Tenure Track Review Standards

Tenure Review Standard

NMT Department of Management

22 September 2006

 

(a) General Purpose

 

The purpose of tenure review is to provide each candidate with an opportunity to demonstrate individual capability as a good instructor and a productive researcher.  According to NMT policies, each candidate will be evaluated with respect to the candidate’s performance in (1) teaching, (2) research and other creative work, (3) professional reputation, and (4) institute and public service.

All the procedures on tenure review will be implemented with the framework of NMT guidelines. Each candidate should be fully knowledgeable on the procedure.  Candidates are expected to make notable and sufficient progress toward tenure during the probationary period.

(b) Evaluation Criteria

(1) Teaching is evaluated by multi-dimensional aspects. The most important concern is a student course evaluation. The next is the number of students who complete his/her final projects for their graduation, especially at the Master of Engineering Management level, under the supervision of each candidate. The publication of a book, pedagogical material development (e.g, case study development and software development used not only Tech but also other universities) and other teaching related results are included into the overall teaching evaluation. The teaching criterion is specified as follows:

(a) “Excellent” in Teaching: If the candidate demonstrates excellent performance in three pedagogical aspects, such as (a) course evaluations, (b) the number of students whose final projects are supervised under candidate and (c) other notable teaching achievement.

(b) “Good” in Teaching: If the candidate demonstrates excellent performance in two pedagogical aspects such as (a) course evaluations and (b) the number of students whose final projects are supervised under candidate.

(c) “Average” in Teaching: If the candidate demonstrates excellent performance in a single aspect, such as (a) course evaluation.

Note: According to Tech rule, the number of students in each class should be more than five for performance evaluation. If the size is less than five, the course evaluation on the class is not considered in the tenure review process.

(2) Research is evaluated by the number of journal publications.

(a) “Excellent” in Research: If the candidate publishes more than 20 refereed articles in academic journals (listed in SSCI or SCI) for 6 annual periods, then the candidate is evaluated as “Excellent” in research.

(b) “Good” in Research: If the candidate publishes more than 16 refereed articles in academic journals (listed in SSCI or SCI) for 6 annual periods, then the candidate is evaluated as “Good” in research.

(c) “Average” in Research: If the candidate publishes more than 12 refereed articles in academic journals (listed in SSCI or SCI) for 6 annual periods, then the candidate is evaluated as “Good” in research.

Note: (a) At least one paper should be published in an A-journal (as classified by a standard source). (b) Publication in A-journals should be counted as equivalent to two or three journal publications in the research evaluation. (c) Publication in books is not counted as a research effort. Such an activity is counted as a teaching effort.

(3) Professional reputation is evaluated by internal and external reputation.

This category includes professional service as journal-paper referee, special-issue editor, conference organizer, conference session chair, and invited conference papers.

(4) Internal and public service is evaluated by internal and external activities.

 

This includes service to the Institute and service to the Department.

Service to the Department:  activities constituting service to the Department include, but are not limited to:  assistance with marketing activities, leadership with specialized efforts such as the student investment club, attendance at faculty meetings, participation in Departmental decision making regarding curriculum design and other issues, and other duties as specifically requested by the chair.

Service to the Institute:  service on Institute committees.

Performance of the above duties constitutes Average service; more than Average service will be exhibited when the candidate takes initiatives in one or more of the above areas.

(C) Evaluation Decision

Tenure is given to each candidate if he/she satisfies any of the following conditions:

(1) Excellent in Teaching, Excellent in Research and more than Average in Professional Reputation and Service.

(2) Excellent in Teaching, Good or Average in Research and more than Average in Professional Reputation and Service.

(3) Good or Average in Teaching, Excellent in Research and more than Average in Professional Reputation and Service.

(4) Good in Teaching, Good in Research and more than Average in Professional Reputation and Service.

In the other cases, the candidate fails to attain tenure in the Department of Management.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *