Note: An official, signed copy of this document can be downloaded by clicking this link.

Article I. Role and Scope of Unit

The mission of the Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences (LRES) is to generate knowledge about local and global environments that can be disseminated to meet the needs of students, agricultural producers, land owners and managers, the general scientific community, and the citizens of Montana. Through our research, teaching, and outreach, we strive to integrate scientifically-sound information to enhance productivity of managed lands, facilitate knowledge-based adoption of sustainable practices, and produce broadly-educated students prepared for careers in the environmental sciences.

The department provides science-based research/creative activity, teaching, and outreach/public service. As a group, our faculty bring together disciplines related to soils, microorganisms, insects, plants, climate, and water to achieve an integrated multi-scale and multi-disciplinary approach to understanding and managing ecosystems. We focus on issues related to natural and managed landscapes such as cropland, rangeland, wildland, and highly-impacted land, with fundamental and applied investigations in environmental science, agriculture, natural resources, and land management. We foster collaboration with allied disciplines, institutions, and stakeholders to address complex land resource and management issues at a variety of spatial and temporal scales. We strive to synthesize the knowledge we discover into comprehensive instructional, scientific and practical purposes.

Instructional courses (on-campus and on-line) provide undergraduate programs of study that prepare students with a foundation of basic sciences and the opportunity to apply this knowledge to understanding the complex interactions of diverse ecosystems. Undergraduate instruction integrates traditional and innovative academic experiences with research opportunities. Graduate programs, including on-line courses, provide excellent opportunities for advanced academic training and focused independent study through departmental research programs. Postdoctoral training offers high-level preparation for professional development and placement. Off-campus instructional programs, i.e., extension, provide research-based information, technological developments, and management recommendations to land resource managers, agricultural producers, and other citizens.

The purpose of LRES research programs is to generate new knowledge concerning land and water resources and organisms. We provide research results that are useful in applications to problems and choices facing the agricultural community, natural resource managers, other professionals, and the community at large. We disseminate information to other scientists, professionals, educators, and information providers to  increase the social, environmental, and economic value of research activities. Substantial salary, research support, and broad program direction are provided by the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (MAES) as funded through state and federal sources. In addition, grants and contracts are solicited by faculty to support research concerning local, regional, national, and international issues and interests. Research activity is conducted in laboratories and on private, state, and federal lands. Faculty and students cooperate with MAES agricultural research centers located in various parts of the state including the main station near Bozeman.

All LRES faculty members participate in service including service and outreach activities to the general public, primary and secondary schools, agricultural and natural resource stakeholders, federal, state and local agencies, and professional organizations. Professional service includes participation in departmental, college, university, and professional society committees and myriad other substantive endeavors related to disciplinary expertise.

Academic Programs  of  the Department:

LRES instructional programs provide science-based knowledge, hands-on experiences, and synthesis of multidisciplinary information and skills.

Undergraduate degree offerings include:

B.S. in Environmental Sciences (both general and the following options)

  • Environmental Biology Option
  • Geospatial and Environmental Analysis Option
  • Land Rehabilitation Option
  • Soil and Water Sciences Option

B.S. in Sustainable Food and Bioenergy Systems

  • Agroecology Option

Undergraduate minors include:

  • Entomology
  • Soil Science
  • Water Resources

Graduate degree offerings include:

  • M.S. in Land Resources and Environmental Sciences
  • M.S. in Entomology (cross departmental)
  • M.S. in Land Rehabilitation (cross departmental)
  • Ph.D. in Ecology and Environmental Sciences (cross-college)

Scholarship

Scholarship includes research programs that focus on generating objective, science-based knowledge concerning land and water resources, land use, biotic interactions, and ecosystem properties and processes as well as advancements in new knowledge in pedagogy and extension.

Service

In fulfilling the University's Land Grant mission, LRES faculty members extend through service and outreach their knowledge, skills, abilities, and creative discoveries leading to practical applications that benefit Montana and the nation.

Article II. Appointment and Advancement of Research Faculty

Research faculty are employees of MSU, and LRES requires all research faculty be hosted by a tenurable faculty sponsor who provides any space requirements. To initiate a research faculty title, the faculty sponsor will send the candidate's CV along with a support letter to the department head who will distribute for LRES RPT Committee review. Once approved, the candidate's title will be changed through HR processes and annual reviews will be conducted by the department head. A research faculty member may request consideration for promotion in rank. The following titles are used for candidates who have qualifications comparable to those expected of the tenurable ranks; the appointee is expected to make significant contributions to the research field:

  • Assistant Research Professor
  • Associate Research Professor
  • Research Professor

In addition to their research responsibilities, research faculty may have educational and service and outreach responsibilities, provided these activities are in compliance with the regulations and restrictions of the agency funding their appointment and consistent with Graduate School policies. These activities include, but are not limited to, co-chairing of graduate committees with tenurable  faculty, serving on graduate  student committees, teaching courses, presenting seminars, serving on departmental or college committees, serving on grant proposal review panels, reviewing manuscripts for journals, and related professional activities.

