Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, Tenure
Adopted October 18, 2001
Amended October 5, 2004
Amended November 9, 2004
Amended October 17, 2006
Amended May 4, 2011
Amended February 26, 2024
Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure
This document delineates the College policies and procedures for the appointment, reappointment, promotion, and tenure of full-time faculty with rank of interim assistant professor or above. Herein, all persons under consideration for such action will be referred to as candidates. In addition, all recommendations for such action are to be made formally and in writing. This document is meant to supplement the university level “Tenure Policies, Regulations, and Procedures” currently in effect and available on University website (hereafter referred to as TPRP) in accordance with the University attorney’s memorandum of November 23, 1998 (see attached). The University attorney reminds all faculty that laws and circumstances change and therefore the attorney is available to respond to questions in a particular instance. Every attempt was made to make this College document consistent with TPRP. However, in the event of a conflict between the two documents on any issue, the procedures and guidelines delineated in the TPRP shall be followed.
In addition, each department within the College has established guidelines and procedures for departmental-level action on the above matters, although the guidelines and procedures of this document prevail over those of the departments. Each faculty member is strongly encouraged to refer to the department, College, and university documents to obtain a complete perspective on these matters.
II. Initial Appointments
A. Departmental Recommendation
The recommendation for initial appointments will originate in one of the departments within the College. Consequently, formal College-level action will commence only upon receipt by the Dean of a recommendation for a new appointment. Terms and conditions of all appointments shall be in accordance with the present university guidelines.
The department shall establish a search committee composed of at least three tenured and/or tenure- track faculty members. The search committee shall elect its Chair. The search committee shall be charged with screening all applicants for a given faculty position and making recommendations to the department’s faculty members.
In making a recommendation, the department Chair will consider all input from faculty members and consult with the department faculty via an assembly of the faculty.
In the case of initial appointments with tenure, the department review committee on reappointment, promotion, and tenure (hereafter referred to as the DRC) will make a recommendation to the Chair.
The Chair of the department will forward his/her recommendation for appointment along with the department search committee’s recommendation, and the DRC’s recommendation (if applicable and including minority opinions from members of the DRC) to the Dean.
B. College Recommendation
In the case of appointments with tenure, the Dean shall submit all departmental recommendations (the Chair’s and the department search and review committees’) and supporting documents to the College of Computing and Informatics Review Committee. The College of Computing and Informatics Review Committee (CCIRC) on reappointment, promotion and tenure shall be invited to participate in the on-campus interview process.
The CCIRC shall make its recommendation, along with any minority opinions to the Dean.
Subsequent to receiving the CCIRC recommendation, the Dean shall consult with those bodies with whom his/her recommendation differs, prior to making his/her final recommendation.
In all cases, the Dean shall forward his/her recommendation, the recommendation of the CCIRC (if applicable, including written minority opinions), and all departmental recommendations and minority opinions of the review committees to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
III. Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure
A. Department Review Committee (DRC)
The DRC is to have no fewer than three or more than five members, all of whom hold permanent tenure from the department. Department chairs and faculty members under review are not eligible to serve on the committee. Faculty members, without permanent tenure, who hold professorial rank, may serve as either participating, nonvoting members or as non-participating, nonvoting observers. In case there is not enough faculty holding permanent tenure in the department, appropriate faculty holding permanent tenure from other departments may be nominated by the department faculty and elected to serve as DRC members (however that may be defined by the department in question). In such a case, the outside tenured faculty elected to serve on DRC must have a substantial background in an IT-related discipline.
The members of the DRC shall be nominated by faculty in the department by April 1 of each year and elected by the department no later than April 15 of each year. All tenured and tenure- track faculty members of the department are eligible to vote in the election process. The DRC shall elect its own committee Chair.
Each member will serve from the start of an academic year (usually August 15th) for one full year, that is one day prior to the start of next academic year.
The DRC provides recommendations to its department Chair on appointment, reappointment, promotion, and tenure (including initial appointments with tenure).
