7.3.1 Third-year Review, Tenure and Promotion of Instructional Faculty

7.3.1 Third-year Review, Tenure and Promotion of Instructional Faculty

The President retains the power of approval for third-year review determinations, conferrals of tenure, and promotions. The Provost, acting in accordance with the provisions stated in this Faculty/Administration Manual, is responsible for making the final recommendation to the President in respect to all such matters.

Tenure and promotion require substantial evidence of consistently high professional competence in teaching, research and professional development, and service. In addition, evidence of either exemplary performance in at least one of the three specified professional competency areas or significant achievement in the two areas of teaching and research and professional development is required. Tenure is a long-term commitment by the College; it is not merely a reward for work accomplished, but it is an award given with the expectation that consistently high professional competence will continue. (Rev. April 2009)

A third-year review should substantiate whether satisfactory progress toward tenure has been made. There should be evidence of effective teaching, a continuing research program, and active participation in service. A candidate should be informed in detail of any weakness that, if not corrected, might lead to a negative tenure decision. If there are serious doubts as to whether the candidate will be able to meet the criteria prior to a required tenure decision, a recommendation against retention should be given.

A tenure decision is made only once, no later than the sixth year. Up to two years credit toward tenure and promotion may be awarded at the time of initial appointment for teaching and research on a full-time basis at other four-year and graduate colleges and universities or for fulltime employment at faculty positions of special status at the College of Charleston. A person receiving the maximum of two years credit would be eligible for consideration for tenure during the fourth year at the College. A person receiving one year of credit would be eligible for consideration for tenure during the fifth year at the College. (Rev. April 2007)

Six years in rank is normally required for an Assistant Professor to be eligible for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor. Seven years in rank is normally required for an Associate Professor to be eligible for promotion to Professor.

In exceptional cases a faculty member may wish to petition for early tenure or promotion provided the action has the prior written approval of the Provost, the Dean and the Departmental Chair.

Faculty are evaluated in the three categories of Teaching Effectiveness, Research and Professional Development, and Professional Service to the Community. Because teaching is the primary responsibility of any faculty member, evidence of effective teaching is expected for tenure and for promotion. Because research and professional development are essential to the mission of the College, evidence of a sustained research program and a continuing scholarly commitment must be provided for tenure and for promotion. Because faculty should be contributing members of the College community and, where appropriate, the community at large, evidence of service to the community is expected.

While quantifiable data (numerical items from student evaluations, numbers of papers published, number of committees, etc.) are important, decisions about tenure and promotion must ultimately rely on sound professional judgment.

What follow are the general standards and evidence that remain constant throughout the four levels of institutional evaluation, namely third-year review, tenure, and promotion to Associate Professor and Professor. A separate evaluation process, with its own standards and evidence, is used for the honorary rank of University Professor (see Art. VI, Sect. I). (Rev. Aug. 2015)

Teaching Effectiveness

Standard
Effective teaching is the primary responsibility of faculty, as well as the hallmark of the institution, and reflects three broad elements: a student-focused approach, appropriate disciplinary or interdisciplinary content, and reflective practices. It fosters intellectual curiosity and motivation, promotes inclusivity, encourages deep learning, and nurtures active listening, all of which promote lifelong learning. As teachers and academic advisors, faculty members are expected to meet the needs of diverse learners by designing courses with transparent expectations and in a format that is accessible and easily navigated by all types of students. Students should be exposed to current and past developments in the field if appropriate, be taught to access and analyze relevant disciplinary information, and be provided opportunities to prepare for subsequent courses in the curriculum. Instructors should engage peer and student feedback and the scholarship of teaching and learning in their disciplines, regularly reflecting on and evaluating current practices and implementing alternative approaches in response. (Rev. Aug. 2023)
Departments and programs that expect faculty members to demonstrate specific characteristics of effective teaching that are aligned with this standard should articulate those in their departmental or program guidelines. (Ins. Aug. 2023)
Evidence (while in rank at the College of Charleston) should include:
The faculty member should provide a narrative that includes a critical selfreflection of their teaching philosophy and methodology, as well as their accomplishments in teaching and in related efforts, including advising and mentoring, as appropriate. The candidate should provide evidence in support of their narrative, associated with courses taught during the review period, including the following:
1. Syllabi, including course objectives and student learning outcomes, grading policy, and other required content, per Policy 7.6.10, Policy on Course Syllabi.
2. Samples of course materials, including assessments (such as tests, exams, essays, or other assignments), and as appropriate, evaluation rubrics, materials from course websites, projects, and evaluated student work.
3. Chair’s evaluations since the faculty member has been in rank. Chair must provide an annual evaluation the year prior to the candidate being considered for promotion or tenure.
4. Student reviews of teaching:
  1. Student Course-Instructor Evaluation quantitative ratings from all course sections for which they were administered. These surveys will be administered for every section of every course, every semester, with the exception of a course that has only one student enrolled. A faculty member undergoing review may also choose to include student free responses as part of the packet, having explained in the written narrative about teaching whether all the comments or a selection of the comments have been included. Departments may require inclusion of the student free responses. Any such requirement should be articulated in approved departmental guidelines. (Rev. Aug. 2018)
  2. An aggregate rating for each semester for all courses in the department will be included in the evidence submitted by the candidate. (Rev. Apr. 2007)
    
