ASAC) as appropriate.

II. Standards

Reappointment, tenure and promotion criteria in the Department of Biomedical Engineering require unequivocal evidence of excellence commensurate with the applicable professorial rank. Furthermore, each faculty member in the joint program is expected to make substantial contributions to the teaching missions. The Department, its School or College and the two universities continually aspire to enhance their academic stature. Such stature is achieved primarily through the continual recruitment, development, and retention of outstanding faculty.

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 candidate makes a compelling case that his or her record meets the standards for the rank being sought. 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, School, College and relevant university for the services that he or she, as a scholar-teacher 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, teaching excellence and a commitment to service are important areas of evaluation of faculty by the Department of Biomedical Engineering. 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 and interdisciplinarity.

As public universities, 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 N.C. State University, and outside the usual spheres of professional academic work. Such activities typically take the form of collaborative interactions, include partners outside the two universities, 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 our 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 Biomedical Engineering should, therefore, regularly evaluate this changing landscape. Candidates for promotion or tenure 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.

General Standards. The following standards will be employed in evaluations for reappointment, promotion, and tenure:

Each faculty member is expected to work in a manner that respects the value of scholarship and academic discourse, diversity, and mutual understanding.

1. A demonstrated commitment to, and achievement of, research excellence is required for consideration for tenure and/or promotions in rank. Evidence of research excellence must accompany each positive recommendation for promotion. One standard to be considered is the number of substantive works accepted for publication through a peer review process.

   The evaluation of quality as well as quantity of research for reappointment, promotion and/or tenure must be applied with judgment since there may be substantial variation among refereed works in terms of their contribution to the academic and professional community. The quality of the work itself and the quality and prestige of the journal or other media in which the work appears are factors to be considered. Most of the published works should be in the candidate's field, broadly defined, and some should be in professional or academic journals recognized to be of high quality.

   Papers presented at professional meetings and research grant proposals will also be considered. The quality and quantity of unpublished working papers, manuscripts, and grant proposals is an important element in assessing a candidate's continuing commitment to scholarly activities. This is particularly relevant for decisions regarding tenure. Activities such as membership on editorial boards of refereed journals, serving as a referee, assisting colleagues with their research activities, and other contributions to the scholarly life of the department will also be considered.

2. 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. Evidence of teaching excellence must accompany each positive recommendation for promotion. The assessment of teaching quality will be based on student evaluations and peer reviews. Papers presented at education conferences and published in engineering journals as well as textbooks will also be considered. In addition, grant funding in engineering education will be considered as evidence of teaching excellence.
3. 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. Evidence of service in professional societies and within the university should accompany each positive recommendation for promotion.

A. Standards of Research

The Department of Biomedical Engineering expects its faculty to be actively involved throughout their careers in achieving scholarly research excellence and in related activities that advance the field. 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 Biomedical Engineering 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. The Department of Biomedical Engineering insists on regarding quality of publication as more important than quantity.

Engaged scholarship refers to research on projects that include collaborative interactions with partners outside the universities and outside the usual spheres of professional academic work. In order to satisfy the criterion for engaged scholarship, the faculty member's work must meet rigorous standards. In our Department, the criteria for evaluating the quality of engaged scholarship include external competitive funding, publication of findings in peer-reviewed journals, and evaluations by experts in the field.

The Department of Biomedical Engineering 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, rigorous peer reviews or other evaluation by experts in the area. The overall quality and contribution of the work must be measured against the universities' 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. All faculty in the Department of Biomedical Engineering possess interdisciplinary interests so that all engineering and medically related work are generally considered. 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 a faculty member's scholarly work shall encompass work across the units of appointment and related interdisciplinary work, assessed by appropriate high standards.

Recognizing the important role that biomedical engineering plays in bringing new technological advances to the healthcare professions, evidence of success in translational research will also be valued in reappointment, promotion and tenure (RPT) decisions. BME faculty who collaborate in multidisciplinary teams to identify new medical applications for their research discoveries are encouraged to include industrial support, invention disclosures, patent applications, issued patents, licensed patents, commercialization activities, startup companies, and the like in their RPT portfolios/dossiers.

B. Standards of Teaching

The Department of Biomedical Engineering 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, direct theses and dissertations, and serve on committees that critically examine and evaluate such research projects. In short, the Department expects colleagues to be 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 two universities.

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. Such endeavors greatly enhance the intellectual life of the two universities 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 transcend the Department and unit boundaries; undergraduate, graduate and post-doctoral mentoring; and involvement in cross-disciplinary learning experiences outside the two universities. As with all forms of teaching, rigorous standards of evaluation should be applied.

C. 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, and participation in professional association activities. Associate professors with tenure and 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 expertise and include interactions with groups and projects outside the professional and scholarly organizations of academia. In the Department of Biomedical Engineering, we value engaged service related to the faculty member's professional expertise, such as industry consulting.

Groups and communities increasingly connect and identify themselves through online resources, electronic networks, virtual spaces and social media. Therefore, in the Department of Biomedical Engineering, faculty service involving digital technologies may be recognized as an important contribution to academic life and to communities outside the two universities. Candidates for promotion or tenure should help articulate the nature of their contribution in this area.

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 Biomedical Engineering, 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 two universities shall be considered in recommending initial appointments, reappointments, promotions to associate professor with tenure, and promotion to full professor.

A. Instructor

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. The UNC-Chapel candidate's appointment is at the rank of Instructor with Special Provision who will be appointed for an initial probationary term of one year, renewable for three additional successive one-year terms, for a total of four years. The N.C. State University candidate's appointment is at the rank of Instructor who will be appointed for an initial probationary term of one year and may be reappointed to one additional probationary one year term, for a total of two years.

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 completion of all requirements for the doctorate or other terminal degree and the degree's conferral are required. Reappointment at the rank of assistant professor requires that the individual is making satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure.

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, (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 each university's policy, tenure is a permanent commitment by the Department, the School or College and the university that makes the appointment. 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 teaching, the Department remains very much concerned, in questions of tenure, that a person show promise of continuing achievement in all three areas: research, teaching, and service. A recommendation for promotion and/or tenure by the Department Chair requires a careful assessment informed by external references about the qualifications of the candidate and 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:

1. The candidate must have demonstrated achievement of research excellence, through the development of an ongoing research and graduate training program and through scholarly contribution(s) of demonstrable value to the field of inquiry or to biomedical engineering. The candidate must also have demonstrated commitment to continued research excellence.
2. The candidate must have demonstrated commitment to teaching excellence and must have achieved excellence in one or more types of teaching.
3. 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.

Promotion to associate professor may only occur with tenure and will be evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across the faculty member's contributions in the areas of research, teaching and service. In general, the expectation is that a faculty member will have demonstrated the potential to achieve national or international recognition for the faculty member's contributions.

The Department will decide whether to recommend tenure following an initial appointment as probationary associate professor on the basis of the criteria outlined above for promotion to associate professor. 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 outlined above. Such an appointment in the College of Arts and Sciences requires written approval of the Dean.

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 external references about the qualifications of the candidate and the professional judgment of the full professors.

In evaluating past performance, present achievements, and promise for the future, the following factors will be considered:

1. The candidate must have a record of sustained research and high quality publication and distinctive achievements to have gained significant recognition in the field nationally, and if appropriate, internationally.
2. The candidate must have demonstrated commitment to, and achievement of, teaching excellence.
3. 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.

Promotion to the rank of professor will be evaluated for each faculty member with an appropriate and individual integration across the faculty member's contributions in the areas of research, teaching, and service. In general, the expectation is that a faculty member will have achieved national or international recognition for the faculty member's contributions in scholarship and leadership.

E. Full Joint Tenure-Track and Tenured Appointments

In order to be recommended for a joint tenure-track or tenured appointment in the Department of Biomedical Engineering, 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 Biomedical Engineering is an honor and not a right or extended as a courtesy. The projected needs and resources of the departments and the universities 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) appointment in another.

