Breadcrumb Navigation:

Frequently Asked Questions

To search this FAQ page, enter key words in your Web browser's "Find" feature:

PC: CTRL key + F
Mac: APPLE key + F

Please contact your College RPT Liaison or us if you have additional questions not answered below:

Amy Jinnette, amy_jinnette@ncsu.edu, 515-3123
Betsy Brown, betsy_brown@ncsu.edu, 513-7741


Click on a category below to link to the list of questions in the category.

Main categories: RPT Procedures :: Dossier :: Review :: Tenure Clock

Miscellaneous: Department Head :: Instructors :: Non-Tenure Track Faculty :: Rules :: Withdrawal


RPT Procedures

Q1: What business practice changes were made to enhance this year's RPT process?

A1: See referenceChanges in Business Practice.

Q2: How are changes and updates made to the RPT process communicated to campus after the Provost's Memorandum is published online?

A2: The deans, department heads, college RPT liaisons, and deans' assistants will receive an e-mail message alerting them whenever a change is made after the Provost's annual memo. The changes are recorded online. See reference Current Year Details.

Q3: Is there a set time frame for a faculty member to remain an associate professor with tenure before being recommended for promotion to full professor with tenure?

A3: There is not a set time frame. However, NC State data indicates the time frame is typically about six years.

Q4: What process should be followed if the Graduate Faculty Status listed in the personnel system is incorrect or needs to be updated?

A4: If the Graduate Faculty Status information on file for a particular individual does not match the information listed in the personnel system, please work with your Customer Service Representative to make the appropriate change in the personnel system immediately.

Q5: Are individuals being reviewed to be informed of the votes and written assessments of the Departmental Voting Faculty, College RPT Committee, head, and dean?

A5: Yes. These items formally become part of the dossier and they must be provided to the individual being reviewed. See reference Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review.

Q6: When are individuals being reviewed to be informed of the votes and written assessments of the the Departmental Voting Faculty, College RPT Committee, head, and dean?

A6: At the time of completion of the review at that stage of review. For example, when the departmental voting faculty have voted and prepared their written assessment and when the department head has completed the department head's recommendation, these pieces of information are to be added to the dossier and supplied to the individual being reviewed; it is the responsibility of the head to assemble these materials and to provide them to the candidate. Provision is made for an allowable time (5 days) for the candidate to respond. The response to the departmental review is to be directed to the head, shared by the head with the departmental voting faculty (DVF), and added to the dossier before formal transmittal to the dean. Similarly, the response to the college review is to be directed to the dean, shared by the dean with the college committee and the head (who is to share it with the DVF), and added by the dean to the dossier before its formal transmittal to the Provost. See referenceConsultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review.

Dossier

<Return to top>

Q1: What constitutes a dossier?

A1: The dossier is prescribed in the instructions issued each year by the Provost. It must be the written basis for the formal review at the department, college, and university stages. See references Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure Policy and REG 05.20.20 RPT Dossier Format Requirements.

Q2: Regarding tenured associate professors being considered for promotion to full professor: should the dossier include only information from the time tenure was conferred at the associate professor level or should it include information dating all the way back to the first appointment here at NC State?

A2: The dossier is a complete representation of the professional credentials and accomplishments throughout the candidate's academic career.  Dossier is to make clear the timing of those accomplishments.

Q3: Regarding the Dossier Cover Form: How is the Dossier Cover Form obtained?

A3: The Dossier Cover Form is initiated by the Provost’s Office, taking information from the Personnel System. The Provost's office sends the forms for each candidate going through the RPT process to the colleges in early September. The department and college complete the remaining sections of the form as applicable. The faculty member involved does not have to do anything except sign the form when asked by their department RPT contact.

Q4: Regarding the Dossier Cover Form: Is the original form to be submitted to the Provost's Office?

A4: Yes. Department and College PRT liaisons are responsible for this action.

Q5: Regarding the Dossier Cover Form: Is the Dossier Cover Form different for candidates who have joint appointments between departments or colleges?

A5: Yes. There is form that includes appropriate areas for recording multiple department and college votes as appropriate. Contact Amy Jinnette in the Provost's office for this form.

Q6: Regarding all sections with page limits denoted: Is it imperative that page limits be adhered to?

A6: Yes. Fairness and consistency dictate that the page limits be rigorously upheld. Dossiers out of compliance will be returned. See reference REG 05.20.20 RPT Dossier Format Requirements.

Q7: Regarding Section I.C. - Candidate's Statement: Since this section is optional, should it be marked as N/A if it is not applicable?

A7: Yes. See reference Section II.I of theRPT Dossier Format Requirements.

Q8: Regarding Section II.A.2.a. - Summary of student evaluations of teaching: What is the time frame to consider when submitting "recent summaries" information?

A8: Period since the initial appointment at NC State University or since the most recent positive RPT action, as appropriate.