    The chair of the Departmental Evaluation Panel will also collect the following evidence:

1. Departmental colleague letters evaluating teaching are required. Letters from extra-departmental colleagues at the College of Charleston and/or at other institutions evaluating teaching are optional. (Ins. April 2007)
2. Optional letters on teaching, from extra-departmental colleagues at the College of Charleston and/or at other institutions, if the candidate elects or if department or program requires. (Ins. Apr. 2007; Rev. Aug. 2023)
3. Recent graduate evaluations on teaching: either all majors or a sample of at least 40 students selected randomly from among all majors in the department who have graduated within the past five years and whom the candidate has taught; additional students whom the candidate has taught, who need not be majors in the department, may be added by the candidate in consultation with the Chair.
  
  Recent Graduate Evaluations are optional for Third-Year Review and may be requested by the departmental evaluation panel or the candidate. (Rev. Apr. 2007)

Additional evidence submitted by the candidate may include but is not limited to:

Samples of evaluatee-prepared and/or supplementary course materials;
Participation in curriculum development;
Participation in interdisciplinary courses and programs;
Participation in peer coaching activities and/or observation of classroom performance by colleagues;
Participation in pedagogical conferences, workshops and field trips. (Rev. Aug. 2023)

Research and Professional Development

Standard
Research and professional development are essential to a professor’s ability to carry out the College’s educational mission. Research and professional development involve the various activities that increase the faculty member’s knowledge and that exemplify scholarly or artistic expertise. It includes, but is not limited to, original contributions to the discipline, creative activities in practice and performance in the fine arts, research in pedagogy, and appropriate studies within and outside one’s specialties. The professional educator undertakes research for scholarly or creative production, to maintain currency in the content of courses taught, and to improve pedagogical techniques. The professional educator sustains professional contact with colleagues and engages in continuing professional activities to upgrade and augment existing skills or develop new ones.
Evidence (while in rank at the College of Charleston) should include:
1. Evaluatee’s narrative of research and professional development activities.
2. Colleague letters (departmental and optional external)
  - Departmental colleague letters evaluating research and professional development are required.
  - Optional evaluation of research and professional development includes:
    - a) letters from extra-departmental colleagues at the College of Charleston evaluating research and professional development and (Rev. Apr. 2012)
    - b) independent external reviews of research. Departments that choose to conduct such external reviews must follow the process outlined here.
  - Instructions for External Reviews of Research:
    The external reviewers chosen should be appropriately qualified to conduct an independent review of the candidate’s research and/or creative achievements. Candidates should submit the names of at least three professionals from outside the College by late August. Evaluation panel chairs, in consultation with departmental panel members, should present additional names of external reviewers in order to obtain no fewer than two independent reviews of the quality of the candidate's research and/or creative achievements. The Departmental Evaluation Panel chair may solicit names of potential additional reviews from people named on the candidate’s list. No more than half of the reviews should be secured from the candidate's own list. The candidate is allowed to strike one name from the panel chair's list. Under no circumstances and at no point in time shall a candidate contact a potential or actual reviewer about any aspect of such a review. Panel Chair should specify in writing, for inclusion in the packet, how each reviewer was selected. (Rev. Apr. 2012; Rev. Aug. 2015)