F. General Recruiting Procedures

The Department of Biomedical Engineering follows recruiting policies and procedures for each university and School or College as applicable.

IV. Summary of Procedural Steps in Appointments, Reappointments and Promotion (not applicable for fixed-term appointments)

Policies identified here are supplemental to, and subject to, the policies found in the most recent versions of the publications listed in the Introduction.

Letters of recommendation. External letters of evaluation constitute an important part of the appointment, promotion and tenure packet. A minimum of four letters of evaluation is required for UNC-CH faculty. A minimum of five letters is required at N.C. State University and if fewer are received, the Chair must explain why. It is the practice of the Department of Biomedical Engineering to request at least six letters for promotion and tenure cases.

For appointments of assistant professors or instructors, these letters should be preferably from outside the institution, and also preferably from 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 external letters of evaluation be from outside the institution, and that all be from individuals independent of the candidate. Three of the six letters must be from a list of names provided by the candidate and three of the six from individuals selected by the Department Chair or faculty group. Ideally, all of the letters should come from individuals at research universities with very high research activity (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 institutions), the Chair's letter 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 external letters of evaluation should be phrased neutrally and should not solicit an affirmative response or recommendation.

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 required independent letters, any number of additional letters from any responsible source 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. Any letters from faculty members at one of the two universities on behalf of an individual at the other university would be considered internal rather than external.

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 external letter should have a designation indicating whether the writer of the letter was suggested by the candidate or was chosen by the Department Chair or faculty group.

The dossier. The Department of Biomedical Engineering will employ the guide provided by the UNC-Chapel Hill Appointments, Promotion and Tenure Committee of the University or the RPT dossier format requirements of N.C. State University in completing the candidate's dossier for review for faculty reappointments, promotions and tenure as applicable.

Notification. Untenured assistant and associate professors should be notified in writing at least three months prior to the start of the mandatory review (not required if primary appointment is at NC State). Tenured associate professors are notified at least six months prior to the start of their scheduled post-tenure review and may seek promotion to professor on the same schedule. 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 voting faculty (DVF). 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.

The Departmental Voting Faculty (DVF) is comprised of tenured members of the departmental faculty. The actual composition of the DVF is case and university dependent. For cases of faculty being reviewed who have their primary appointment at N.C. State, the following provisions exist: if the faculty member being reviewed holds the rank of associate professor, the DVF is comprised of all tenured professors; if the faculty member holds the rank of assistant professor, the DVF is comprised of all tenured associate professors and all tenured professors. For cases of faculty being reviewed who have their primary appointment at UNC-CH, the DVF is always the tenured professors for School of Medicine faculty. For BME appointments in the College of Arts and Sciences, in addition to the full professors, the BME tenured associate professors also vote on recommendations for reappointment of assistant professors and promotion of assistant professors to associate professor with tenure.

In the College of Arts and Sciences, 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. At N.C. State, if the number of voting faculty members is fewer than three, the Chair, in consultation with the DVF, the individual being reviewed, and others as appropriate, shall request that the Dean appoint faculty members from allied departments in such number as to provide a group of three members to serve as the DVF for the case.

For each promotion case, the Department Chair appoints an ad hoc committee of approximately three DVF members each of whom are above the rank of the faculty member being reviewed. This ad hoc committee works with the candidate to facilitate preparation of the candidate's dossier and supporting information. While the ad hoc committee advises the candidate, the final preparation of the candidate's credentials and supporting information is the candidate's sole responsibility.

At UNC-Chapel Hill, the promotion package should include: CV, teaching, research (reflective), and service statements, teaching evaluations, letters of recommendations, and four representative publications. At N.C. State, the RPT dossier contains a statement of mutual expectations, brief resume, teaching and mentoring activities, and sections for scholarship, extension, innovation, service, and external letters of recommendation.

