Â鶹ӳ»­

These Bylaws of the Department of Sociology are authorized by Section 2.1.1 of the Bylaws of the Â鶹ӳ»­.

These Bylaws provide for and articulate the organization and administrative structure of the department and the department policies and procedures. These Bylaws shall be consistent with and subordinate to the College of Liberal Arts (CLA) Bylaws, the University Bylaws, and the NSHE Code; in the event of a conflict, the superior authority governs.

These Bylaws shall be adopted when they have been approved by a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot of the regular faculty of the Department of Sociology and approved by the dean of the College of Liberal Arts.

Any regular faculty member may propose an amendment to the Bylaws by submitting it in writing to the chair. After a department meeting to discuss the proposed change, the chair shall submit the proposed amendment to a vote of the faculty using a secret ballot with two working weeks’ notice. Proposed amendments to the Bylaws of the Department of Sociology are adopted when they have been approved by a two-thirds majority vote of the regular faculty and by written approval of the dean of College of Liberal Arts.

Questions of interpretation of these Bylaws shall be directed to the appropriate standing committee or to an ad-hoc Bylaws committee, which shall review the question and forward its recommendations to the chair for a decision. The chair shall make his or her decision upon appropriate consultation and in a manner consistent with the NSHE Code and established university and college policies and procedures.

The Department of Sociology, a unit of the School of Social Research and Justice Studies of the College of Liberal Arts, is committed to excellence in teaching, research, and service in the best tradition of a liberal arts education. The department prides itself in providing a quality education to its majors, minors and graduate students. It is also committed to serving the larger university community by participation in such programs as the Silver Core Curriculum.

As part of a research-oriented discipline, the department is committed to the production of new knowledge. This goal is accomplished by ongoing faculty research, supervision of graduate and undergraduate student theses, directing independent research, and critically evaluating past research in order to contribute and to provide alternative theoretical schemes.

The department is committed to the transmission of knowledge, both old and new, within the context of a liberal arts tradition. The teaching functions of the department are carried out in many diverse but complementary fashions; classroom and on-line instruction, tutorials, internships, reading groups, discussion groups, informal discussion and debate, assignment of supervised projects, supervised independent reading, counseling of students, and serving on student committees. Within this liberal arts tradition, the department views one of its major functions to be that of providing the student with alternative ways of interpreting social processes. Our commitment is to both graduate and undergraduate education. We view sociology as a discipline that requires scientific rigor in the critical analysis of societal processes.

As a service unit, the department contributes in several different ways. Foremost, of course, are the teaching and research functions. Through their intimate relations with each other, teaching and research provide the basis for addressing old problems from new perspectives; they also provide the possibility for examining novel problems from perspectives, which are critical of preconceived solutions. In other words, some of our major bases for service center on the production of knowledge and provisions for creative and critical dialogue, which inform outreach activities of the department. Several areas of contribution for these professional services are: engaging in college and university committee work, and providing service to various governmental, civic, and professional groups.

The faculty of the department may include regular faculty, contingent faculty, and adjunct faculty.

1. Regular Faculty

   Regular faculty members hold state-funded, continuing positions as defined in Section 2.3.3 of the university bylaws. Regular faculty members may be on academic or administrative contracts. All regular faculty must occupy a .50 or more position within the department. Members of the sociology faculty may hold joint appointments in other divisions or departments of the Â鶹ӳ»­ System of Higher Education in accordance with UAM 2,572 and provided that all arrangements are made with the full knowledge and consent of the Department of Sociology and the dean of the College of Liberal Arts.

   The academic faculty include tenure-track, rank I, and non-tenure track faculty. The tenure-track faculty is composed of three (3) ranks: Professor (IV), Associate Professor (III), and Assistant Professor (II), in accordance with the university bylaws section 2.3.3 (1)(a). Rank I for Instructor is reserved for academic faculty who have been hired for a tenure-track position but have yet to complete the appropriate degree required by the position. Non-tenure-track faculty (zero rank) are hired at rank 0(IV), 0(III), 0(II), and 0(I).

   The administrative faculty are executive faculty, supervisory faculty, or support faculty as defined by the Board of Regents, Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 2 whose primary duties involve services to students, faculty, or administrators. Administrative faculty grades are defined in section 2.3.2 (b) and 2.3.3 (2) of the university bylaws.

2. Contingent Faculty

   Contingent Faculty (zero rank) hold contracts of up to one year that may be funded from state, research, or other sources. These contracts may be “renewable contingent upon funding” (RCUF).