    After the external reviewers have been determined, a cover letter from the panel chair should accompany the review materials sent to them, stating that the College seeks a review of the quality of a candidate's research and professional development, rather than an overall assessment of whether the candidate would meet research expectations at the reviewer’s own institution. A copy of the candidate's academic curriculum vitae and copies of the relevant scholarly and/or creative works agreed upon by the candidate and evaluation panel chair should be sent to each of the outside reviewers. Letters to external reviewers may also reflect any quantitative or qualitative research expectations set by collegewide or approved school or departmental guidelines. For instance, the following excerpts from the Faculty/Administration Manual 81 could be included in such letters, “Because research and professional development are essential to the mission of the College, evidence of a sustained research program and a continuing scholarly commitment must be provided for tenure and promotion,” and for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, candidates must present “...clear evidence of high promise for continued quality scholarship and professional activity. Since peer refereeing is one criterion of scholarly quality, the evidence must include scholarly books or journal articles or otherwise juried publications, or professionally evaluated performances or exhibits in the arts). All evidence must be evaluated rigorously.” Additional supporting review materials may also be submitted by the panel chair or the candidate, provided that these materials are included in the packet. (Rev. Sept. 2021)
    Reviewers should be asked to identify what relationship, if any, they have with the candidate and to return their review in a timely manner for the deliberations of the departmental panel. To make it possible that reviews are available prior to those deliberations, external reviews must be solicited sufficiently in advance of panel deliberations.
    The panel chair must include in the candidate's packet: 1.) a description of the process by which the outside letters were obtained, 2.) each reviewer's institutional and departmental affiliation, and rank or other institutional title, a description of the academic specialization of the reviewer, and other relevant information about the reviewer, which may be useful to those unfamiliar with the field, 3.) a copy of the letter of solicitation by the panel chair, and 4.) the confidential outside reviews. (Ins. Apr. 2007)
3. Chair’s evaluations since faculty member has been in rank. Chair must provide an annual evaluation the year prior to the candidate’s being considered for promotion/tenure.
4. Evidence of scholarship may include but is not limited to:
  - professionally published scholarly books
  - academic journal articles
  - chapters in scholarly books
  - dited volumes
  - review essays
  - creative literary and artistic works and other creative works
  - research grants
  - conference papers
  - reviews of candidate’s books, performances, etc.
  - scholarly reviews by candidate of books, performances, etc.
  - invited or juried exhibits, concerts, performances, etc.
  - technical reports
  - textbooks, workbooks, study guides and other published pedagogical materials
  - draft manuscripts
  - professional bibliographies
5. The professional activities listed below can be included as evidence either in the category of Research and Professional Development , or in the category of Service.
  Evidence of professional activities may include but is not limited to:
  - serving as an officer or a member of a board or committee of an international, national, regional or state professional organization
  - serving on an editorial board of a scholarly journal
  - reviewing manuscripts for journals and publishers; evaluating proposals for granting agencies
  - chairing or serving as a discussant on a panel at a professional meeting
  - preparing grant proposals and reports
  - conducting professional workshops, seminars, and field trips
  - participating in professional meetings, seminars, workshops, field trips, etc.
  - undertaking post doctoral studies
  - receiving fellowships and awards
  - serving as a professional consultant
  - serving as Department Chair,Program Director, or Associate Dean (Ins. Aug. 2015) (Rev. Sept 2021)

