Faculty Reappointment, Promotion and/or Tenure
 


I. General Requirements

This policy will be in effect as of October 1, 2001, and will be used for evaluating the overall academic performance of a full-time faculty member in making recommendations for :
(a) Re-appointment (b) Promotion (c) Tenure

Reappointment of a full-time faculty member shall not be granted automatically upon completion of the terms of the contract, but shall be based on satisfactory performance in the three related categories above as assessed and determined by the Department Chairperson, DPC, FPC, Faculty Dean, PVP, and the President.

Also, promotion and/or tenure of a full-time faculty member shall not be granted automatically, upon completion of the minimum six-year-term (or ten-year-term) of continuous service at NDU. Neither longevity of service nor the assumption of administrative posts shall be a warranty for promotion and/or tenure. Indeed, no promotion or tenure shall be granted without documented evidence that significant achievement has been and will continue to be made in the scholarly work criteria, in addition to demonstrating high-quality of curricula development activities and teaching performance. Service in all aspects of the University operations shall be considered as an integral part of the evaluation criteria and shall not be disregarded on the basis that the first two categories carry more weight. Hence, a full-time faculty member shall always seek to excel in all three categories. Each successive evaluation for promotion from one rank to another higher rank shall be based upon new and non-recurrent evidence of substantial growth beyond the stage at which the previous rank was attained.

II. The Categories

 1. Teaching and Curricula Development                
This category is an important factor in the evaluation criteria. It shall be the major indicator of the candidate’s broad recognition as both a teacher and an educator.  It shall include, but shall not be limited to                                                          

  • Course and curricula activities, as may be demonstrated by the development of new relevant courses; proposing new programs of study; the improvement of existing courses; course portfolio evaluation; clearly stated course objectives; etc.
  • Development and use of innovative pedagogy and effective teaching techniques at various levels of the teaching-learning process, as may be demonstrated by the candidate’s rate of success over the years of service as a teacher at the University; by diversity, originality, size and level of courses taught; by departmental teaching evaluation, by student evaluation; by student performance in later sequential courses; by quality presentation; by efficient management of the class-time.

2. Scholarly Work
This category is the most important factor in the evaluation criteria for promotion and/or tenure. It shall be considered as the major indicator of the candidate’s broad recognition as a scholar and/or artist. It shall always include evidence of original research and creative work sufficient in both quality and quantity as appropriate to the related field, while taking into account that in some fields of study the corresponding quantity may be much lower than in some other fields of study.

2.1. Research & Publications
This sub-category is mainly required for those candidates who are in the professorial ranks.  However, any contribution to this category by candidates in the non-professorial ranks will be considered and evaluated in their favor.  This sub-category shall include the publication of books, refereed articles, refereed conference papers, and other related scholarly works.              
      
2.2. Creative Productivity
(2.2.a)    This sub-category shall include, but shall not be limited to,

    • The production or the creation of creative work of high distinction in    painting,   sculpture, design, architectural work, and other creative arts. The exhibition of a creative work of high distinction in museums, prestigious galleries, and the like.                          
    • The staging, directing, or acting in musical, theatrical and dance productions  and other performing arts.                               
    • Creative writing (i.e., fiction, drama, poetry, art, design, architecture, etc.)                                               

(2.2.b) - The publication of reviews of performances in related prestigious journals or magazines                                                                                                     

  • Publications of reviews of exhibits or artistic displays or innovative design in related prestigious journals or magazines.
  • Reviewing work in painting, sculpture, design, architecture, and other creative   arts                                                         
  • In-house publications of logos, post-cards, posters, slides, etc.   

3. Services
This category is another important factor in the evaluation criteria. It shall be the major indicator of the candidate’s dedication, commitment, and devotion to serve the University.

III. Eligibility Requirements

  • For a candidate to be eligible for promotion in the professorial ranks from one rank to higher rank, when there is a vacancy in the appropriate University quota requirement, he/she must:
  • have an appropriate Ph.D. degree or its equivalent.
  • have successfully completed at least 6 years of continuous full-time employment in the same professorial rank at NDU, unless he/she was initially credited with some years of services due to prior external full-time employment in the same rank in another accredited institution of higher education.
  • have shown clear of evidence deserving promotion.
  •  be recommended by the President to the executive committee of the BOT, upon the completion of the evaluation process, and be approved by the executive committee of BOT.

