NMSU Department of Biology

Statement of Departmental Responsibilities

Tenure and/or Promotion Process, Review Procedures

Qualifications for Membership on the Graduate Faculty

(Department Functions & Criteria: reaffirmed Feb 2002)

CONTENTS:	PAGE
Departmental Mission Statement	2
Statement of Departmental Responsibilities	3
Faculty Review Preparation and Schedule	4
Periodic review - assistant professor Periodic review - associate professor	4 4
Preparing the Tenure and/or Promotion Package	5
For external review For in-house review Selecting external reviewers	5 5 6
Guidelines for Review, Tenure and Promotion	6
Annual review of non-tenured faculty members Criteria for evaluating candidates for tenure and promotion Policies governing the recommendation for tenure Procedures governing the recommendation for tenure Policies governing the recommendation for promotion from assistant to associate professor Policies governing the recommendation for promotion from associate professor to professor Procedure governing the recommendation for promotion from associate professor to full professor	6 7 8 8 9 9 9
Policy Governing Membership on the Graduate Faculty	10

Departmental Mission Statement

Modified and approved, March 1999

The mission of New Mexico State University is to serve the people of New Mexico through education, research, extension education, and public service, with special emphasis on preserving the state's multi-cultural heritage, protecting its environment, and fostering its economic development in an interdependent world. New Mexico State University is an equal opportunity institution welcoming all within our community, regardless of sex, color, or other circumstance.

The purposes of the NMSU Department of Biology are coincident with those of the University, in that we see our responsibilities falling into the general areas of teaching, research, and professional service. The first two are considered inseparable and of equal importance; proper graduate and undergraduate instruction requires student involvement in research, and instructors involved in research convey more current and higher-quality instruction. The third area, professional service, is an important part of departmental activity. As a department we have the specific responsibilities in each of these areas as described below.

Teaching: We have the responsibility to provide for all students a knowledge of the general concepts of biological sciences and where possible the relationship of biology to other academic disciplines. We must also provide specialized courses and programs for biology majors and students in other departments and colleges. We must provide opportunities for hands-on experience and research skills that will be of value to students outside the college classroom. We are responsible for the mentoring and professional development of graduate students as researchers and as instructors.

Research: Research must be strenuously pursued in the Department. The results of this research not only contribute to the academic community and ultimately to society at large, but also conduct of research itself is an important ingredient in maintaining a high level of intellectual achievement and scholarship.

Professional service: Service, while not entirely separable from teaching and research, does constitute another responsibility that falls within the purposes of the Department. Members of the Department are encouraged to provide their expertise and time when possible for the Department, the university, professional organizations, government units and agencies, and otherwise for citizens locally, statewide, and nationally.

STATEMENT OF DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES

The Department of Biology has multiple responsibilities in providing 1) basic education in biology for all students, 2) providing specialized training for a) our majors and b) students in other departments, especially in agriculture and nursing education, and 3) providing high quality graduate education at the Masters Degree and Ph.D. degree levels in Biology. Not only must we provide sufficient breadth in our offerings to serve undergraduates but at the same time provide depth and sufficient research strength to serve graduate students.

The faculty contribution through research in a land grant university setting, where the Ph.D. degree is offered, in conjunction with teaching at all levels, is also an important responsibility that must be strenuously pursued within the department. The results of this research not only contribute to the academic community and ultimately to society at large, but it is important in maintaining a high level of intellectual endeavor.

It is also the department’s responsibility to provide, to the best of its ability, the intellectual atmosphere and physical facilities that permit individual faculty to meet the responsibilities stated.

The departmental Guidelines for Review, Tenure, and Promotion reflect clearly the departmental responsibilities (these guidelines follow). It is clear in those that scholarship is the most important facet. Scholarship is an inseparable and coequal combination of the teaching and research activities of the faculty. Scholarship is the necessary base for attaining the goals of Biology. Accordingly, scholarship is the principal factor in annual evaluations and in recommending tenure and promotion.

Specifically, all faculty members are expected to develop a research program to the level at which teaching assignments should not exceed three formal courses per year (approximately 9 credit hours on average). Under some conditions a teaching commitment less than that may be considered a full assignment after consultation with the department head and the college dean. Examples are: very heavy advising responsibilities (including graduate mentorship), involvement in traineeship programs that provide outside funding for release time, involvement in research programs that provide outside funding for release time, and administrative duties such as those of the chair and the associate chair of the department.

Formal courses are usually easily identified when assigning teaching loads. The usual pattern is that two of the courses are larger general courses or upper division required courses and the third is one close to the faculty member’s research interest area. If a faculty member has been assigned sufficient credit for graduate student advising (as determined by the formula devised by the administration), then that may be considered part of his/her formal teaching load. Faculty members may elect, but will not be encouraged, to take extra course assignments in some semesters; this is particularly dependent upon research activity and productivity.

Communication of the results of research to others is a primary obligation of the faculty. For this reason, research activity is best measured by the degree of peer recognition that a faculty member receives (see attached guidelines for details).

All faculty are expected to seek outside funding for their research and the graduate program. The degree of success in obtaining grant funds must be weighed against such factors as the variety of sources sponsoring a particular kind of research and the availability of funds.

Service is properly part of the responsibility of a faculty member, remembering that scholarship is the primary responsibility. The accompanying guidelines identify various types of service activities.

Other activities hard to categorize but important for the department to carry out its responsibilities include museum collection curating and identification of specimens, maintenance of equipment such as electron microscope and analyzers of all types, improvement of library holdings, and coordination of programs with visiting speakers. All of these activities are time consuming and the load in carrying out these activities falls more heavily on some faculty members than others, and this must be recognized for the contribution that is made to the department.

FACULTY REVIEW PREPARATION AND SCHEDULE

(See also “Guidelines” section, following)

PERIODIC REVIEW – ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

[updated 2-2000]

Procedures in the AP&P Manual will be followed. Progress toward tenure and progress toward promotion will be addressed separately.

The Promotion and Tenure Committee in Biology will consist of all faculty available at any one rank allowed by University regulations to review faculty at lower ranks, plus an outside member to be appointed by the Dean. The Committee will be constructed according to University and College guidelines.

Assistant professors will be reviewed once per year for progress toward tenure and toward promotion, by both the departmental Committee and the Department Chair. Biology will perform these reviews during the spring semester. The reviews will separately address teaching, research and service, will indicate clearly areas of concern, and may also address other aspects of the individual that affect professional capacity.

Not later than the spring semester of the fifth year of service, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will review an untenured faculty member’s file and either recommend that the faculty member assemble a file for formal consideration for promotion and tenure the following fall, or recommend that the faculty member not assemble this file. In the latter instance, the faculty member may choose formal consideration in the fall nevertheless. If the candidate does not wish to be formally considered in the fall he/she must indicate so to the department head in writing.

PERIODIC REVIEW – ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

The Biology Department believes that it is in the best interest of a faculty member and the department to review associate professors periodically. Normally the very shortest period at associate professor level at NMSU is five years. An offer, in writing, to review an associate professor in the spring of each year will be extended, an acceptance or decline for review to be acknowledged also in writing. In the spring of the third year after promotion to associate professor, review will be required. This will consist of a review of the faculty member’s vitae, annual evaluations by the department chair, and other materials that the faculty member chooses to submit, with the intent that the review will provide the faculty member feedback on progress that he/she is making toward promotion to full professor.

The faculty member will be notified by the department at the end of the fourth year after promotion to associate professor, in the spring, that time for earliest formal consideration of promotion to full professor would take place in the fall of the fifth year. A second brief review may be requested by the faculty member in the fourth spring. If so, the faculty member will be given guidance by the Promotion and Tenure Committee with regard to the advisability of a request for consideration for promotion.