B. College of Computing and Informatics Review Committee (CCIRC)
The CCIRC shall consist of one tenured faculty member representing each department in the College and one, at-large, tenured faculty member from CCI faculty. Faculty members, without permanent tenure, who hold professorial rank, may serve as either participating, nonvoting members or as non-participating, nonvoting observers. In case there is not enough faculty holding permanent tenure to represent a department and/or the College “at-large” member, appropriate faculty holding permanent tenure from other departments may be nominated and elected by the department in question (to represent that department) and/or the College faculty (for the College “at- large” member). In such a case, the outside tenured faculty elected to serve on CCIRC must have a substantial background in an IT-related discipline. The Dean, Associate and Assistant Deans, Department Chairs, faculty members under review and current members of the DRCs are not eligible to serve on the CCIRC.
The departmental representative members of the CCIRC shall be elected by their respective Departments; the at-large member shall be nominated and elected by the CCI faculty at a CCI faculty meeting; the College shall elect the at-large member no later than May 1 of each year. All tenured and tenure-track faculty members of the CCI faculty are eligible to vote in the election process. The CCIRC shall elect its own committee Chair.
Each member will serve from the start of an academic year (usually August 15th) for one full year, that is one day prior to the start of next academic year.
The CCIRC provides recommendations to the Dean on appointment with tenure, reappointment, promotion, and tenure.
C. Permissible and Impermissible Grounds
As specified in the TPRP, decisions pertaining to reappointment, promotion, and tenure are the responsibility of the officers of administration authorized to make them. Such officers may use as the basis of their decisions any factors deemed relevant to total institutional interests. Under no circumstances shall a recommendation/decision not to appoint, not to reappoint, not to promote or not to grant tenure be based upon: 1) exercise by the faculty member of rights of freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or by Article I of the Constitution of North Carolina, 2) discrimination based upon the race, sex, disability, sexual orientation, religion, age, or national origin of the candidate, or 3) personal malice as defined in Section 1.11 of the TPRP.
D. Closed Sessions
Any deliberations by the DRC and CCIRC concerning appointment, reappointment, promotion, or permanent tenure shall be held in closed session, with only those present whom the committee deems necessary to its deliberations. Specifically, the Dean and the Chair should not be present during the deliberations of the DRC.
Review committee members, either voting or nonvoting, including nonparticipating observers in review committee proceedings, as well as any permanently tenured senior faculty member in the department who is at or above the rank for which a candidate is under consideration and has reviewed the candidate’s dossier and provided advice to the DRC, shall treat as confidential personnel information all documents submitted or created in connection with the process of review for reappointment, promotion, or the granting of permanent tenure, and the information contained therein, as well as information derived from any discussions that are part of the formal review process. Such confidential records and information shall not be disclosed to or discussed with any person except: (1) committee members and observers as provided in these policies; (2) those persons required or permitted to be consulted in accord with the requirements of department, college, or university policies; or (3) those persons permitted access to such documents by law. Violation of this section may expose any faculty member, including an administrator, to the imposition of serious sanctions, but only in accordance with the provisions of Section VI of The Code of the University of North Carolina.
F. Channels of Review
The Permanently Tenured Faculty Members in the department, other than those who will participate in the review process at another level, who are at or above the rank for which a candidate is under consideration shall be provided an opportunity to review the candidate’s dossier and provide advice to the DRC. Evaluations of the candidate’s dossier by the DRC and by the chair are intended to be separate and independent. However, the DRC may invite the department chair into its discussions if the DRC unanimously determines that doing so will assist in its deliberations. The DRC shall submit its recommendation(s) and rationale(s) whether or not to reappoint, to promote, or to confer Permanent Tenure to the department chair after considering the advice provided by such Permanently Tenured Faculty. If the department chair’s determination is positive on each action under review, he or she shall, after consulting with the assembled DRC, submit his or her determination and rationale, together with the recommendation(s) and rationale(s) of the DRC, to the dean of the College.
If, after consulting with the assembled DRC, the department chair determines not to reappoint, promote, or confer Permanent Tenure for a Faculty Member under review, he or she shall meet with the Faculty Member to provide the Faculty Member with a copy of that determination and its rationale, and to explain the Faculty Member’s right of rebuttal. Within ten Days after this meeting, the Faculty Member may submit to the dean and the chair his or her written rebuttal to the chair’s determination. Upon receipt of the Faculty Member’s rebuttal, or at the end of ten Days after the chair meets with the Faculty Member if the Faculty Member does not submit a rebuttal, the chair shall submit his or her determinations and rationales, together with the recommendations and rationales of the DRC, to the dean of the College.
After receipt of the determinations and rationales of the department chair and the recommendations and rationales of the DRC, and the Faculty Member’s rebuttal to the chair’s determination, if any, the dean shall deliver such documents to the CRC. The CRC shall submit its recommendations and rationales to the dean. If the dean’s determination is positive on each action under review for a Faculty Member, he or she shall, after consulting with the assembled CRC, submit his or her determinations and rationales, together with the recommendations and rationales of the CRC and the DRC, the determinations and rationales of the department chair, and the Faculty Member’s rebuttal(s), if any, to the Provost.
If, after consulting with the assembled CRC, the dean determines not to reappoint, promote, or confer Permanent Tenure for a Faculty Member under review, he or she shall meet with the Faculty Member to provide the Faculty Member with a copy of that determination and its rationale, and to explain the Faculty Member’s right of rebuttal. Within ten Days after this meeting, the Faculty Member may submit to the Provost and the dean his or her written rebuttal to the dean’s determination. Upon receipt of the Faculty Member’s rebuttal, or at the end of ten Days after the dean meets with the Faculty Member if the Faculty Member does not submit a rebuttal, the dean shall submit his or her determinations and rationales, together with the recommendations and rationales of the CRC and the DRC, the determinations and rationales of the department chair, and the Faculty Member’s rebuttal(s), if any, to the Provost.
G. Consideration Guidelines
All recommendations for reappointment, promotion, or grant of tenure forwarded to the Office of the Dean from any Department of the College of Computing and Informatics must contain at least the following:
- Complete and up to date vita (prepared by candidate; see G.1.1).
- An Affirmative Action Form.
- The department Chair’s recommendation and a written summary evaluation of the activities since the last previous appointment or promotion as they relate to the criteria for reappointment, promotion, or grant of tenure.
- The written recommendation (supporting or differing) of the DRC.
- All other documentation material the department and/or candidate wish to provide to support the recommendation. Materials include, but are not limited to, student teaching evaluations, publications, awards, patents, certificates of merit or appreciation for professional service, alumni, peer, and external evaluations. This material will be returned to the originating departments. It will be retained there indefinitely or be placed in the candidate’s personnel file.
G.1.1 Format of Vita
A suggested format for a vita to accompany recommendations for reappointment, promotion, and permanent tenure is given below. The information requested is that which must be presented to the Board of Trustees and/or the Board of Governors.
- Education: Full Name and Present Rank. List degrees earned, year earned, and institution.
- Professional Experience: List teaching experience at colleges and universities, years employed and ranks held. Also list pertinent related employment.
- University and Community Service: List membership on departmental, college, and University wide committees and any involvement in community matters, consulting activities, etc.
- Publications and Research: List publications and research funds awarded.
- Honors and Awards: List educational and community service awards.
- Professional Affiliations: List memberships in educationally and professionally related organizations.
G.2 Criteria for Professorial Rank and Tenure Consideration
Faculty are expected to contribute to the mission and goals of the University, College, and Department in the areas of education, research, and service. The College values efforts that further the strategic goals of the institution at all levels in all of these areas. Faculty should strive for excellence in all areas and may distinguish themselves in one or more areas. The College recognizes that individuals differentially contribute to each area and will reward outstanding contributions by faculty in teaching, research and/or service. While faculty members can achieve success through individual efforts, which continue to be highly regarded and can provide a pathway to promotion, it is important to note that in the 21st century many scholarly and educational goals can best be met by the collective and often interdisciplinary efforts of the faculty. The College values effective collaborative efforts with colleagues both within and outside the institution. It is important, especially for consideration for promotion to senior ranks, for faculty to assume leadership roles in collaborative research efforts, the development and improvement of the curriculum, continuous improvement of the educational experience, mentoring of junior faculty, and professional service activities that advance the mission of the institution. CCI is committed to building and maintaining a culture that promotes collaborative research.
G.2.1. Reappointment as Assistant Professor
The fundamental requirement for reappointment as Assistant Professor is the demonstration of significant potential for excellence in education, research, and service by documented accomplishments in these areas. Education metrics include, but are not limited to, teaching evaluations by students and faculty peers, substantive contributions to course and curriculum development, and supervision of undergraduate and graduate student projects. Evidence of the potential for outstanding scholarship may be evaluated by establishment of a productive research program, peer-reviewed publications, and extramurally supported research, as either an independent scholar or principal within a collaborative team. Evidence of professional service includes substantial and documented contributions to the activities of departmental, college, and university committee activities, and participation in professional societies, peer-review panels, and similar extramural activities. In all aspects of academic life, faculty are expected to be collegial and to treat students, staff, and colleagues with respect.
G.2.2 Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor and/or Grant of Tenure
The fundamental requirement for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor and/or grant of tenure is documented evidence of a solid record of accomplishments in education, research, and service with the potential for future outstanding achievement in one or more of these areas. Education performance metrics include, but are not limited to, innovations in courses and curriculum development, teaching evaluations by students and faculty peers, successful mentorship of graduate students, and a demonstrated excellence in promoting student success. Evidence of current research scholarship and future potential may be evaluated by a record of high-quality refereed publications, demonstrated impact in the field as judged by reference letters from peers, an extramurally-supported research program, whether as an independent scholar or a principal (e.g., a substantial contributor) within a collaborative team and development of intellectual property with potential for commercial application. Evidence of professional service includes demonstrated effectiveness in departmental, college, and university committees, extramural professional activities such as service on peer-review or program panels, community engagement, leadership roles in professional societies, and other similar activities that demonstrate leadership in the discipline. In all aspects of academic life, faculty are expected to be collegial and to treat students, staff, and colleagues with respect.
G.2.3 Promotion to the Rank of Professor
The fundamental requirement for promotion to the rank of Professor is documented evidence of a substantial record of accomplishment in education, research, and service with superior achievement in one or more of these areas. Education performance metrics include, but are not limited to, a record of exceptional teaching excellence as evidenced by peer and student evaluations, accomplishments of students, an excellent record of student mentoring, and teaching innovation, including leading efforts in improving and/or developing the College’s education programs or initiatives. As a scholar, a candidate for this rank is expected to be nationally and internationally recognized for research and scholarship, and should have a long, sustained record of high impact scholarly activities including peer-review publications and other publications such as books, book chapters, and review articles. Substantial extramural support for a program of research and scholarship, including support for students, is expected. Other evidence of substantial impact at this level includes leadership of a collaborative multidisciplinary or multi-institutional research team or development of intellectual property with potential for commercial application. Excellence in professional service can be demonstrated by major leadership roles in national and international professional organizations, service on major peer-review or program panels at the national and international level, leadership with documented substantial outcome of departmental, college, and university committees, mentorship of junior faculty that leads to substantial positive outcomes, and by assuming other roles which advance the strategic goals of the department, college, and university. In all aspects of academic life, faculty are expected to be collegial and to treat students, staff, and colleagues with respect.
G.3 Evaluation of Education, Research, and Service
Faculty are expected to contribute to excellence in education through teaching classes and contributing to the continuous improvement of the educational experience for our students. The candidate may demonstrate contributions to education by highlighting exemplary educational activities and providing objective evidence of the impact of these activities for reaching institutional, national and/or international goals for education. Educational activities include, but are not limited to activities related to teaching (e.g., courses, capstone experiences, and experiential learning), graduate student mentorship (e.g., thesis and dissertation advising), curriculum development (e.g., courses, programs), scholarship (e.g., assessment and dissemination of effective practices), and student success (e.g., advising, mentoring). Evidence of educational impact may be demonstrated by, but is not limited to standardized student evaluations, yearly formal written peer evaluations, documented student learning outcomes, documented student achievements, peer- reviewed publications, extramural funding, awards, surveys, focus groups and/or institutional research data. Candidates wishing to demonstrate outstanding impact in education are encouraged to include quantitative and qualitative assessment showing the positive impact of educational activities on specific outcomes such as barrier elimination for historically underrepresented* and underserved** populations in computing and student learning, recruitment, retention, quality, graduation, and placement.
