Faculty Promotion Policy

General Overview of the Process for Promotion in Rank

Promotion in rank is based on the faculty member’s achievement while at McNeese as well as their potential for professional growth. Promotion in rank carries an assumption of the faculty member’s increasing responsibility to serve the University mission with regard to teaching, scholarly activity/research, and service. The review of application materials for promotion should focus on quality over quantity. 

A faculty member must either already hold tenure or be undergoing tenure review to be eligible for promotion in rank. Promotion is not granted to non-tenured faculty. Promotion in rank is not automatic and cannot be earned simply by attaining the minimum qualifications for that rank. Only academic criteria are considered for promotion in rank. Under no circumstances is seniority in time served considered a factor in promotion. 

Recommendations for promotion submitted to the provost are considered according to the quality of appropriate academic criteria, number of faculty in each rank, past merit performance, and potential for contributions that will enhance the learning community. The provost includes information and input from the University academic leadership when evaluating recommendations for promotion.

The number of faculty promoted in any given year may vary to ensure compliance with Part Two, Chapter III, Section X of the University of Louisiana (UL) System Board Rules which states that faculty holding the rank of professor should not exceed 35% of the total faculty, with a typical range of 20-28%, and those holding the rank of associate professor should also not exceed 35% of the total faculty, with a typical range of 25-35%. McNeese may fall below these ranges for both ranks.

Criteria for Promotion

Criteria for promotion provided in this policy represent the minimum criteria that must be incorporated into departmental/college guidelines for promotion. Colleges and departments may develop additional and/or more specific criteria than the items presented within this policy. It is the department head and dean’s responsibility that all tenured and tenure-track full-time faculty members are made aware of the criteria for promotion in their department and college. Departmental criteria for promotion must be consistent with annual performance review (APR) and performance level expectations and must be approved by the dean. The criteria for promotion must be within UL System and University guidelines.

Instructor Rank

Instructor positions are non-tenure-track positions not eligible for promotion. Instructors cannot be promoted to assistant professor or higher from an instructor position. Instructors may apply for an assistant professor vacancy for which they qualify.

Assistant Professor to Associate Professor Rank

To be eligible for promotion from assistant to associate professor, the faculty member must have earned at least a master’s degree with a major concentration in the teaching discipline or a related discipline, including 18 hours of graduate credit in the teaching discipline, from an institution accredited by a US Department of Education-recognized institutional accreditor.

The faculty member must have achieved relatively high APR scores, and the earning of consistent overall performance level ratings of satisfactory on the APR is a key factor when considering promotion applications. The faculty member must have demonstrated continued professional growth and development through participation in the activities of the various professional associations of their discipline and through publications or comparable scholarly achievements. The faculty member must demonstrate consistent contribution to the institutional mission, including student engagement and success. Collegiality is also considered in promotion decisions. Department heads and deans must meet the same criteria for promotion.

Associate Professor to Professor Rank

To be eligible for promotion from associate professor to the rank of professor, a faculty member must have an earned doctorate or terminal degree in the teaching discipline, or a related discipline, from an institution accredited by a US Department of Education-recognized institutional accreditor and must have held the rank of associate professor for at least five years.

The faculty member must have demonstrated excellence, a strong record of scholarly/creative achievement, above-average APR scores, and consistent overall performance level ratings of satisfactory on the APR since the previous promotion. Faculty considered for the rank of professor must demonstrate exceptionally skilled performance in teaching, publication or comparable scholarly activity, service, and consistent contribution to the institutional mission, including student engagement and success. Furthermore, the faculty member must have demonstrated continued professional growth and development through participation in the various professional associations of their discipline. Collegiality is also considered in promotion decisions. Department heads and deans must meet the same criteria for promotion.

Guidelines for Evaluation of Candidates for Promotion

Professional accomplishments should be measured in proportion to the work assignment and support for professional growth (e.g., reassigned time, grants, travel to professional meetings, graduate assistant support, etc.). For example, all candidates should demonstrate excellence in teaching; in addition, a faculty member who receives reassigned time for research may be expected to achieve higher levels of scholarly productivity than one who has responsibility for a full teaching load of 12 credit hours per semester.

Candidates for promotion should provide evidence of professional achievement which is truly outstanding, significant to the discipline and supportive of the University mission. Evidence must be documented and available for review. Candidates who do not meet the criteria will not receive a positive recommendation for promotion to a higher rank.

Procedures for Promotion Review

The following procedures should be followed for review of applications for promotion.

Submission of the Application for Promotion

Applications for promotion are submitted in the learning management system (LMS) by March 1. If the University is closed on March 1, the application is due the next business day.

The candidate for promotion should seek advice from the department head, and may choose to consult with the dean, regarding eligibility for promotion well before the March 1 deadline. 

If the candidate decides to submit an application for promotion, these steps must be followed:

