Frequently Asked Questions

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

• Changes in Business Practice
• Department Head
• Emeritus and Phased Retirement
• General
• Graduate Faculty Status
• Instructors and Lecturers
• Management Flexibility
• Notification
• RPT Dossier
• Special Faculty
• Tenure Clock
• Withdrawal

Click on a question to link to the answer.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Answers

---

A1 What business practice changes were made to enhance this year's RPT process?
Reference: Changes in Business Practice

---

A2 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?
The dean is to appoint a full professor to act on the department head's case only; the department head can act on all other cases within the department.

---

A3 How should the RPT review process be conducted during the departmental stage of review if the department head is not a full professor?
The dean is to appoint a full professor to act on all cases of promotion to full professor. The department head is to act on and be a part of all other cases.

---

A4 May Emeriti faculty or faculty participating in Phased Retirement vote on RPT cases?
No. The consultative vote is provided by the tenured faculty within the department.  As Emeriti faculty and faculty participating in Phased Retirement are no longer tenured, they may be included in the consultation deliberation process, but their votes are not be included.  Please note: As applicable, candidates must grant permission for Emeriti faculty and faculty on Phased Retirement to review personnel information contained in the dossier. Reference: Academic Tenure Policy, Section 6.4

---

A5 Are all cases to be reviewed at each stage: department, college, and university?
Once initiated by formal review by the departmental voting faculty (DVF) and unless and until withdrawn by the individual reviewed, all cases are to be reviewed at the department, college, and university stages.

---

A6 What constitutes initiating a case?
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, as defined by the Academic Tenure Policy, Section 6.3 , the case is initiated.

---

A7 What constitutes a dossier?
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. Reference: Academic Tenure Policy, Section 6.3 and REG 05.20.20 RPT Dossier Format Requirements

---

A8 How are changes and updates made to the RPT process communicated to campus after the Provost's Memorandum is published online?
The deans, department heads, RPT process administrators, and deans' assistants will receive an e-mail message alerting them each time a change is made to any of the RPT instructions.  The changes are recorded online. Reference: Errata

---

A9 What are the requirements of confidentiality?
Ensure that confidentiality is maintained in the review process with no discussions of the case outside the context of the formal review. According to the 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 of the various faculty committees 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. Reference: General Process Description

---

A10 When can colleges/departments submit updates to their RPT rules ?
Although the Provost requests colleges/departments to verify accuracy of their guidelines by mid-October of each year, regulations and rules may be updated at any time through the PRR revision process .

---

A11 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?
The dossier is a complete representation of the professional credentials and accomplishments throughout the candidate's academic career.  Presentation is to make clear the timing of those accomplishments.

---

A12 Which sections of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements should be submitted for candidates who are not recommended for reappointment, promotion, and/or tenure?
All sections of the RPT Dossier are to be submitted; departments and colleges are to follow the RPT Dossier for all RPT cases regardless of whether the review has a positive or negative outcome. The only instance when the complete RPT Dossier does not have to be submitted is when a candidate voluntarily withdraws the case from consideration; see A43 and A44 below.

---

A13 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?
There is not a set time frame. However, NC State data indicates the time frame is typically about six years.

---

A14 Are the terms "9-month and 12-month" and "academic-year and fiscal-year" (respectively) used interchangeably?
Yes. The terms "9-month and 12-month" and "academic-year or fiscal-year" (respectively) are used interchangeably throughout various NC State documents.

---

A15 What process should be followed if the Graduate Faculty Status listed in the personnel system is incorrect or needs to be updated?
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.

 

A16 Is an RPT Dossier required when recommending an instructor for reappointment to an additional term?
The RPT Dossier is not required for instructors. As defined in the Academic Tenure Policy, instructors are appointed for one-year terms only and may not be reappointed for more than four years total, except as provided in the tenure policy. The reappointments of instructors are to be monitored so that reviews may be appropriately conducted before the end of the instructor's fourth year. Reference: Academic Tenure Policy, Section 5.1.

---

A17 How are reappointments for instructors handled through the RPT review process?
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. Reference: General Process Description

---

A18 Are the reappointments of lecturers handled through the RPT review process?
No.