3. Adjunct Faculty

   Adjunct Faculty are persons qualified to provide special services to the University and who receive no compensation from the University (as defined in university bylaws section 2.3.6), shall not vote in the college or in any of the departments within the college.

   “Letter of appointment” contracts may be created for special appointments to meet academic or administrative needs. Letters of appointment may be made for teaching, research, and other professional employment activity to augment regular faculty positions. They are issued only for clearly defined duties that are part-time and/or temporary. Unless otherwise stated, the provisions of these bylaws shall exclude letters of appointment (University bylaws 2.3.2).

1. The Director of the School of Social Research and Justice Studies

   The director of the School of Social Research and Justice Studies is responsible to the dean of the College of Liberal Arts for advancing the mission of the school. In this capacity, the director is the reporting authority between department chairs and the dean. The director is responsible to the faculty of the school for executing approved faculty actions. The director advises the dean in the annual evaluation process (in accordance with CLA Bylaws section 20) through the review of all annual evaluations submitted by the faculty of the school. The director shall also advise the dean on the tenure and/or promotion evaluation of the school’s faculty. Should a department chair at the rank of Associate Professor (III) apply for promotion to the rank of Professor (IV), the director shall assume the responsibilities of the chair for that particular case. Additional duties of the director include coordinating and facilitating research and grant acquisitions. The director is also charged with coordinating and developing curriculum and interdisciplinary degree programs within the school. As such, the constituent departments of SSRJS shall involve the director in all processes involving curricular development and new program design as the approval authority who shall present curricular and program proposals for approval by the dean of the college.

2. The Chair
   1. Responsibilities of the Chair

      The chair of the department shall be responsible to the director of the School of Social Research & Justice Studies (henceforth ‘the director of the school’) and the dean of the College of Liberal Arts for implementing college policies and procedures, and responsible to faculty for implementing policies and procedures mandated by department bylaws. The chair of the department shall serve as adviser to the director of the school and the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and provide liaison between these individuals and the faculty. The chair of the department will inform faculty of actions taken by the director of the school, the dean, and the Council of Chairs and Directors, and inform the director of the school and dean of actions taken by department faculty. The chair of the department shall take a leadership role in serving on the Council of Chairs and Directors and be responsible for the advancement of the department missions and goals as identified in the department long-range planning document. The chair shall be an ex-officio member of all department committees, except those that evaluate the chair of the department’s performance as a faculty member or as a chair of the department.

   2. Authority of the chair

      In order to expedite the routine duties of a chair of the department, the chair shall have the authority to perform or delegate the following duties:

      • Administering department funds and accounts
      • Providing information in a timely matter to all regular faculty on the operating budget, instructional funding request, and other major departmental expenditures
      • Eliciting faculty input on budget priorities and major expenditures
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating classified staff
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating temporary (non-continuing) faculty
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating student workers and graduate assistants
      • Preparing semester and summer school class schedules in consultation with individual instructors
      • Maintaining and securing departmental personnel files of continuing faculty
      • Managing and assigning department office and classroom space and facilities
      • Managing the assignment of departmental administrative responsibilities with individual continuing faculty

      The department chair’s executive authority shall be limited. The chair’s decisions on issues not specifically noted above shall require consultation and recommendations from the regular faculty as provided for in these bylaws. However, the chair is required to issue separate decisions on annual evaluations, merit, promotion, and tenure. Issues requiring faculty recommendations include but are not limited to:

      • Recommendations for hiring full or part-time continuing faculty
      • Recommendations on annual evaluations and merit recommendations
      • Recommendations on the reappointment, promotion and tenure of continuing faculty including probationary faculty in their third year
      • Recommendations on curriculum (courses and academic programs)
      • Recommendations for long-term and strategic planning
   3. Term of Service

      The chair shall serve for a term of three years.

   4. Eligibility

      All regular tenured faculty are eligible to run for election for the position of department chair, including the incumbent chair.

   5. Election of the chair

      Nominations: In February of the final semester of a chair’s three-year term, all regular faculty will be solicited for nominations for chair, including self-nominations, to be submitted anonymously to the department administrative assistant (AA) by the second Monday of the month. The AA will check with eligible nominees to determine their willingness to serve. By the first Monday of March, the AA shall then provide the faculty via email with the name(s) of faculty who will run for election for chair. In the event that no eligible faculty member is willing to run for election, the chair will inform the dean.