Q9: RegardingSection II.A.2.b. - Summary of peer evaluations: Are peer evaluations required?

A9: Yes. See reference REG 05.20.10 Evaluation of Teaching.

Q10: Regarding Section III.B. - List externally and internally sponsored grants and contracts: Are submitted grants to be listed?

A10: Submitted grants may be included if clearly designated as such. The Research Administration Data And Reporting System (RADAR) Report that is required for this section of the dossier includes both funded and unfunded projects that have been processed through the system. See reference Section III.B. of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements.

Q11: Regarding Section VII. - External Evaluations: Are external evaluations required for cases recommending reappointment to a 2nd term as assistant professor?

A11: No. See reference Section VII of theRPT Dossier Format Requirements.

Q12: Regarding Section VII. - External Evaluations: How many external evaluation letters are required?

A12: Evaluators should be selected with the aim of obtaining evaluations from five individuals. See reference Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review.

Review

<Return to top>

Q1: May Emeriti faculty or faculty participating in Phased Retirement vote on RPT cases?

A1: No, only the tenured faculty within the department vote.  Emeriti faculty and faculty participating in Phased Retirement have relinquished their tenure. However, although they may not vote, the DVF may want to consult them relative to candidates and this is allowed as long as candidates grant permission for Emeriti faculty and faculty on Phased Retirement to review their personnel information contained in the dossier. See reference Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure Policy.

Q2: What constitutes initiating a case?

A2: Once a dossier is prepared at the department stage in accordance with the RPT Dossier Format Requirements and formally reviewed by the departmental voting faculty (DVF), the case is initiated.

Q3: Are all cases to be reviewed at each stage: department, college, and university?

A3: Once initiated by formal review by the departmental voting faculty (DVF) and unless and until withdrawn by the individual reviewed, all cases are to be reviewed at the department, college, and university stages.

Q4: What are the requirements of confidentiality?

To ensure that confidentiality is maintained in the review process with no discussions of the case outside the context of the formal review. According to N.C. General Statues, RPT is a personnel action and therefore related information becomes part of a faculty member's personnel file and may be examined by the faculty member. All participants in the process are expected, as a part of their professional responsibility at the university, to maintain appropriate confidentiality in the proceedings. All discussions by the Departmental Voting Faculty, College RPT Committee, and administrators must remain confidential among them with results communicated through written assessments and votes as prescribed in the procedures. The dossier is to be considered in the control of the candidate until the candidate's portion is completed; any release to any party of any parts of the dossier before the candidate completes it is to be done only with the candidate's express permission.

Q5: Regarding Sections VIII.A. and IX.A. - Tally of votes: How are votes recorded on the Dossier Cover Form?

A5: For the Department Voting Faculty Review Record the numbers entered for the four categories, 'For,' 'Against,' 'Abstain,' and 'Missing' add up to the total number of those eligible to vote. The Department Head is not eligible to vote with DVF so must not be counted in # eligible.

For the College RPT Committee Review Record the numbers entered for the three categories, 'For,' 'Against,' and 'Abstain' add up to the total number of those eligible to vote.

# For. Enter the number of departmental voting faculty members who vote in favor of the proposed action for the candidate.

# Against. Enter the number of departmental voting faculty members who vote in opposition to the proposed action for the candidate.

# Abstain. Enter the number of departmental voting faculty members who elect to abstain from the decision on the proposed action for the candidate.

# Missing. The number of departmental voting faculty members who did not indicate a vote in favor, a vote against, or an abstention. Please note that "nonparticipation" is an unusual practice that is not encouraged. The department head is expected to provide an explanation for any cases of nonparticipation in Section VIII.B. of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements.

Q6: Regarding Sections VIII.A. and IX.A. - Tally of votes: How are votes handled for faculty who are not able to participate in the departmental/college RPT reviews?

A6: On each RPT case, each member eligible to vote shall vote "Yes," "No," or "Abstain." Members eligible to vote who do not enter one of these three votes will be considered as not participating and their votes will be considered as missing.

Q7: Regarding Sections VIII.A. and IX.A. - Tally of votes: If a faculty member is unable to participate in the discussions pertaining to an RPT recommendation, and therefore does not vote on a candidate's RPT recommendation, should an explanation be provided for the "missing" vote?

A7: Yes. The department head is expected to provide an explanation for any cases of nonparticipation in Section VIII.B. of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements. See reference REG 05.20.05,Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review.

Q8: Regarding Sections VIII.A. and IX.A. - Written Assessments: Should DVF and CRPTC written assessments provide an explanation for negative votes?

A8: DVF and CRPTC assessments are to provide a summary of the discussion which, in most cases, will explain the votes. However, circumstances do occur where no negative comments are made, but negative votes are cast.
See reference Consultation and Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review.

Q9: Regarding Sections VIII.C. and IX.C. - How does adverse weather affect the candidate written response time clock?