The candidate must notify the department head of intent to apply for promotion no later than during the candidate's annual performance evaluation of the calendar year the candidate wishes to go up for review. A candidate must submit documentation for evaluation for promotion consistent with department (see Article VI) and college policies and the MSU Faculty Handbook (6. Research Faculty Appointments). The candidate is responsible for meeting the deadlines, standards, and performance indicators comparable to the research expectations for tenurable faculty established by the department. The effective date for  promotion will be July 1 immediately following the successful review.

Article III. Annual Review Process

The college-approved productivity reporting instruments will be completed by all faculty members for the previous calendar year's activities and submitted to the LRES administrative assistant by January 15. The information obtained is used by the department head to review the faculty member's performance relative to their role and responsibilities, and recognizing the requirements and expectations of the position and the proportionate time and resources officially allocated to the particular activities.

The department head reviews the materials provided and assigns an annual performance rating for each faculty member, subject to approval by the Vice President/Dean of Agriculture  and by the  Director of Extension or other Center or Institute Directors as appropriate. Adhering to deadlines set forth by the college and university, the department head then meets with each faculty member to review and discuss the faculty member's performance, activities, and role within the department. The department head also writes a statement for teaching, scholarship, and service, followed by a summary statement of the faculty member's annual performance using the annual review form from Activity Insight, which includes the performance rating for each, to be signed by the faculty member and department head during or soon after the meeting; the annual review goal form is filled in using the goals narrative added into Activity Insight by the faculty member. The signed annual review form is provided to the Vice President/Dean of College of Agriculture's office. Copies of the annual review and goal documents are sent to the faculty member and maintained in the faculty member's confidential personnel file. Annual review forms with summary statements are included in any subsequent faculty retention, tenure and promotion dossiers.

Article IV. Primary Review Committee and Administrator

Section 4.01 Primary Review Committee-Composition and Appointment

Composition of the Committee: The Department of LRES Retention, Promotion, and Tenure (RPT) Committee consists of four tenured faculty members having tenure in the  department, three of whom shall: a) hold the rank of professor; and b) serve a three-year term on the committee. The terms  of these three committee members shall be staggered. The fourth member of the committee shall serve a one-year term, and must hold the rank of associate professor or professor. Thus, in any given year the committee shall consist of a professor serving the third of a three-year term (the committee chair), a professor serving the second year of a three-year term, a professor serving the first year of a three year term, and an associate professor or professor serving a single-year term.

The composition of the committee rotates annually on June 1, with the committee chair and the member serving a single-year term rotating off of the committee at the close of business May 31. The faculty members rotating onto the committee shall be elected by vote of all tenurable faculty members having locus of tenure in LRES. Faculty who are rotating off of the committee may rotate back on the committee immediately.

Prior to January 31 each year:

A member of the LRES office staff shall prepare, send out, receive, and tally the votes from a ballot sent to all tenure-track faculty. Each tenurable faculty member having a locus of tenure in the department shall be permitted to cast one vote on each ballot. The professor with the highest number of votes will rotate onto the committee for a three-year term. The associate professor or professor with the second highest number of votes will rotate onto the committee for one-year term. The person with the third highest number of votes shall be the alternate for this position.

The following special circumstances shall apply:

  • In the event of any tie for either committee member or alternate, the person who advances shall be the candidate drawing the lowest number from numbered slips of paper.
  • Vacancies that cannot be filled by the alternate shall be filled until the next annual election by vote ofthe remaining three members of the committee. If, for whatever reason, the remaining committee members cannot agree on a replacement for an unexpected vacancy on the committee, the tenurable faculty will be re-polled according to the procedure of the original vote.

The department will promote committee membership which is inclusive of the categories protected by the university Non-Discrimination Policy (htt p://www .montana .edu/ policy/ discrimination/).Before conducting a review, committee members must attend the bias-literacy training offered by the university for the review cycle and orientation regarding retention, tenure, and promotion offered by the provost's office.