      Election procedures: In addition to the procedures outlined below in 11.B. the following procedures will apply to the election of a department chair. An election by secret ballot shall occur during a March faculty meeting. At that meeting, two regular faculty members shall be randomly selected, one to read the votes aloud and the second to record the votes on the whiteboard. The nominee who wins a simple majority of the votes cast shall be recommended to the dean. If no nominee obtains a majority vote, another election by secret written ballot between the two nominees who received the most votes shall be conducted, as above. To break a tie, another election by secret written ballot shall be conducted, as above. If the tie holds, the dean shall be informed of the tie.

   6. Vacancy prior to expiration of the chair’s term

      Should a vacancy occur before the normal expiration of the chair of the department’s term of office, the regular faculty shall meet as an advisory committee to assist the director of the school and the dean of the college in selecting an interim chair of the department.

   7. Interim Chair

      An interim chair of the department can be appointed by the dean on an annual basis until a permanent chair of the department has been selected. A permanent chair of the department should be selected as soon as a willing and qualified candidate is available.

   8. Temporary assumption of authority of the chair

      Should the chair of the department be temporarily absent, the chair of the department shall designate another faculty member with signature authority and notify the dean’s office.

   9. Removal from office of the chair

      The chair of the department’s removal from office for cause may be recommended to the director of the school and the dean of the college at any time by simple majority vote of the regular faculty in the department. A meeting shall be called for a vote if 1/3 or more of faculty not including the chair agree to convene it. The vote will occur at that meeting of the regular faculty in the absence of the chair. This meeting will be chaired by a senior faculty member. The department’s recommendation for removal of the chair of the department is subject to the approval of the director of the school, the dean of the college, and the president.

   10. Evaluation of the chair

       The chair shall be evaluated annually upon submitting the annual chair’s report that is due on the same date as the annual evaluation. A tenured faculty member (who can but does not need to be a member of the personnel committee) shall circulate the chair’s report and solicit anonymous feedback identifying the chair’s strengths and areas for improvement. That faculty member shall create a written summary of feedback for the personnel committee and a draft of the chair’s evaluation letter. The draft will be finalized by the personnel committee, shared with the chair, and submitted by the committee chair to the dean.

3. The Director of Graduate Studies

   The director of graduate studies (DGS) shall be appointed by the chair for a term of three years to direct the graduate program in sociology. The DGS shall have responsibility for implementing the graduate program in sociology in alignment with the policies of the Graduate School, including but not limited to student recruitment, admissions, advisement, curriculum development, and assessment. The DGS shall chair the graduate program committee. The DGS shall have the authority to admit students to the graduate program based on recommendations of the Graduate Program Committee. The DGS shall make recommendations to the chair for allocation of departmental graduate student funding such as teaching assistantship positions. The DGS shall work with other units on campus on matters of mutual interest related to the graduate program.

4. The Director of Undergraduate Studies

   The director of undergraduate studies (DUS)shall be appointed by the chair for a term of three years to direct the undergraduate program in Sociology. The director of undergraduate studies (DUS) shall have responsibility for implementing the undergraduate program in Sociology. The DUS shall chair the undergraduate program committee.

5. Associate Chair

   The chair may appoint an associate chair to assist the chair in conducting department business. The term and responsibilities of the associate chair shall be determined by the chair in consultation with the associate chair and shall be presented in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by both the chair and the associate chair, which shall be shared with all regular faculty in the department. The MOU will be represented in the role statement of the associate chair. The associate chair shall be evaluated annually by the chair who will write a letter describing the evaluation to the CLA dean. If both the associate chair and the chair agree, the chair will train the associate chair for a potential future leadership position in the department.

The department chair will appoint standing and ad hoc committees to assist him or her in supervising certain areas of the department's responsibilities. The chair will be an ex-officio, non-voting member of all committees.

1. The Graduate Program Committee

   The graduate program committee is responsible for advising and assisting the director of graduate studies (DGS) in all matters related to the sociology graduate program including but not limited to student recruitment, admissions, advisement, curriculum development, and assessment. The committee consists of three members appointed by the department chair: the DGS who chairs the committee, and two members of the regular faculty.

2. The Undergraduate Program Committee

   The undergraduate program committee shall be responsible for reviewing the department’s undergraduate degree programs, course offerings, policies, and procedures; for assessing the undergraduate program; for administering the department’s undergraduate scholarships and awards; and for making recommendations to the faculty concerning these and related issues. The undergraduate program committee shall consist of at least three members appointed by the department chair including the director of undergraduate studies (DUS) who chairs the committee, two members of the regular faculty, and the undergraduate adviser.