The ad hoc committee consults with the candidate to identify the names of appropriate reviewers to be selected by the candidate. The ad hoc committee members work with the Department Chair and other faculty at the two universities to identify additional external reviewers. The number of external reviewers will be chosen to meet guidelines of the university at which the candidate is based. The external reviewers will be asked to assess the candidate's scholarly and professional contributions.

The ad hoc committee reviews and becomes familiar with the candidate's dossier and contributions. The ad hoc committee typically provides an overview of the candidate's contributions to initiate the DVF discussion. The ad hoc committee, however, is not to make a recommendation regarding the action being considered during this overview.

External reviewers' letters are made available to the DVF prior to and during the DVF discussion. If some external letters requested by the chair have not yet been obtained prior to the discussion, the DVF may choose to delay the discussion or vote until additional external letters are received. In any case, all letters received are made available for review by the DVF, and all letters become part of the dossier.

The ad hoc committee for each candidate under consideration drafts a written summary assessment of the candidate that captures the major issues raised during the DVF discussion and the range of opinions regarding the quality and impact of the contributions of the candidate. The draft is made available to all members of the DVF so that they may read it and make comments over a period of approximately 2 to 3 days. The ad hoc committee then finalizes the written summary assessment that then becomes part of their candidate's dossier. The dossier remains available for review by any DVF member until the departmental RPT process is concluded.

The Chair writes an independent assessment and makes a recommendation or decision. For SOM, the review includes discussion by the full and tenured associate professors (DVF) with the Chair's assessment including the vote of the full professors only. For N.C. State and the College of Arts and Sciences, the vote by rank of the full and tenured associate professors will be included. At N.C. State the DVF assessment and the Chair's assessment and recommendation are provided to the candidate who may write a response for inclusion in the package submitted to the College of Engineering. In the School of Medicine or the College of Arts and Sciences, the candidate is not provided these assessments at this time for the purpose of a possible written response.

At N.C. State, the DVF discussions are typically held in a series of meetings during the fall semester. The overall timetable is carried out to meet the schedule set by the N.C. State Offices of the Dean and the Provost. The Department and College process usually begins in September and is completed by mid-December. At the School of Medicine, RPT cases are processed continually during the calendar year. At the College of Arts and Sciences, RPT cases are processed during the academic calendar year according to the schedule set by the College and based on when the faculty are hired – July 1 or January 1.

A given case is discussed during one or more DVF meetings until the DVF is ready to vote. When the DVF votes on a RPT case, votes will be counted for all members present; any DVP member who cannot be present may inform the Chair of how he/she would have voted if present but that does not constitute a reportable vote except at N.C. State. Any DVF member who does not participate in the vote will be recorded as missing and the Department Chair will explain the absence in his/her assessment that is submitted to the dean.

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.

A. Assistant Professor

Tenure-track Assistant Professors (Third-Year Reviews). Initial appointment to the rank of assistant professor is for a probationary term of four years. At N.C. State, depending on the appointment date, the initial probationary appointment may be for no fewer than 3.5 years and no greater than 4.5 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.

The Department's assembled voting faculty (DVF) shall review the assistant professor's scholarship, teaching, and service and vote on a recommendation. External letters of evaluation are not required for reappointment. The Chair consults the DVF before acting upon a recommendation. At N.C. State, in the College of Arts and Sciences and School of Medicine, that discussion is followed by a vote of the assembled full professors and tenured associate professors regarding the proposed reappointment. In the School of Medicine, only the vote of the assembled full professors is reported. At UNC-CH, the faculty's vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends reappointment or decides against reappointment. At NC State the Chair's statement to reappoint or not to reappoint is transmitted to the College along with the DVF statement and vote.

If the Chair (with the Dean's agreement at NC State) 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, 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" or N.C. State POL 05.25.01 - Faculty Grievance and Non-Reappointment Review Policy

Review for Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure

Assistant professors are reviewed during their sixth year for promotion to associate professor with tenure or non-reappointment.

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 both universities, and is eligible to be reviewed for promotion on the same schedule.