Committee Operation: The LRES RPT, objective, independent, and substantive review of candidate dossiers for retention, tenure, and promotion based on the appropriate department, college, and university criteria and standards. Strict confidentiality of all materials and discussions is maintained.

The chair of the departmental RTP committee ensures that all committee procedures are met but will not necessarily write the committee's evaluation of each candidate. Committee members may provide input on a retention, promotion, and tenure case at only one university level.

Confidential dossier materials are solicited by the department head and collected and uploaded into Knox by the administrative assistant. The candidate is responsible for all items, except review letters (Section 6.01) and those items provided by the department head as indicated in Section 4.03. Dossier materials are made available to the LRES RPT Committee for review in advance of the review committee meeting; committee members thoroughly study the dossiers of all candidates before the review meeting and participate substantively in all discussions. Upon completion of the department review process, the materials are uploaded into the dossier and forwarded to successive levels of review within the university. Upon completion of the institutional review process, all dossier materials not maintained as institutional records are destroyed. A hard copy of the dossier is maintained in a locked cabinet within the department, as well as in the Office of Academic Affairs.

The LRES RPT Committee provides a letter discussing its decision, including the reasons for positive and negative votes, and a tally of the votes. The committee evaluation letter is added to the candidat e' s dossier. The LRES administrative assistant provides the candidate a copy of the signed committee's recommendation.

Section 4.02 Primary Review Administrator

The department head serves as primary administrative reviewer and shall review all submitted materials, provide any required materials, conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. The recommendation shall include a written rationale. If the administrator's recommendation does not concur with that of the primary review committee, the department head's rationale must explain the reason for the non-concurrence. Following addition of the  department  head's independent, substantive review recommendation, the dossier is forwarded to Vice President/Dean of the College of Agriculture's office for subsequent levels of review. The LRES administrative assistant provides the candidate with a copy of the signed committee' s recommendation at that time.

Section 4.03 Identification of Responsible Entities

  1. Establish the Primary Review Committee either by facilitating the election or appointment of the members as described: Primary Review Administrator.
  2. Select external reviewers and solicit review letters: Primary Review Administrator.
  3. If internal Reviews are part of the unit's review process, selecting and soliciting Internal Reviews: Primary Review Administrator.
  4. Assuring the following materials are included in the Dossier:
    1. Internal and external reviewer letters of solicitation, letters from the reviewers and, in the case of external reviewers, a short bio-sketch of the reviewer should be included in the Dossier (Note: Department's preferred wording in section (1) above is: Internal (Retention) and external (Promotion and Tenure) reviewer letters of solicitation, letters from the  reviewers  and, a 1-2 page bio-sketch of the reviewer should be included in the dossier.): Primary Review Administrator.
    2. Applicable Role and Scope Document: Primary Review Administrator.
    3. Letter of hire, any Percentages of Effort changes, all annual reviews, and all Evaluation Letters from prior retention, tenure, and promotion reviews at MSU: Primary Review Administrator.
    4. Candidate's teaching evaluations from the review period. If the evaluations are not in electronic format, the unit will provide evaluation summaries. Upon request by review committees and review administrators, the unit will provide access to the original evaluations to review committees and administrators during the review. (Note: department requests that second sentence in (iv), "If the evaluations are not in electronic format, the unit will provide evaluation summaries" be deleted.): Primary Review Administrator.
    5. Maintaining copies of all review committee Evaluation Letters and internal, (if applicable), and external review letters after the review: Primary Review Administrator

Section 4.04 Next Review Level

College of Agriculture Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee

Article V. Intermediate Review Committee and Administrator

Section 5.01 Intermediate Review Committee - Composition and Appointment

College of Agriculture Review Committee. See College of Agriculture Role and Scope Document for details.

Section 5.02 Intermediate Review Administrator

Vice President/Dean of College of Agriculture. See College of Agriculture Role and Scope Document for details.

Section 5.03 Level of Review following Intermediate Review Administrator

University Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee.

Article VI. Review Materials

Section 6.01 Materials submitted by Candidate

Candidates undergoing fill levels of review must include the following materials in the dossier:

  • The 'Cover Sheet' obtained from the Provost's Office;
  • An overarching personal statement that includes a description of the candidate's area of Scholarship, including impacts;
  • Separate self-evaluations for teaching, scholarship, service, and integration summarizing the evidence demonstrating that the candidate meets the standards for the attainment of retention, tenure, or promotion, as applicable. Each selt-evaluation shaii inciude a summary of activities, selected products or accomplishments, and evidence of recognition over the relevant review period. See additional details below under Teaching, Scholarship, Service, and Integration.
  • A comprehensive CV with teaching, scholarship, and service activities of the candidate. The candidate must annotate lists of publications, grants, and other relevant activities to give evaluators sufficient knowledge of the candidate's involvement in, and importance of, these activities within the context of the standards of the candidate's discipline.