3. The Personnel Committee
   1. Selection of the Personnel Committee

      The personnel committee shall be composed of three regular tenured faculty. Two will be elected by the regular faculty, one to serve a three-year term and the other a two-year term. These terms will be staggered to produce continuity of membership. A third member of the committee will be appointed annually by the department chair. Terms on the personnel committee follow the calendar year, beginning in January and ending in December. The length of term of those elected will be decided by the number of votes received, with the person receiving the highest number of votes getting the longest term. In the event of a tie vote, the length of the term shall be decided by a coin toss.

      All regular tenured faculty are expected to serve on the personnel committee although faculty may opt out in a given year owing to other obligations after consultation with the chair. If a member of the regular faculty is serving as director of the SSRJS, that person is not eligible to serve on the personnel committee.

   2. Responsibilities of the Personnel Committee

      The primary responsibility of the personnel committee is to assist the chair in the annual evaluation of regular faculty and in matters related to tenure and/or promotion of faculty. The personnel committee shall advise the chair on all other personnel matters as needed.

      The personnel committee shall assist the chair in the annual evaluations and merit rankings of the department regular faculty members. Annual evaluations provide an opportunity to acknowledge the achievement of excellence and the hard work and commitment required for such achievement. The committee shall review Part I of the annual evaluations of department faculty members and prepare Part II of the evaluations, including rating of faculty in each category of teaching, research and service. The evaluation in all areas, including the overall evaluation, shall be determined by majority vote of the personnel committee.

      The committee's recommendations are advisory to the chair. The chair makes the final determination, meeting with faculty and the committee if necessary, and forwards those recommendations to the dean. The committee shall consult with and advise the chair on recommendations for the distribution of merit and review and make recommendations on requests by faculty members for reconsideration of an evaluation.

      Members of the personnel committee recuse themselves from discussion of their case. In the event of requests by regular faculty members for reconsideration of an evaluation, the chair and the individual faculty member shall discuss the matter and handle the reconsideration of the evaluation according to relevant bylaw provisions for the CLA and Code.

      The personnel committee is responsible for thoroughly and fairly evaluating a person's performance over the past calendar year and should limit their evaluation to that year. Evaluators should apply the same standards for all faculty. In keeping with the tool kit provided by the Â鶹ӳ»­ Department of Human Resources, evaluators should follow these principles:

      • Avoid "permanent halo or doghouse" effects by focusing on the current evaluation year rather than recalling past performances
      • Single aspects of a faculty member's performance should not determine their entire rating
      • All judgments must be supported by evidence
      • Evaluation requires more than description: An analysis of the relevant data and recommendations is critical
      • Remain focused on the performance of the faculty member and not be generous to faculty members based on the fact that they are new faculty or beginners

      It is expected that the department will exercise appropriate standards when completing its evaluations of its faculty. Faculty should be evaluated fairly and consistently, based solely on their performance during the calendar year. The evaluation ratings of two faculty members whose performance is similar should be equivalent. Likewise, the ratings of two faculty members whose performances are highly variable should be different. Supervisors (chairs, directors, deans, VPs) should be able to defend their relative evaluations of faculty using documented evidence of their performance.

4. Tenure and/or promotion committees

   A tenure and/or promotion committee shall be formed, as needed, that consists of all faculty at or above the rank to which a given faculty member is applying for tenure and/or promotion. This committee shall assist the chair in matters concerning tenure and/or promotion to associate or full professor as specified in the department bylaws. In the event that there are fewer than three eligible faculty to serve on a tenure and/or promotion committee, the department will, in consultation with other senior faculty members, recommend to the dean several senior faculty members at the university who have teaching and research experience in a related discipline, from which the dean shall select one or more senior faculty member(s) to achieve the required minimum number of senior faculty members to serve on the Committee. See 11.E. and 11.F. for voting rights regarding tenure and promotion.

Attendance at department meetings shall be required of the regular faculty. Regular department meetings shall be held at least twice a semester. Other department meetings shall be called at the discretion of the chair or upon the request of one-third of the regular faculty to the chair. An agenda will be prepared and distributed to faculty members at least two days prior to each meeting. All recommendations and decisions made in department meetings shall be made a matter of record. The latest edition of Robert’s Rules of Order shall govern proceedings at all Department of Sociology faculty meetings.