Whatever the outcome of the review, or in the absence of a review, the faculty member may choose or decline to put his or her request for promotion and supporting documentation forward for formal consideration the following fall. If so he/she will be given assistance by the department in preparing the review package. If promotion is not sought, or not granted, subsequent reviews of the faculty member’s file by the department will be at the request of the faculty member.

PREPARING THE PROMOTION AND/OR TENURE PACKAGE

The candidate is responsible for preparing a package that (1) details the candidate’s progress to outside reviewers and (2) details progress for NMSU faculty who will review the candidate. The package that is prepared is the product of the candidate. The following is a recommendation:

For external review:

Part A: Complete vitae

Part B: In the case of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, experience and accomplishments prior to joining NMSU

Part C: Accomplishments since joining NMSU (or since last promotion, but then summarizing previous progress).

Dates are relevant.

A single moderate-size three ring binder should be sufficient. Include:

A current vitae

A statement regarding teaching philosophy

A list of courses taught and overall teaching load

Up to 5 most important papers

A statement as to why these papers are important

A list of successful grants

A listing and brief description of service activities

The candidate, of course, may include anything more that he/she wishes.

For in-house review:

This would include all materials for external review, but might be much more thorough with regard to teaching and service accomplishments. The candidate might wish to include:

All evidence of personal accomplishments felt to be applicable to quantity and breadth of teaching contributions (all facets), and quality of teaching.

Factual information; courses taught, various kinds of involvement, advising, administrative responsibilities, thesis titles and students directed, degree levels of programs supervised, etc.

Extraordinary efforts such as off-campus development, distance education work curriculum development, etc.

Accomplishments in local, regional and national service.

SELECTING THE EXTERNAL REVIEWERS:

NMSU requires letters from at least 3 external reviewers for tenure and/or promotion. Biology believes that assurance of receiving at least 3 letters is achieved by requesting letters from at least 5 external reviewers who positively respond to initial inquiries regarding availability and willingness to prepare a review. These names will be selected as follows:

The candidate will suggest 5 external reviewers. These ordinarily are professionals at or above the rank being sought by the candidate. The candidate is urged to carefully consider the pros and cons of selecting previous mentors as external reviewers.

Using similar guidelines, the departmental P&T Committee will suggest 2 external reviewers and will confer with the candidate regarding the appropriateness of these reviewers.

These 7 reviewers will be contacted early in the summer.

Of the positive responses at least 5 will be selected by the department head and or the chair of the P&T Committee in conference with the candidate. An approximate balance of candidate-selected and committee-selected will be attempted (i.e. " 4:1 ratio). Those reviewers who indicated that they could review but do not make the final “cut” will be notified by the department chair.

If at least 5 external reviewers cannot be found the department chair or the chair of the promotion and tenure committee will confer with the candidate to seek other external reviewers that are considered acceptable.

All letters received from external reviewers will become part of the tenure and/or promotion package. The promotion and tenure committee and/or the department chair may wish to specifically address the content of certain letters or parts of certain letters in their review of the candidate and the tenure/promotion package.

GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW, TENURE AND PROMOTION

[Event timing, committee composition and procedures are subject to changes required by current AP&P]

I. Annual Review of Non-tenured Faculty Members

Reviews of non-tenured faculty members are conducted annually in the spring semester by tenured faculty. For final recommendations regarding tenure, reviews are initiated approximately six weeks before the deadline for tenure recommendations set by the College.

Annual review will be governed by the following procedures:

A. Prior to the annual review all non-tenured faculty members should review their own personnel files and bring them up to date concerning their activities. If the files seems to be inadequate in reflecting his/her contributions, the non-tenured faculty member should feel free to add statements to supplement the formal file. He/she will be notified sufficiently in advance so that documents may be prepared carefully.

B. Written statements and personnel files of non-tenured faculty members will be available for each tenured faculty member for review.