Professional Service to the Community

Standard
Service to the College and/or community falls within the responsibilities of a faculty member and is essential to the fulfillment of the College’s responsibilities to the academic community and to the attainment of institutional goals. Each faculty member is expected to cooperate in supporting the mission and the goals of the department and the College. Service includes involvement in standing or ad hoc committees of the College faculty, in departmental committees or offices, and in special committees or task forces.
Service includes working with student organizations and non-academic advising; working with community, state, regional or national organizations; utilizing professional expertise; and working on institutional advancement projects. Service can also include those professional activities listed in Section VI.A.2.b.(5), which addresses evidence of professional development. (Rev. Sept. 2021)
Evidence (while in rank at the College of Charleston) should include but is not limited to:
1. Evaluatee’s narrative of service activities.
2. Departmental and extra-departmental colleague letters:
  - Departmental colleague letters evaluating service are required.
  - Letters from extra-departmental colleagues at the College of Charleston and/or at other institutions evaluating service are required. (Ins. Apr. 2007)
3. Chair’s evaluations since the faculty member has been in rank. Chair must provide an annual evaluation the year prior to the candidate’s being considered for promotion/tenure.
4. Specific Criteria for Tenure and Promotion
  What follow are minimum criteria for tenure and promotion. Departments and schools may develop additional criteria. Any such proposed criteria will require review and approval by the appropriate academic dean and Provost’s Office to ensure consistency with college-wide guidelines and procedures. Additionally, they shall be reviewed by the originating body every five years and will require review and approval by the dean and the Provost’s Office when modified. (Rev. Apr. 2012)
  - Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor is normally awarded simultaneously with tenure. The following criteria are necessary, though not sufficient, for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor. The Associate Professor will normally hold the highest appropriate terminal degree. Evidence of exemplary performance in at least one of the specified professional competency areas or significant achievement in the two areas of teaching and research and professional development is required. (Ins. Apr. 2007; Rev. Apr. 2009)
    1. Tenure and promotion to the rank of Associate Professor require sustained effectiveness in teaching.
    2. There must be clear evidence of high promise for continued quality scholarship and professional activity. Since peer refereeing is one criterion of scholarly quality, the evidence must include scholarly books or journal articles (or otherwise juried publications, or professionally evaluated performances or exhibits in the arts). All evidence should be evaluated rigorously.
    3. There should be active and sustained service to the College or there should be active and sustained service in the candidate’s professional role to the local, state, regional, or national community.
  - Tenure for Associate Professors
    A faculty member hired as an untenured Associate Professor must meet the same criteria for tenure as in section a (immediately above). Evidence of exemplary performance in at least one of the specified professional competency areas or significant achievement in the two areas of teaching and research and professional development is required. (Ins. Apr. 2007; Rev. Apr. 2009)
  - Promotion to the Rank of Professor
    Promotion to the rank of Professor requires evidence of continuing quality teaching, research and service. The following criteria are necessary, though not sufficient, for promotion to Professor. The Professor must hold the highest appropriate terminal degree. Evidence of either exemplary performance in at least one of the specified professional competency areas or significant achievement in all three areas is required. (Ins. Apr. 2007; Rev. Apr. 2009)
    1. Promotion to the rank of Professor requires sustained high quality and effective teaching. (Rev. Apr. 2009)
    2. Because Professor is the highest rank, there must be clear evidence of continuing quality scholarship. Peer refereeing is one criterion of scholarly quality; therefore the evidence must include scholarly books or journal articles (or otherwise juried publications, or professional evaluated performances or exhibits in the arts). In addition to scholarship, sustained professional activity is expected. All evidence should be rigorously evaluated.
    3. There should be active and sustained service to the College. Leadership should be demonstrated either in college service or in the candidate’s professional role to the local, state, regional, or national community.
  - Tenure for Professors
    A faculty member hired as an untenured Professor must meet the same criteria for tenure as in section a (above). (Rev. Apr. 2012)
5. Nomination of Instructional Faculty to a Higher Rank
  When a faculty member becomes eligible for nomination to a higher rank, a nomination may be submitted in the form of a petition from one or more of the following:
  - the Department Chair, after consultation with the tenured members of the department, to the Provost;
  - a majority of the tenured members of the department to the Provost;
  - the individual faculty member to the Provost;
  - the Provost to the Department Chair;
  - the Dean to the Department Chair.
Normally, a petition nominating a faculty member to a higher rank should be made not later than August 15 of the academic year in which a decision on promotion is to be made. The faculty member will then be evaluated under the provisions outlined in Art. VI.D. entitled “Procedures for Third-Year Evaluation, Tenure and Promotion of Instructional and Library Faculty.” (Rev. Apr. 2007)
It should be clearly understood by all faculty members that promotion does not come automatically after the passage of a fixed period of time, but it is recognition of outstanding performance and service at the College

Related Policies, Documents or Forms

7.3.1 Third-year Review, Tenure and Promotion of Instructional Faculty (FAM VI.A) PDF

Revision Log

Web Publication Date: 1/20/2026