1. All voting situations

   All voting situations (e.g., departmental officer elections, hiring decisions, and tenure and promotion decisions) require a quorum of at least 50% of the regular and active (not on approved leave) faculty in person or virtually. Abstentions are not counted in the number of votes needed. Proxy votes may be allowed with the expectation that those voting by proxy will be well informed on the matters under consideration. A proxy vote is a written or emailed document provided prior to faculty meeting in which a regular faculty member delegates their vote to another regular faculty member. When a vote is called outside of a faculty meeting, voting may be done by email provided the matter is not personnel-related. Any regular faculty member may request a faculty vote.

2. Elections

   Voting in elections for departmental chair and for any other departmental officers will be limited to regular faculty (as defined in section 7.A. of these Bylaws) with a primary assignment (0.5 or greater) in the department. Rank 0 faculty in contingent positions are also eligible to vote after three consecutive years of employment.

3. Hiring

   Voting on tenure-track positions (both the position’s area of specialization and the hiring process) is limited to tenure-track faculty. Voting on non-tenure-track positions is limited to regular faculty (as defined in section 7.A. of these Bylaws) with a primary assignment (0.5 or greater) in the department or program as well as Rank 0 faculty who have held contingent positions for three consecutive years.

4. Search committees

   Search committees consist of at least 3 regular faculty appointed by the chair. Search committees have the authority to select candidates from a pool of applicants to invite to campus for in-person interviews, to rank order those candidates deemed acceptable, and to submit that rank ordering to the regular faculty. The regular faculty shall vote whether or not to recommend the top candidate to the dean. When a department includes lecturers on a search committee for a tenure-track position, the lecturer may vote as part of the committee to give a recommendation to the department, but they may not vote at the department level on approval of the recommendation to hire. All search committee members should undergo diversity training as part of their service on the committee.

5. Tenure recommendations

   Departmental voting rights on tenure recommendations shall be restricted to those department members who are already tenured at the Â鶹ӳ»­ and who serve on a given tenure committee (see eligibility in 9.D). In tenure considerations for joint appointments where the appointment is equally split between the two units, the chair or director of the joint-appointment department/program (or a designated representative at the appropriate rank) will serve as a voting member of the tenure-home department’s personnel committee.

6. Promotion recommendations

   Departmental voting rights on promotion recommendations shall be restricted to those department members who are at the rank in consideration or higher. In promotion considerations for joint appointments where the appointment is equally split between the two units, the chair or director of the joint-appointment department/program (or a designated representative at the appropriate rank) will serve as a voting member of the tenure-home department’s personnel committee.

There shall be a regular program review of the department at least every10 years following the procedures outlined by the Office of the Provost.

1. Annual evaluation
   1. Procedure

      All regular academic faculty are required to complete their annual self-evaluation using the appropriate software platform and submit it to the personnel committee by the deadline set by the department chair each January. Personnel committee procedures are covered in section 9.C.2.A.

   2. Criteria for annual evaluation

      Faculty are evaluated according to the criteria detailed below. All activities are evaluated proportionate to the faculty member’s role statement during the evaluation period. If a faculty member believes their work would be improperly categorized as secondary or tertiary as outlined below, they should provide a written explanation thereof in their self-evaluation document.Faculty are rated as excellent, commendable, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory in each of three areas: teaching, research, and service.

      1. Teaching

         Items used as criteria in the evaluation of teaching include but are not limited to the following lists, classified as primary and secondary, wherein primary activities are typically weighted as more meritorious than secondary activities. Each faculty member’s annual teaching activities are rated based on a combination of the percentage of effort devoted in the Role Statement and an assessment of the quality of the overall teaching record.

         1. Primary
            • In-load courses taught
            • Course evaluations including but not limited to student evaluations and peer assessments
            • New course preparations evaluated according to effort required and use of innovative methods
            • Dissertation/thesis/other graduate committee chair
            • Undergraduate committee chair
            • Dissertation/thesis/other graduate committee member
            • Undergraduate committee member
            • Lectures delivered in team-taught classes (e.g., SOC 710, 711, 718, 739, and 740)
            • Teaching awards
            • Teaching grants
         2. Secondary
            • Uncompensated overload teaching
            • Course preparation effort
            • Graduate student primary adviser
            • Undergraduate student adviser
            • Graduate student advisement in supervised research
            • Undergraduate student advisement in supervised research
            • Participation in teaching workshops and professional development
            • Innovative teaching methods
            • Public engagement
            • Entrepreneurial activities
            • Other teaching-related activities
      2. Research

         Items used as criteria in the evaluation of faculty research include but are not limited to the following lists, classified as primary, secondary, and tertiary, wherein primary activities are typically weighted as most meritorious, followed by secondary and then tertiary activities. Each faculty member’s annual research activities are rated based a combination of the percentage of effort devoted in the Role Statement and an assessment of the quality of the overall research record.