Candidates should review 1) MSU Faculty Handbook, Retention/Tenure/Promotion Rights and Responsibilities, Section 1, and 2) Article VI, Section 6.01 in the College of Agriculture Role and Scope Document prior to preparing materials.

Teaching

  1. A self-evaluation that describes teaching experiences, philosophy, and accomplishments as relevant to the review process and teaching appointment. Strategies taken to address feedback and evaluations from students and peers may also be Learning objectives, methods of delivery, innovative features of educational programs and advising activities should be summarized.
  2. For on-campus or on-line teaching, a cumulative listing of all courses taught, course titles, credit hours, enrollment, and contact hours. For off-campus teaching (i.e., Extension), a description of major educational programs delivered including a summary of content, number of participants, and contact hours.
  3. A cumulative table of student/participant evaluation scores from department- and university­ approved teaching evaluations (e.g., Climate, ALEAMONI, Knapp, Extension, or other) and undergraduate advising evaluations. The candidate will also extract and include representative examples of student/client comments based on the same approved screening tools. Mid-course evaluation scores and summaries may also be submitted by the candidate.
  4. The amount, quality, and nature of undergraduate and graduate student advising and mentoring, including but not limited to primary advising of undergraduate students and/or graduate teaching and research assistants, undergraduate researcher scholars, and summer interns; and service on graduate committees.

Scholarship

  1. A self-evaluation that clearly documents the candidate's efforts and accomplishments in meeting the appropriate departmental criteria and standards (see Appendix A for definition of Scholarship). The document should specifically address scholarly activity and clarify what work was done before and after the candidate's date of hire or last promotion. Summed quantities of extramural and internal funding, publications, presentations at conference, etc., should be included. Candidate should describe how efforts have created impactful knowledge that serves relevant audiences.
  2. A sampling of 'best efforts to advance the discipline' (reprints, products, etc.) along with a cover page describing these items and their context.

Service

  1. A self-evaluation describing the candidate's professional outreach and discipline-related public service activities and accomplishments as documented in the candidate's CV.

Integration

  1. A self-evaluation describing how the candidate integrated at least two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service.

Section 6.02 Documentation of Collaborative Scholarly Contributions

Candidates undergoing review for retention, tenure, and promotion will document their individual contribution to collaborative scholarly projects and products by including a comprehensive and annotated CV that includes lists of publications, grants, and other relevant activities. For each publication or grant, the candidate must provide information on their contribution to the overall product (e.g., role in project conception, implementation (field and lab work), data analysis, writing, editing, personnel management, etc.). Any collaborative scholarly contributions shall be further described in self-evaluations describing teaching, scholarship, and service.

Section 6.03 Peer Review Solicitation Procedure

For candidates undergoing review for retention, the department head will solicit three internal reviews by qualified MSU faculty members within or outside the department. The candidate provides the names, addresses, email addresses, and phone numbers of three faculty members who are familiar with their teaching, scholarship and service. The candidate must not contact nor notify any of the individuals. The department head will select one of these individuals and ask LRES faculty for two additional names of faculty members to serve as internal reviewers. The internal reviewers may not also serve on a subsequent ievei of review for the same candidate  (e.g., department, coiiege, or university review committees).

For candidates undergoing review for tenure or promotion, external reviewers are required. External reviewers are from outside MSU and are qualified to provide knowledgeable and unbiased evaluation of performance. In advance of the deadline set by the department head, the candidate provides the department head with a list of names, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses of three qualified potential external reviewers. The candidate must not contact nor notify any of the individuals. The department head also solicits names of potential reviewers from department faculty including members of the RPT committee. The department head then solicits and obtains agreement to provide external review from no more than two persons suggested by the candidate, and at least two persons not nominated by the candidate, for a total of four external reviewers.  Lists provided by the candidate and department need not be mutually exclusive.