1. The dean or department head submits a request to the Office of E-Learning and Testing for a course shell to be created in the LMS to house the application for promotion. The course shell should be named “Spring [Current Year] Promotion Application – Faculty Member’s Last Name, First Name”.
2. The department head enrolls the candidate into the LMS course.
3. The candidate uploads documentation into the LMS course shell to create the application for promotion. Supporting documentation must cover at least the five most recent years of their current rank. Colleges and/or departments may require additional documents than those listed below, but at a minimum, the application must contain the following, organized in a way that is easy to navigate:
   1. A concise narrative summary presenting the candidate’s basis for requesting consideration for promotion, not to exceed two pages. The candidate should clearly state achievement and recognition (relative to approved departmental guidelines) on which they believe the overall APR results and the teaching, scholarly activity/research, and service should be judged. The information submitted should apply to achievements since the most recent promotion or, if requesting promotion for the first time, since the date hired in the tenure-track position.
   2. A current and complete curriculum vitae (resumé).
   3. Documented APR summaries and performance level ratings since the most recent promotion or, if requesting promotion for the first time, since the date hired in the tenure-track position.
   4. Evidence of positive classroom teaching, student advising, student success, innovative teaching methods, and mentoring since the most recent promotion or, if requesting promotion for the first time, since the date hired in the tenure-track position. Include copies of Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEI) results, including student comments for the appropriate timeframe.
   5. Evidence of scholarly activity, research, and/or professional recognition appropriate to the teaching discipline since the most recent promotion or, if requesting promotion for the first time, since the date hired in the tenure-track position.
   6. Evidence of service since the most recent promotion or, if requesting promotion for the first time, since the date hired in the tenure-track position.
4. When the application is completed in the LMS course, the candidate notifies the department head.

Peer Evaluation by Tenured Faculty in the Department*

The department head informs tenured faculty within the department holding rank at or above the rank being requested about the need to review a request for promotion. To begin the review process, the department head makes the candidate’s application available to the appropriate faculty, department head, and dean by enrolling them into the LMS course. The department head may ask the tenured faculty members to convene as a committee or the department head may poll each faculty member individually to determine the recommendation for each person requesting promotion. Faculty reviewing the candidate’s file must ensure the evaluation is not tainted by undocumented or hearsay evidence.

If the review takes place in a committee format, the committee should select a spokesperson to lead the discussion regarding each candidate’s application and to report the committee’s recommendation in writing to the department head. All committee members must sign a written document indicating their individual recommendation or the committee’s consensus regarding the request for promotion. The document with all signatures is forwarded to the department head by the committee spokesperson.

If a committee is not convened, each tenured faculty member reviews the application materials separately; then the department head obtains the signature of each faculty member providing input for the promotion recommendation. The signature serves as documentation that all appropriately credentialed faculty have been consulted in the promotion decision.

*In cases where there are less than three departmental tenured faculty at the appropriate rank for the promotion review, the department head must consult with the dean to identify tenured faculty, in related disciplines, at the appropriate rank to assist with the review. The candidate must be informed in writing about the faculty who will review the materials and provide input regarding the recommendation for promotion.

Department Head Evaluation of Candidate for Promotion

The department head’s evaluation of the candidate for promotion should be founded primarily upon a definite, objective, and fair interpretation of the candidate’s application and teaching, scholarly activity/research, and service as documented in previous APRs. The evaluation shall not be tainted by undocumented or hearsay evidence. The department head may request additional supporting documentation as well as an interview with the candidate. The department head will make the recommendation based on their evaluation of the candidate’s performance in producing scholarly activity, contributing to the discipline, teaching/classroom performance, service, and collegiality. The department head will forward the signed departmental faculty recommendation as well as the signed department head’s recommendation to the dean for further consideration.

Dean Evaluation of Candidate for Promotion

The dean’s evaluation of the candidate for promotion should be founded primarily upon a definite interpretation of the candidate’s previous APR results (teaching, scholarly activity/research, and service), evidence of consistent professional growth and contribution to the institutional mission, and other information in the review file. The evaluation shall not be tainted by undocumented or hearsay evidence. In making their decision, the dean should consider carefully the recommendations of the candidate’s departmental peers and department head.

The dean may convene a college committee comprised of tenured faculty holding rank at or above the rank being requested to review the request. Each member of the college committee must provide signed, written documentation indicating their individual recommendation regarding the request for promotion.

The dean should study the information supporting the request and take into consideration the department head’s and the faculty’s comments (and, if appropriate, the college committee’s comments) relevant to the recommendation, interview the candidate if deemed necessary, and make their own recommendation regarding promotion.

Approval/disapproval by the dean should be a matter of careful review to ensure that no major misjudgments have been made by the faculty and the department head, that no major inequalities exist between departments in meeting the academic standards of the college, and that candidates demonstrate consistent contribution to the institutional mission.

By April 1, the dean should forward their recommendation and supporting documentation to the provost and should ensure that the provost and all other academic deans are enrolled in the LMS course for the Office of Academic Affairs review.

Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Review

Approval/disapproval by the provost should be a matter of careful review to ensure that no major misjudgments have been made by the recommending units (departmental faculty, department head, and college dean) and that no major inequalities exist between colleges in meeting the academic standards of the University. The provost may create an ad hoc committee comprised of one tenured faculty member at the appropriate rank to represent each academic college to review the process for each promotion recommendation.

When there are conflicting recommendations from the tenured faculty, department head, and dean, the provost should study all the particulars and make an appropriate determination for recommendation.

The provost reviews all recommendations for promotion with the academic deans and the library director prior to forwarding the recommendations to the president. The provost’s review may consider documented but confidential information related to the candidate’s work performance in formulating a decision for promotion. Institutional requirements as to the number of faculty at each rank may restrict the number of promotions recommended.

After all reviews are completed, the provost submits recommendations for promotion to the president.

Promotion Decision

The president makes the final recommendation for faculty promotion and forwards recommendations for promotion to the UL System Board of Supervisors for final action. The Office of Academic Affairs informs the candidate of the status of the request for promotion prior to the end of the spring semester. After the UL System Board of Supervisors acts on the recommendations at their August board meeting, the Office of Academic Affairs informs the candidate in writing. The promotion decision shall be made public only after the UL System Board of Supervisors has approved the promotion.

Communication

This policy is distributed via the University Policies webpage.