         1. Primary(not listed in order of importance)
            • Books. Note that books may be counted for two years (e.g., year contract is signed and year of publication) and are evaluated in terms of authorship (solo/co-author/order of authors/editor), prestige of press
            • Peer-reviewed articles if accepted for publication are evaluated in terms of order of authorship, prestige or quality of journal indiscipline/sub-discipline, contribution to the field, and whether or not paper is co-authored with a student
            • Research grants if awarded are evaluated in terms of amount of award, prestige of funding agency (local, private, regional, national, federal), and role of faculty member (principal investigator/co-investigator/supporting investigator); ongoing grant-funded projects are also considered for merit
         2. Secondary
            • Book chapters (invited) that are either accepted for publication or published
            • Articles submitted for publication but not accepted that are under review, invited to be revised and resubmitted, or rejected
            • Grant proposals submitted but not funded, including proposals that are under review, invited to be revised and resubmitted, or rejected
            • Books submitted for publication but not accepted that are under review, invited to be revised and resubmitted, or rejected
            • Conference participation including symposium, panel presentations, and poster presentation evaluated in light of locale (local, regional, national, or international), and if published in conference proceedings
            • Research awards
         3. Tertiary
            • Research reports
            • Ongoing research activity
            • Other creative activity
            • Invited talks evaluated in light of locale (local, regional, national, or international)
            • Articles and books in progress
            • Book reviews
            • Non-peer reviewed publications
            • Public engagement
            • Entrepreneurial activities
      3. Service

         Service activities are not listed in order of importance. Faculty members should report the degree of effort of each activity and their degree of involvement in their self-evaluation. Each faculty member’s annual service activities are rated based on a combination of the percentage of effort devoted in the Role Statement and an assessment of the quality of the overall service record. Items considered in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • Administrative assignments within the department including graduate program director, undergraduate program director, committee chair, committee member, or other contributions to the department
         • Administrative assignments at the Â鶹ӳ»­ outside of the department such as member or chair of college committees, member or chair of university committees, and other significant service such as Faculty Senate service or chairing search committees
         • Service on NSHE committees
         • Assignments outside of the University (e.g., program evaluator, service on advisory boards, service in state or local government, or significant role in other professional organizations)
         • Service grants awarded; consider prestige of funding agency (local, private, regional, national, federal), amount of grant, and role of faculty member (principal investigator/co-investigator/supporting investigator)
         • Service awards
         • Editorial activities including being Editor of a journal, Editor of a book series of special issue, Editorial board member of a journal or book series, or Editorial advisory board member
         • Reviewing activities for peer-reviewed journals, granting agencies, of book manuscripts or book chapters, award competitions including local competitions
         • Conference organization and reviewing
         • Websites created/maintained
         • Media contact such as published or televised interviews
         • Community contacts such as presentations or talks
         • Other forms of public engagement
         • Entrepreneurial activities
2. Promotion and tenure
   1. Procedures
      1. Reappointment and non-reappointment of tenure-track faculty

         Progress towards tenure for all probationary faculty is reviewed annually. The chair shall write a letter making a recommendation to the dean concerning reappointment by May 31 each year that is shared with the probationary faculty member.

      2. Third-year review

         Tenure-track faculty must undergo a third-year review that assesses their progress towards tenure. Faculty should submit the following materials to the department chair by the second Friday of February of their third year:

         • Current CV
         • P&T application form
         • Statement of research accomplishments, interests and future plans
         • List and copies of all publications in electronic or hard copy form and written summary of publication activities in progress. In the case of a book a published copy should be submitted if available. If not, proofs or the more recent draft should be submitted.
         • Teaching portfolio that includes but is not limited to course syllabi, sample assignments, summary of teaching evaluations and reflections on teaching

         These materials will be reviewed by the department tenure/promotion committee and chair and form the basis of a letter of recommendation from the chair to the CLA dean for the reappointment or non-reappointment of the faculty member.