A9: When calculating candidate written response time clocks, the time the University is operating under the Adverse Weather and Other Emergency Conditions Regulation does not count.

Tenure Clock

<Return to top>

Q1: What is the process to follow if extenuating circumstances warrant adjusting a faculty member's tenure clock?

A1: The procedure for adjusting a tenure clock is documented through the Provost's Office. See reference Extending the Tenure Clock.

Q2: Is the tenure clock or RPT schedule for review affected in any way if an RPT candidate has an FTE below 1.00?

A2: It depends. Please contact Betsy Brown for additional information.

Q3: Is the tenure clock adjusted when a faculty member has a new child in the family or takes extended Family Medical Leave, and if so, what are the processes to follow to adjust the tenure clock in these situations?

A3: In instances where faculty have a new child in the family, they may request tenure clock extension within one year following the birth, adoption, or placement of a foster child by submitting the Notification of a Birth, Adoption, or Placement of a Foster Child form. Approval is automatically granted. Requests after this one-year window are not automatic but will be considered using the process described inExtending the Tenure Clock. A maximum of two automatic extensions of one year each will be granted, while all other extensions will be considered using the process described inExtending the Tenure Clock.

Approved family medical leave of 60 calendar days or longer will automatically extend the tenure clock. A maximum of two automatic extensions of one year each will be granted, while all other extensions will be considered using the process described inExtending the Tenure Clock.

Q4: If a faculty member obtains a tenure clock extension, does that lock the faculty member into delaying their tenure consideration for a year?

A4: In the case of a tenure clock extension, the faculty member will have the option to be reviewed in either the extended mandatory year or the year prior. Both years will be considered normal review years; i.e., not “early”. If the faculty member wants to be reviewed in the year prior, the faculty member must inform the department head before the start of the departmental RPT process for that year. A faculty member should check with their department head to ascertain when their departmental review process begins.

Miscellaneous - Department Head

<Return to top>

Q1: How should the RPT review process be conducted during the departmental stage of review if the department head is also a candidate within the process?

A1: The dean is to appoint an ad hoc Head, preferably another Head in the college or a college level administrator who is a Professor, to act on the department head's case only; the department head can act on all other cases within the department.

Q2: How should the RPT review process be conducted during the departmental stage of review if the department head is not a full professor?

A2: No change in process needed. The Department Head may handle all cases, even those for promotion to Professor.

Miscellaneous - Instructors

<Return to top>

Q1: Is an RPT Dossier required when recommending an instructor for reappointment to an additional term?


A1: The RPT Dossier is not required for the reappointment of instructors.

Q2: How are reappointments for instructors handled through the RPT review process?

A2: Once an instructor has been identified in the RPT process, the Job Request-Change in Appointment Begin and End Date action may be processed in the personnel system as you normally would for an appointment outside of the RPT process. The official letter from the dean is to follow Human Resources approval of the Job Request.

Miscellaneous - Non-Tenure Track Faculty

<Return to top>

Q1: Are the reappointments of lecturers handled through the RPT review process?


A1: No.

Q2: What documentation should be submitted for recommendations for promotion of non-tenure-track faculty with professorial rank?

A2: See REG 05.20.34 Non-Tenure Track Faculty Ranks and Appointments.

Q3: Are Departmental Voting Faculties and College RPT Committees to vote on Non-Tenure-Track recommendations?

A3: Yes. See REG 05.20.34 Non-Tenure Track Ranks and Appointments.

Miscellaneous - Rules

<Return to top>

Q1: When can colleges/departments submit updates to their RPT rules?


A1: Although the Provost requests colleges/departments to verify accuracy of their RPT rules by mid-October of each year, regulations and rules may be updated at any time through the PRR revision process.

Miscellaneous - Withdrawal

<Return to top>

Q1: What procedures should be followed if a tenure-track faculty member voluntarily withdraws the case during a mandatory RPT review period?


A1: Voluntary withdrawal during the mandatory review period is tacit acknowledgment of a decision not to reappoint. The faculty member is to submit a letter to the department head outlining the candidate's decision to voluntarily withdraw and desire to not be considered in the review process. The letter will be reviewed and signed by the department head and dean and then forwarded to the Provost who will review the request for accuracy regarding appointment dates and recommend formal notification of non-reappointment.

Q2: What procedures should be followed if a tenure-track faculty member or a tenured faculty member voluntarily withdraws the case during a nonmandatory RPT review period?

A2: The candidate is to provide to the department head via e-mail or memorandum notice that they have withdrawn their case from further consideration. The department head or department head's designee will then notify the Amy Jinnette of the withdrawal via e-mail (amy_jinnette@ncsu.edu) or memorandum, Office of the Provost, Box 7526. If the case is still in the department, the department head will stop the review and inform all that need to be informed. If the case has gone beyond the department for review, the department head will inform the appropriate administrator (i.e., Provost, Dean).