Faculte Senate Resolutions

Whereas, The criteria and the process by which faculty are reappointed, promoted, and awarded permanent tenure are crucial to ensuring that the University recruit and retain excellent faculty members and fulfill its mission; and

Whereas: The Provost has recently modified the Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Procedures in an effort to address perceived shortcomings in the Procedures, including establishment of college level review committees by Deans, populated by faculty members; and

Whereas: The Provost has clearly indicated that instituting these modifications was within his authority and responsibility, and that NC State University administration welcomes and wishes to facilitate review, feedback, and involvement of faculty in optimizing procedures for future years, including a campus-wide dialogue on scholarship and consideration of a university level committee of faculty to assist administration in Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure decisions; and

Whereas: Numerous faculty members have expressed serious concern that sufficient faculty consideration and input into modification of the Procedures was not requested before their enactment, and that establishment of college level review committees may not be necessary, e.g. for those colleges without such committees which have excelled and improved in national stature due to their faculty achievements; and

Whereas: Some departments completed candidate dossiers before the new guidelines were issued, and may face practical difficulties in meeting particular requirements, which may unduly burden a candidate, and

Whereas: Numerous faculty members have expressed appreciation for increasing faculty involvement in Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Procedures, including establishment of college level review committees; and

Whereas: Numerous faculty members believe that the principal criteria by which faculty members seeking reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure should be established by the faculty member*s colleagues at the departmental (i.e. disciplinary) level; therefore be it

Resolved: That the Provost accept this year's candidate dossiers with flexibility on procedural requirements, within his judgment of fairness and appropriate faculty involvement; and be it further

Resolved: That departments be implored to develop and/or refine their criteria for Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure decisions so as to ensure the appropriateness to the scholarship of the discipline; and be it further

Resolved: That the Faculty Senate calls upon the Provost to seek methods which ensure that college and university level review committees respect the departmental or disciplinary criteria relevant to each faculty member’s dossier, and not judge the faculty member’s dossiers based on other criteria except as required by current Procedures; and be it further

Resolved, That the Provost periodically share any intended or imminent changes in
Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Procedures with the Faculty Senate and
Chair of the Faculty, and assist in obtaining faculty review and input prior to
their enactment; and be it further

Resolved, That the Chair of the Faculty appoint a Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure (RPT) committee to (a) study and make recommendations on the new RPT process (b) give the faculty the opportunity to express its views in all appropriate forums, (c) study and make recommendations on the composition and purview of a university-level committee and (d) report to the Faculty Senate with its recommendations by March 7, 2000.

Resolution R2: 99/00
First Reading: October 26, 1999
Second Reading: November 9, 1999
Third Reading: November 23, 1999
Adopted:  November 23, 199