The Department's assembled voting faculty (DVF) shall review the assistant professor's scholarship, teaching, and service and vote on a recommendation. External letters of evaluation are required for promotion to associate professor with tenure. The Chair consults the DVF before acting upon a recommendation. In the School of Medicine and in the College of Arts and Sciences and at N.C. State, that discussion is followed by a vote of the full professors and tenured associate professors regarding the proposed promotion to associate professor with tenure as specified previously. At UNC SOM only the vote of the assembled full professors is reported. At UNC-CH, the faculty's vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends promotion to associate professor with tenure or decides against reappointment. At NC State the Chair's statement, whether supportive of the recommendation or against, is transmitted to the College along with the DVF statement and vote.

Negative Decisions.

In the College of Arts and Sciences and School of Medicine, 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 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." In the College of Arts and Sciences, the faculty member may, if necessary, also have an administrative conference with the Dean.

At N.C. State a probationary assistant professor who is notified of a terminal appointment or a non-reappointment shall be granted upon request an interview with the Department Chair to discuss the decision. The faculty member shall also upon request be granted a subsequent interview with the Dean to discuss the decision. After these interviews, if the faculty member believes the decision not to reappoint was based upon other appeal rights as defined and prohibited by N.C. STATE POL 05.25.01 - Faculty Grievance and Non-Reappointment Review Policy.

B. Associate Professor, Full Professor, and Post-Tenure Review

Untenured Associate Professor. At UNC-CH initial appointment to the rank of untenured associate professor is for the probationary term of five years. At N.C. State an initial appointment to the rank of untenured associate professor may be for one probationary appointment not to exceed five years. An untenured associate professor is reviewed no later than the year prior to the appointment end date 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.

The Department's assembled voting faculty (DVF) shall review the untenured associate professor's scholarship, teaching, and service and vote on a recommendation. External letters of evaluation are required for an appointment which confers tenure. The Chair consults the DVF before acting upon a recommendation. At UNC-CH, 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). At NC State the Chair's statement, whether supportive of the recommendation or against, is transmitted to the College along with the DVF statement and vote.

Full Professor. An associate professor who has completed a probationary term and has been reappointed at the same rank with tenure must be reviewed every five years to meet the post-tenure review requirement of each university, and is eligible to be reviewed for possible promotion to full professor on the same schedule.

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.

The Department's assembled voting faculty (DVF) shall review the tenured associate professor's scholarship, teaching, and service and vote on a recommendation. External letters of evaluation are required for promotion to full professor. The Chair consults the DVF before acting upon a recommendation. The faculty's vote is advisory to the Chair, who either recommends promotion to full professor or decides against promotion.

Out of cycle reviews. In the College of Arts and Sciences, if a tenured associate professor, with the concurrence of the Department, wishes to be considered for review for 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 full professors believe that not enough has been done to warrant consideration for promotion, the Chair has the right to recommend denying the request for the out of cycle review on the advice of the full professors. The Chair must give the reasons for recommending denial of the out-of-cycle review and communicate these reasons to the faculty member in writing.

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 N.C. General Assembly that a system of periodic review of the performance of tenured faculty be implemented. Our Department has a separate set of post-tenure review policies. Post-tenure review applies to all tenured faculty, except as otherwise specified by either university or School or College policy with regard to its timing for faculty who are department chairs, senior associate deans, and deans.

C. Faculty Annual Review

The Department Chair performs evaluations of all faculty-tenured, tenure-track and non-tenure-track-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 faculty member may provide a written response a copy of which also becomes part of the 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. In the College of Arts and Sciences 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

Instructions regarding completion of this Part II will be provided at a later date.

---

Department of Biomedical Engineering Procedures Governing the Promotion of a Teaching Assistant Professor to Teaching Associate Professor

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.

In the Department of Biomedical Engineering, evidence of distinguished teaching may include: a university teaching award, consistent teaching evaluations in the top 10% of the department, 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 Biomedical Engineering, 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 engagements at other institutions of higher learning, service through Carolina Speakers Bureau.