Those who qualify for promotion and/or tenure, without meeting the quota requirement, must be placed on an orderly waiting list (based on seniority, and higher scores) housed in the Office of the PVP for Academic Affairs until the appropriate vacancy arises.

  • For a candidate to be eligible for promotion in the non-professorial ranking from one rank to another higher rank, he/she must:
  • have successfully completed at least 6 continuous years of full-time employment in the same non-professorial rank at NDU, unless he/she was initially credited with some years of services due to prior external full-time employment in the same rank in another accredited institution of  higher education.
  • have shown clear evidence deserving promotion.
  • be recommended by the Faculty, the PVP for Academic Affairs, and approved by the President.

IV. Evaluation Process

In October of each year, the PVP for Academic Affairs shall ask each Faculty Dean to begin the consideration of file applications for re-appointment, promotion and/or tenure within his/her Faculty. The evaluation process shall consist of the following steps, and shall, at each level, adhere to the terms of the above criteria of File evaluation and shall deal solely with only evidence contained in the official File or Dossier. Hence, it is the responsibility of the candidate to efficiently and promptly compile his/her File by the University set deadline.

Step 1: The submission of the File by the faculty member concerned in its totality to the Department Chairperson concerned. Immediately, the Department Chairperson shall include his/her evaluation and recommendation in the File, and thereafter convene the DPC for deliberation by the deadline set by the Faculty Dean.
Step 2: The DPC shall submit the File in its totality along with written evaluation and recommendation to the Dean concerned, including the vote distribution. In due time, the Dean shall convene the FPC for deliberation by the deadline set by the PVP for Academic Affairs. 
Step 3: The Dean shall submit the File in its totality along with the following:

  • the written evaluation and recommendation, including the vote distribution of the FPC,
  • his/her written evaluation and recommendation to the PVP for Academic Affairs, not later than the end of April of the same academic year.

The Files approved by the VP for their legal aspects (contents, criteria, years, etc.) shall be submitted to the UFPC, while non-approved Files will be returned to the concerned faculty members.
Step 4: The UFPC shall forward the Files with its written evaluation and recommendation to the President for final action, except for tenure, and promotion to Associate Professor and/or Professor. In these latter cases, the Files shall be submitted by the UFPC to the President for possible review by external peer reviewers.  Consequently, the Files that receive favorable assessment from the President shall be forwarded by the President to the Executive Committee of the BOT for final action.
Step 5: The President shall inform the individuals concerned of the University’s final decision not later than the end of May of the same academic year. Consequently, all approved applications for re-appointment, promotion and/or tenure shall be effective October 1 of the next academic year.

V. Confidentiality

Each faculty member and/or administrator who has been involved in the evaluation process of a File, at any level of the process, shall assume the professional responsibility to deal with the content of the File and the outcome of the evaluation process with extreme care of confidentiality.

VI. The Academic File

The file of each full-time faculty member shall contain only material pertaining to the work of the faculty member as it relates to his/her academic status, and it shall be the only File to be used in decisions concerning the conditions of employment of the full-time faculty member with the understanding that once the faculty member submits the File to the Department Chairperson concerned for an administrative action by the DPC, no document may be added to, or withdrawn from, the File until the entire evaluation process is completely done.
Initially, the File shall include the following:

  • File’s table of contents
  • Candidate’s letter requesting re-appointment, promotion and/or tenure.
  • Summary of all previous actions on re-appointment, promotion and/or tenure.
  • An updated and detailed curriculum vitae.
  • The candidate’s self-evaluation report.
  • Evidence on teaching and curriculum development.
  • Evidence on research and publications.
  • Evidence on creative productivity.
  • Evidence on professional activities and professional listings.
  • Evidence on services and administrative assignments, if any.
  • Evidence on all other relevant documents, if any.

The several recommendations and evaluations shall become an integral part of the candidate’s File, and shall include the voting distribution (i.e., the numerical results of voting by secret ballots), and shall include the assigned grades to each category and sub-category, and shall assess the nature and quantity of work and its time length and, more importantly, its quality and originality, and shall explicitly address the level to which the candidate satisfies or does not satisfy the requirement of the evaluation criteria. Thus, if a candidate receives a positive response, then the evaluation shall clearly identify his/her points of strength. Otherwise, it shall clearly identify the points that still require improvement and further work.