         The third-year review, including the letter from the department chair, will be evaluated by the college personnel committee and used as a basis for a recommendation to the dean for reappointment or non-reappointment of the faculty member. The decision of the dean, which shall include reference to the recommendation of the college personnel committee, shall be communicated in writing to the faculty member being reviewed and to the chair of that faculty member’s department.

      3. Maximum probationary period

         The maximum probationary period is seven years. Application materials for tenure must be submitted no later than the beginning of the sixth academic year. If a tenure-track faculty member has not been awarded tenure by the end of the faculty member's sixth probationary year, the faculty member will be notified that the contract issued for the seventh academic year will be a terminal contract.

      4. Probationary credit

         Tenure-track faculty may receive up to a maximum of three years probationary credit for service in a faculty position at other institutions, as per NSHE Code 4.3.3. The faculty member's appointing documents and initial contract with the NSHE shall specify the years of prior service to be applied to the faculty member's probationary period.

      5. Extension of the probationary period

         The faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period when hired in mid-year or for other types of extenuating circumstances. The dean may recommend that the president approve such a request. The president may extend the probationary period in accordance with NSHE Code [3.3.1(c) and 3.3.1(d)].

      6. Procedure for requesting tenure and/or promotion review early

         An assistant professor interested in applying early for promotion to associate professor and tenure must inform the chair of their interest by February of the calendar year in which they would like to apply. The chair will consult with the tenure and/or promotion committee and the dean and advise the faculty member whether or not to apply early. Early cases (those forwarded before the individual has five years in rank) are expected to demonstrate not only that the faculty member has clearly met or exceeded our standards in all three areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service, but also that there is a substantial probability for a continued high rate of quality scholarship/creative activity, teaching, and service.

      7. Procedure for requesting review for promotion to the rank of Professor (IV)

         An associate professor interested in applying for promotion to the rank of Professor must inform the chair of their interest by February of the calendar year in which they would like to apply for promotion. The chair will consult with the promotion committee and advise the faculty member. Should the chair advise the faculty member not to go up for promotion, the recommendation is binding but for one year only. In subsequent years, an associate professor may apply for promotion to Professor without an explicit recommendation from the chair.

      8. Procedure for applying for promotion and/or tenure

         Applicants for promotion and/or tenure should submit the following materials to the department chair by the second Friday of February of the year before their application will be submitted, which is typically the fifth year for probationary faculty:

         • Current CV
         • Statement of research accomplishments, interests and future plans
         • List and copies of all publications in electronic or hard copy form and written summary of publication activities in progress. In the case of a book a published copy should be submitted if available. If not, proofs or the more recent draft should be submitted.
         • Teaching portfolio that includes but is not limited to course syllabi, sample assignments, summary of teaching evaluations and reflections on teaching
         • List of five to six potential external reviewers who are experts in the applicant’s area of research and not closely associated with the applicant. For more detailed information see instructions on the Provost’s website

         Applicants must complete their P&T application form and compile all teaching/research activity and service materials by July 15 of the summer before they apply and submit these materials to the department chair.

   2. Criteria for Promotion and Tenure
      1. Criteria for promotion from Rank I to Rank II

         A faculty member in Rank I shall be eligible for promotion to Rank II when the faculty member has attained a Ph.D. and has demonstrated potential for developing professional achievement in teaching/performance of assigned duties; research, scholarly, creative and/or entrepreneurial activity; and service.

      2. Criteria for promotion from Rank II to Rank III

         A faculty member in Rank II shall be eligible for promotion to Rank III when the faculty member has established a substantial record of achievement in teaching/performance of assigned duties, scholarly and (when approved by the chair and the dean) entrepreneurial work, and service. A departmental recommendation for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor may precede, accompany, or follow upon a recommendation for tenure. Eligibility for being recommended for promotion shall be based upon meeting a minimum standard of an “excellent” evaluation in (1) teaching or (2) research, scholarly, creative, and/or entrepreneurial activity; and at least a “satisfactory” evaluation in the other two areas (i.e., service and either teaching or research). Departments and units shall obtain appropriate external evaluations of the faculty member's achievement according to Â鶹ӳ»­ bylaws 3.3.5. Ideally five external evaluations but no fewer than four and no more than six should be included.