C. The annual review will terminate with a meeting of the tenured faulty.

D. Results of the review meeting will be conveyed to the non-tenured faculty members by the department chairman.

II. Criteria for Evaluating Candidates for Tenure and Promotion

The following will serve as guidelines for evaluating candidates for tenure or promotion. These guidelines are listed in decreasing order of importance (A, B, C). These could also serve as the basis for self-evaluation by all faculty of the department.

A. SCHOLARSHIP. We view scholarship as the sum of an individual’s research and teaching activities. As such we hold that these activities are co-equal and to a large extent inseparable. The Department of Biology has as its primary goal a balanced program of undergraduate and graduate education and productive research. Thus scholarship, involving both teaching and research, must be considered as the primary factor in awarding tenure and promotions.

1. Teaching Activities

a. It is expected that courses taught will be up do date in content and will be well organized. Demonstration of effectiveness in teaching can be based on combinations of student evaluations, faculty evaluation and critical self-evaluation.

b. The mentoring of undergraduate and graduate students, either formally for credit or in a less formal manner, is an important aspect of teaching and is appropriately considered a part of teaching effectiveness.

c. It is expected that as a member of the faculty the individual will be available to both undergraduate and graduate students outside of the classroom both as a teach and an advisor. Personal contact between the faculty member and students is an important part of the learning process of the student and is significant in the development of the faculty member in his/her role as a teacher. This activity should extend to all students who seek help from, or counsel with the faculty member.

2. Research Activities

a. Faculty members are expected to initiate and maintain a productive research program. In the absence of outside support, this program must be within the limitations of the department’s ability to support research.

b. Since the financial resources of the department are limited, it is expected that faculty members will actively seek outside support. The degree of success in these efforts will be weighted against such factors as sources and availability of funds.

c. Significant measures of research activity can take a variety of forms. The most significant are those that indicate peer recognition. These include papers published in peer-reviewed journals, invited contributions to symposia or published works, and awards for scholarly activity. Papers presented at professional meetings, papers published in non-reviewed journals, progress reports, etc. are among the other important indications of research activity.

B. COOPERATION. The number of faculty members in the department is small and the departmental facilities are limed, requiring much sharing by both faculty and students. It is important that faculty members interact and cooperate with each other and with students in a positive manner. In situations where the cooperation is perceived to be a problem, the faculty member should be informed and given recommendations for adjustment.

C. SERVICE. The primary responsibilities of faculty members in the Department of Biology are teaching and research. Service as listed below will be considered within the constraints of these responsibilities.

1. Professional Organizations. It is recognized that an essential part of scholarship is active participation in professional societies. These activities are in addition to publishing papers, and may include acting as a reviewer, editor or officer. These activities can be construed as recognition by peers and as such reflect credit to the individual and to the department.

2. Departmental. Participation in departmental planning and operation is recognized as an essential part of the duties of faculty members at all ranks.

3. University. Faculty participation in university governance is desirable. Such participation, however, should not be at the expense of primary responsibilities.

4. Community. Service to the community will be considered to the extent that it contributes to the stature of the department and the university.

III. Policies Governing the Recommendation for Tenure

A. The department is subject to the rules of the university in determining when a tenure decision must be made.

B. The recommendation that tenure be awarded to a faculty member of the department will be largely based on a positive indication of success in both teaching and research.

C. Cooperation and service will be considered.

IV. Procedures Governing the Recommendation for Tenure

A. At the time of annual review, a faculty member may be considered for tenure for the coming year. Prior to the review, a faculty member being reviewed or any member of the tenured faculty may request that tenure be considered during the review.

B. A statement should be filed by the candidate that supports the recommendation for tenure in terms of criteria established by the department.

C. The next step is review of the file by tenured faculty members. Any tenured faculty member who has a question concerning fitness of the faculty member under consideration must express these doubts and explicitly cite his or her reasons at the time of the initial annual review meeting. Ideally, unless new, such concerns would have been expressed in one or more previous annual reviews so the department and candidate might have taken corrective action.