---

A20 Are individuals being reviewed to be informed of the votes of the faculty committees, the written assessments of the faculty committees, heads, and deans?
Yes. These items formally become part of the dossier and they must be provided to the individual being reviewed. Reference: Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review

---

A21 When are individuals being reviewed to be informed of the votes of the faculty committees, the written assessments of the faculty committees, heads, and deans?
At the time of completion of the review at that stage of review. For example, when the voting faculty have prepared their written assessment, when the vote of the faculty is taken, 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. Reference: Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review

---

A22 Regarding the Dossier Cover Form: Is the original form to be submitted to the Provost's Office? Yes. Reference: Guidelines for Preparation of the Dossier Cover Form

---

A23 Regarding the Dossier Cover Form: Is the Dossier Cover Form different for candidates who have joint appointments between departments or colleges? Yes. Reference: General Process Description

---

A24 Regarding all sections with page limits denoted: Is it imperative that page limits be adhered to?
Yes. Due to reporting requirements and reproduction costs, it is imperative that all denoted page limits are adhered to. Reference: RPT Dossier Format Requirements

---

A25 Regarding Section I.C. - Candidate's Statement: Since this section is optional, should it be marked as N/A if it is not applicable? Yes. Reference: Section II.I of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements

---

A26 Regarding Section II.A.2.a. - Summary of student evaluations of teaching: What is the time frame to consider when submitting "recent summaries" information?
Three years.

---

A27 Regarding Section II.A.2.b. - Summary of peer evaluations: Are peer evaluations required?
Yes. Reference: REG 05.20.22 Reporting Teaching Evaluations in RPT Review, Section B

---

A28 Regarding Section III.A. - List accomplishments as applicable, e.g., original research articles: Are submitted publications to be listed? No. Only publications that have been published or are in press are to be included. Publications "in press" should have a letter of acceptance from the publisher on file in the department.

---

A29 Regarding Section III.B. - List externally and internally sponsored grants and contracts: Are submitted grants to be listed? No. Submitted grants do not yet have approved funding levels or duration attributed. Reference: Section III.B. of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements

---

A30 Regarding Section VII. - External Evaluations: Are external evaluations required for cases recommending reappointment to a 2nd term as assistant professor? No. Reference: Section VII of the RPT Dossier Format Requirements

---

A31 Regarding Section VII. - External Evaluations: How many external evaluation letters are required? Evaluators should be selected with the aim of obtaining evaluations from five individuals. Reference: Section "Identifying External Evaluators" - Bullet 4 of the External Evaluations for RPT Review Regulation

---

A32 Regarding Sections VIII.A. and IX.A. - Tally of votes: How are votes recorded on the Dossier Cover Form?
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.

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

Reference: Dossier Cover Form Guidelines

---

A33 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?
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.

---

A34 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?

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 . Reference: REG 05.20.5, Consultation in RPT Review

---

A35 Regarding Sections VIII.A. and IX.A. - Written Assessments: Should DVF and CRPTC written assessments provide an explanation for negative votes?
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. Reference: REG 05.20.33, Written Assessments, Recommendations, and Responses in RPT Review, Section II.B.

---

A37 Regarding Sections VIII.C. and IX.C. - How does adverse weather affect the candidate written response time clock?
When calculating candidate written response time clocks, the time the University is operating under the Adverse Weather and Other Emergency Conditions Policy does not count.

---

A38 What documentation should be submitted for recommendations for promotion of special faculty?
Reference: General Process Description

---

A39 Are Departmental Voting Faculties and College Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committees to vote on special faculty recommendations? Yes. Reference: General Process Description

---

A40 What is the process to follow if extenuating circumstances warrant adjusting a faculty member's tenure clock?
The procedure for adjusting a tenure clock is documented through the Provost's Office. Reference: Request for Tenure Clock Extension Form

Only in extenuating circumstances will tenure clock extensions be granted during the year of the scheduled review. Once the Provost or his designee approves the request, electronic notification of approval will be sent to the college and department personnel officers for filing and update of the appointment end date and appointment length in the personnel system.

---

A41 Is the tenure clock or RPT schedule for review affected in any way if an RPT candidate has an FTE below 1.00?
No.

---

A42 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?
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 (include the link). Approval is automatically granted. Requests after this one-year window are not automatic but will be considered using the process described in Question 40. A maximum of two automatic extensions of one year each will be granted, while all other extensions will be considered using the process described in Question 40.

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 in Question 40.

---

A43 If a faculty member obtains a tenure clock extension, does that lock the faculty member into delaying their tenure consideration for a year?
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.

---

A44 What procedures should be followed if a tenure-track faculty member voluntarily withdraws the case during a mandatory RPT review period?
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.  The candidate will receive a formal non-reappointment notice from the chancellor before the end of the mandatory review year.

---

A45 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?
The candidate is to provide to the department head via e-mail or memorandum the notice of intent to withdraw the case from consideration. The department head or department head's designee will then notify the Assistant Vice Provost of the withdrawal via e-mail (assistant_vice_provost@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).