         A candidate for promotion to Rank III shall have a record of substantial accomplishments in the previous rank; shall have given evidence of effectiveness in university teaching activities and advisement of students; shall have performed substantial research resulting in publication and presentations; shall have performed service to the college, the university and professionally related service to the community or the discipline; shall have demonstrated capacity for further significant intellectual and professional achievement, and shall have demonstrated that they are in the process of establishing a national reputation. All activities are evaluated proportionate to the candidate’s role statement during the probationary period.

         Quality of research is evaluated in keeping with the criteria for annual evaluation of research (see 13.A.2.b) including the hierarchy of primary, secondary, and tertiary research activities. Research in the secondary and tertiary categories are considered supplemental to primary research activities that are given the greatest weight in the evaluation of the candidate’s scholarship.

         Quality of teaching is evaluated in keeping with the criteria for annual evaluation of teaching (see 13.A.2.a.), including by student evaluations, syllabi review, new course preparations, and innovative teaching methods. In addition, teaching is evaluated by a peer assessment process in which senior faculty make annual course visitations and provide independent assessments of probationary faculty member in the form of written evaluations submitted to the personnel committee and department chair.

      3. Criteria for promotion from Rank III to Rank IV

         A faculty member in Rank III shall be eligible for promotion to Rank IV when the faculty member has established a sustained record of excellence in a professional field. The record shall document publications and/or creative work as defined in 18.B of the College bylaws and as judged significant by peers in the field; distinguished professional service; and distinction in teaching and related activities such as graduate student advising (only for faculty in departments with graduate programs). The record should, where relevant, document exceptional administrative achievement as well. Departments and units shall obtain appropriate external evaluations of the faculty member’s achievement according to procedures defined in their bylaws. Ideally five external evaluations but no fewer than four and no more than six should be included.

         A candidate for promotion to Rank IV shall have a record of substantial accomplishments in the previous ranks; shall have established a sustained record of excellence and attained national or international recognition in the special professional field; shall have a sustained record of substantial publications judged significant by peers in the field; shall have achieved distinction in teaching and related activities; and shall have provided distinguished professional service to the university, to the college, and to the community or the profession.Quality of teaching, research, and service are evaluated in keeping with the criteria for annual evaluation detailed in 13.A.2.with an emphasis on research and teaching activities categorized as primary and proportionate to the candidate’s role statement during the evaluation period.

      4. Criteria for tenure

         A candidate for tenure shall have the doctoral degree; shall have demonstrated effectiveness as a classroom teacher; shall have performed substantial research activity resulting in publications; shall have performed service to the college, university and professionally related service to the community or the discipline; and shall have demonstrated capacity for further significant intellectual and professional achievement. Quality of teaching, research, and service are evaluating in keeping with the criteria for annual evaluation detailed in 13.A.2.with an emphasis on research and teaching activities categories as primary.

   3. Entrepreneurial activities

      Entrepreneurial activity refers to the application of sophisticated research and creative methodologies and innovations to the public domain with the goal of developing a market outside the university. A record of entrepreneurial productivity should be recognized as a significant part of a faculty member’s professional achievements. However, such activity is not required of individual faculty members. Entrepreneurial activity must be appropriate to the faculty member’s discipline and approved by the chair and dean as part of the role statement articulating the distribution of duties.

      In accordance with the CLA Bylaws section 18.B., in order for entrepreneurial activity to count towards a candidate’s case for promotion and tenure, the chair and the dean must approve it in advance of the review.

   4. Public engagement

      Faculty engagement refers to scholarly, creative, pedagogical, clinical, and service activities engaged for the public good and directed toward persons and groups outside the university. Such activities (in the form of research, creative activity, teaching, and /or service) develop as collaborative interactions that respond to short-term and long-term societal needs. Engagement serves our local community, state, nation, and/or the wider world through academically or creatively informed activities that are intentional in their effort to enrich and improve the lives of people. Engagement will necessarily take different forms in the various schools and departments of the college, so each unit should develop its own descriptions and examples of academically informed activities that constitute public engagement and its own measures for evaluating engaged activities for the purposes of promotion and tenure as well as merit consideration. Engagement should be recognized as a significant part of a faculty member’s professional achievements. It must be appropriate to the faculty member’s discipline and approved by the chair and dean as part of the role statement articulating the distribution of duties. However, the Â鶹ӳ»­ is a research-intensive university, so the College of Liberal Arts continues to require original scholarly research or creative activity as a key criterion for tenure and promotion. In addition, while engagement should be supported at any phase of a faculty member’s career if it is consistent with the unit’s priorities and practices, faculty whose work does not include engaged activities should not be penalized.