D. In the event that such a question is raised about the granting of tenure, one or more tenured faculty members will be chosen to consult with both the tenure candidate and all of those raising questions. The object of this is to provide an advocate for the candidate who will be in a knowledgeable position to defend the candidate in a formal meeting later. The tenured faculty will meet to formally consider the question of tenure. All questions should be raised at this time and appropriate criticisms answered. If new criticisms arise at this time, the meeting will be recessed until rebuttal information is gathered.

E. The tenured faculty will reach one of the following decisions:

1. Recommendation for tenure.

2. Recommendation for postponement of a decision on tenure (if such a postponement is possible within the duration of time established by the University for reaching a tenure decision).

3. A failure to recommend tenure.

F. A simple majority vote made by secret ballot by the tenured faculty shall authorize a recommendation for tenure to the Dean. Distribution of votes will be made known to the Dean and to the candidate.

V. Policies Governing the Recommendation for Promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor

A. The department is subject to the rules of the University in determining when promotion decisions may be made.

B. In general, a recommendation for this promotion will be based on demonstrated ability in both teaching and research. Accomplishments in both these broad areas might not be uniform, but notable deficiencies and documented problems are likely to detract from a positive recommendation. Unusually fine performances, however, in either area may also justify a recommendation for promotion.

C. A consideration of service activities may also be part of the materials reviewed.

VI. Policies Governing the Recommendation for Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor.

Professor is unique among the academic ranks. “A professor through teaching and service should have demonstrated substantial command of his/her whole field, sound scholarship, and a mature view of the discipline. Promotion to professor should not be considered to be forthcoming merely because of years of service...[Instead he/she]... is expected to expected to have maintained all the qualities and conditions required for tenure and for the rank of associate professor. Additionally, a professor should exhibit special stature in his/her discipline, in leadership, and in both teaching and service.” (Faculty handbook, 95-96)

A. Special stature in his/her field. This can be accomplished by a combination of contributions to activities designed for the improvement of instruction.

1. Teaching ability. As indicated by innovation, enthusiasm, and contributions to activities designed for the improvement of instruction.

2. Research ability. As indicated by publications and the direction of graduate students.

3. Professional Service. As indicated by involvement in state, regional, national, and international groups within his/her field.

B. Leadership. This quality will be determined primarily on a departmental basis and secondarily on a university and/or outside basis. Leadership should embody initiative, perseverance, and originality.

C. Balanced Contribution. A professor should have substantial strength in all areas - teaching, research, and professional service.

VII. Procedures Governing the Recommendation for Promotion from Associate Professor to Full Professor.

A. Once a year the associate professors will be requested to indicate whether they wish to be reviewed and considered for promotion to professor as indicated in guidelines in a proceeding section.

B. Should it be decided to give detailed consideration to promotion, an associate professor will be asked to prepare a file, built around criteria as suggested above, allowing discussion of any points of particular importance from the faculty member’s point of view. At this time names of outside reviewers will be selected.

C. The next step is review of the file and letters by the professors. Recommendation for promotion will be based upon a simple majority vote of the professors. Results of the vote will be made available to the Dean and to the candidate.

D. Normally, an associate professor will not be recommended for promotion until he/she has held the associate rank for at least five years. Nevertheless, should an associate professor feel that he/she is qualified for promotion before five years have elapsed he/she may request to be considered. This may occur with or without preliminary in-house review by the promotion and tenure committee.

POLICY GOVERNING MEMBERSHIP ON THE GRADUATE FACULTY

The Biology Department is very much concerned about quality of its graduate faculty. The faculty feels that there must be periodic review of all members as regulated by the Graduate School. The faculty is unanimous in its belief that the importance of items that contribute to the determination of a member’s fitness for the Graduate Faculty may vary from department to department, but more importantly from person to person in a given department. Consequently, it is imperative that criteria used to determine graduate faculty qualifications be developed and assessed by each department for its members. This department feels that the inclusive qualification should be “Creative scholarship at the graduate level.”