Procedure for unit review of candidates for Teaching Associate Professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering

Only a teaching assistant professor who has completed a minimum of six consecutive years of full-time (1 FTE) service in the Department of Biomedical Engineering is eligible to be considered for promotion to teaching associate professor. Teaching assistant professors who meet this minimum eligibility requirement must be provided a copy of these guidelines and should be notified in writing at least three months prior to the scheduled department review.

A candidate eligible for promotion to teaching associate professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering 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:

1. the candidate's current curriculum vitae;
2. the candidate's statement of teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research activities;
3. documentation of the candidate's teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research activities;
4. list of courses taught by year for the past five years, ,
5. evidence of distinguished teaching and service;
6. 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.
7. 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.

If your department requires or allows any additional materials to be submitted in the dossier, please specify what they are.

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 a written report concerning each candidate for promotion to teaching associate 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 in the tenure track. 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 associate professor. For promotion to teaching associate professor, all tenured and tenure track faculty may vote, as well as any 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, and if applicable, research 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.

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).

Voting Information

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.

UNC Faculty Code Definition of Voting Rights of Fixed-Term Faculty

Members of the school or departmental faculty who are members of the voting faculty as defined in Section 1-4 of the Faculty Code are eligible to vote in faculty meetings, except that fixed term faculty are not eligible to vote on tenure-track appointments, reappointments or promotions. [Amended March 18, 2011]

Fixed Term Faculty Voting eligibility as defined in Section 1-4 of the Faculty Code

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,
• 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.

Department of Biomedical Engineering Procedures Governing the Promotion of a Teaching Associate Professor to Teaching Professor

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 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 Biomedical Engineering, 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 Biomedical Engineering, 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.

Procedure for unit review of candidates for Teaching Professor in the Department of Department of Biomedical Engineering

Only a teaching associate professor who has completed a minimum of six consecutive years of full-time (1 FTE) service in the Department of Biomedical Engineering is eligible to be considered for promotion to teaching professor. Teaching associate professors who meet this minimum eligibility requirement must be provided a copy of these guidelines and should be notified in writing at least three months prior to the scheduled department review.

A candidate eligible for promotion to teaching professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering 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:

1. the candidate's current curriculum vitae;
2. the candidate's statement of teaching and service, and if applicable, a statement of research;
3. documentation of the candidate's teaching and service activities, and if applicable, research activities;
4. List of courses taught by year for the past five years;
5. evidence of distinguished teaching and service;
6. 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.
7. 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 written 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, and if applicable, research 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 a College unit requires permission from the appropriate 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).

Voting Information

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.

UNC Faculty Code Definition of Voting Rights of Fixed-Term Faculty

Members of the school or departmental faculty who are members of the voting faculty as defined in Section 1-4 of the Faculty Code are eligible to vote in faculty meetings, except that fixed term faculty are not eligible to vote on tenure-track appointments, reappointments or promotions. [Amended March 18, 2011]

Fixed Term Faculty Voting eligibility as defined in Section 1-4 of the Faculty Code

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,
• 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.

• The Code, Board of Governors, UNC
• Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 
• The Faculty Code of University Government, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 
• Policy on Prohibited Discrimination, Harassment and Related Misconduct Including Sexual and Gender-Based Harassment, Sexual Violence, Interpersonal Violence and Stalking.
• Personnel Policies for Academic Personnel, Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor & Provost
• UNC-Chapel Hill: School of Medicine Guidelines for Appointment, Reappointment and Promotion
• NC STATE POL 05.20.01 - Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure 
• NC STATE RUL 05.67.308 - College of Engineering Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures 
• NC STATE REG 05.20.27 - Statements of Mutual Expectations 
• NC State Office of the Provost RPT Website 

Unit Policies, Standards, and Procedures

• College of Arts & Sciences Chair’s Manual 
• Memorandum from the Dean on Peer Faculty Teaching Observations for Tenure, Promotion and Post-Tenure Review, August 21, 2012. 

Contact Information

Primary Contact

Name: James Cahoon, Chair

Email: chemchair@unc.edu