* "Underrepresented" populations include students who hold identities or backgrounds whose representation is disproportionately low in the computing community. Underrepresented populations may be identified by a variety of identities and backgrounds, including but not limited to race, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability status, religion, geographic area, income level, immigration status, culturally- and language-diverse backgrounds, age, military or veteran status and sexual orientation. **"Underserved" populations include students who do not have access to the same type or level of resources as other students in their academic journeys before arriving at UNC Charlotte. Underserved individuals may come from low-income areas, rural areas and underserved counties (the 80 NC counties below the statewide college-going rate). They may also come from disadvantaged populations, racial/ethnic minorities, religious minorities and immigrant communities regardless of immigration status, first-generation families, active military and veteran-status personnel, culturally- and language-diverse backgrounds and Title 1 schools.
The candidate may demonstrate contributions to research by highlighting exemplary research activities and providing objective evidence of the impact of these activities for reaching institutional, national and/or international goals for research. Research activities include, but are not limited to activities related to basic and applied research, technology transfer, research leadership, and interdisciplinary and collaborative research. The Department Review Committee shall solicit reference letters regarding the candidate’s research and scholarly activities from external sources. These external sources may include faculty members at other academic institutions, and/or recognized professionals in the candidate’s field. Emphasis shall be placed on the significance and impact of the candidate’s research, and the candidate’s leadership in his/her field of research. Additional evidence of research impact may be demonstrated by, but is not limited to peer-reviewed publications, citation rate, quality and impact factor of published materials, extramural funding, awards, leadership role in collaborative and/or interdisciplinary research that increases the scholarly output of a group or research community at large, and documented graduate student achievements.
The candidate must submit a list of his/her professional service activities. Service activities may include but are not limited to: administrative responsibilities within the university, University committee assignments, institutional capacity-building, and non-university professional activities. In particular, candidates should document specifically how their service has had a positive impact on department, college and university, and their professional community. Candidates wishing to demonstrate outstanding impact in service are encouraged to provide objective evidence of impact of service activities. The level of service expected depends on the rank of the candidate. Senior faculty are expected to have major leadership roles in national and international professional organizations and to provide leadership for projects important to mission of the institution.
Adopted April 5, 2001
Procedures for Election of the College Committee Representative and DRC
The Department Chairperson, by written notice to each tenure-track faculty member,
- announces the names of the faculty members for whom a personnel decision is mandated during the subsequent academic year,
- announces the names of the tenured faculty members who must be reviewed for promotion because of time in rank since their last review,
- announces the names of the tenured faculty members who are scheduled for a tenured faculty performance review,
- requests additional nominations for promotion or tenure review
- requests from each candidates identified by the above procedure and for whom a review is not mandatory, a written consent to be reviewed or written request not to be reviewed, as appropriate.
This notification process is to be completed by March 15.
All department members who have been awarded permanent tenure or who have been recommended by the Dean of College of Computing and Informatics for permanent tenure are eligible to serve as DRC members or as CCIRC member except
- The Department Chair,
- Department members who must be considered or who have consented to be considered for tenured faculty performance review, promotion, reappointment, or tenure in the upcoming year.
- Department members excused by the Department electorate for good and sufficient reason.
Eligibility carries with it automatic obligation to serve if elected.
3) Election process
A faculty meeting will be called for the purpose of election process. All and only available tenured and tenure-track faculty shall participate.
The representative to the College Committee shall be elected first. Election shall require a majority of the full electorate. The individual so elected shall not be eligible for membership on the DRC.
Election of DRC
- The Department tenured and tenure-track faculty at the meeting shall nominate at least three eligible faculty members for DRC.
- In case only three eligible faculty members are nominated, nomination carries with it automatic obligation to serve as DRC.
- In case more than three eligible faculty members are nominated, four or five DRC members maybe elected if and only if all elected members received majority vote. Otherwise the top three nominees with most votes will be elected and obligated to serve as DRC; in case some or all nominees received equal votes, election process will be repeated until the top three nominees with most votes can be established.