Each internal or external reviewer is sent a copy of the individual's dossier, and a standardized letter requesting an objective evaluation of the candidate's case for retention, tenure and/or promotion based on the appropriate departmental criteria and standards (abstract of relevant portions of this document is provided to guide reviewers, along with a full copy of the LRES Role and Scope Document). Internal and external reviewers are asked to evaluate teaching, scholarship, service, and integration relative to the candidate's appointment. They are also asked to comment on the future potential and continued contributions of the candidate. External reviewers provide a 1-2 page bio-sketch, which are then included to accompany the reviewer's letter in the dossier. The confidentiality of reviewer names and all information provided is maintained throughout the process.

For candidates with Extension appointments or appointments associated with an approved Center or Institute, the Extension, Center, or Institute Director will provide a review in addition to internal reviews (retention) or external reviews (tenure and promotion).

Article VII. Applicable Role and Scope Documents

Section 7.01 Retention Review

Candidates for retention are reviewed under the standards and indicators in the Role and Scope Documents in effect on the first day of employment in a tenurable position.

Section 7.02 Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor Review

Candidates for tenure are reviewed under the standards and indicators in the Role and Scope Documents in effect on the first day of employment in a tenurable position. Candidates may select a more recent, approved Role and Scope Document by notifying the primary review committee.

Section 7.03 Promotion to Professor Review -The faculty member will be reviewed using standards and indicators in the Role and Scope Documents in effect two (2) years prior to the deadline for notification of intent to apply for promotion.

Article VIII. Retention Reviews

Section 8.01 Timing of Retention Review.

Faculty are reviewed for retention in the academic year specified in their Letter of Hire, unless extended under the Extending Tenure Review Period policy.

Section 8.02 University Standard

The standards for the retention of probationary faculty members are:

  1. effectiveness in teaching, scholarship, and service during the review period, and
  2. integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
  3. satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for tenure by the candidate's tenure review year.

Section 8.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Categories of products and activities that will be used to evaluate performance of the candidate undergoing review may include, but are not limited to, the following and will be relative to the candidate's appointment. Special weight will be given to the following criteria with the following rank order implying general weighting.

For Teaching:

  • teaching on-campus, online, and off-campus
  • course development, including substantial revision of existing courses
  • undergraduate, graduate, and post-doctoral advising and mentoring (for Retention review, a candidate is not expected to have mentored graduate students through graduation)
  • workshops, seminars, presentations
  • teaching awards
  • guest lectures

For Scholarship:

  • peer-reviewed publications, including journal articles, authored and edited books, and book chapters
  • dissertations and theses by advised students
  • grant proposals submitted, grants funded, and research contracts
  • reviewed publications such as extension bulletins, book chapters, technical reports, and popular press articles
  • invited presentations
  • academic and professional conference abstracts, proceedings, and presentations
  • curriculum development at department, college, and university levels
  • partnerships, programs, and plans through extension or other community-based research
  • print and on-line media and website development
  • patents and licenses
  • scholarship awards

For Service:

  • journal editorships
  • ad-hoc journal, book, and grant reviews; panel reviews
  • department, college, university, community, and professional leadership positions
  • department, college, university, community, and professional committee memberships
  • outreach activities such as disciplinary-related presentations to off-campus groups or media appearances
  • advisory roles with stakeholder groups and boards of directors
  • service awards

Performance will be evaluated for a suitable combination of these products and activities in a manner that is appropriate for the candidate's disciplinary focus and position descri ption. Quality of such works will be based on indicators such as evaluations, peer-review, and recognition (awards) and through measures described in Section 8.04.

Section 8.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Teaching

Faculty performance in on-campus and on-line teaching will be judged effective if it is substantial with regard to content and frequency of offering; is responsive to curricular needs and demands, and is consistently evaluated as good to excellent by students. Off-campus teaching will be judged effective if it is substantial with regard to content and people contact­ hours, is consistently evaluated as good to excellent by participants and includes a multi­ pronged educational approach consisting of publications, press releases, presentations, web pages, etc. Evaluations will be conducted for 10-20% of presentations and will be selected to best represent a broad audience (Extension agents, crop advisers, land managers, farmers, ranchers, etc.).

Undergraduate advising will be judged effective based on mentoring students in undergraduate research projects or internships and/or a record of responsive advising which addresses students' course of study and career directions. The department compiles student advising evaluations.

Graduate advising and mentoring are required, and will be judged effective based on an appropriate combination of the following: mentoring of graduate  students  that  how substantive progress in completing degree programs; if the candidate participates on other graduate student committees, and in maintaining or improving the department's graduate programs through participation in program review or modification; if graduate students are involved in published materials and conference presentations; and if the overall quality of theses or dissertations is judged appropriate to department standards. Integration of undergraduate student teaching with research will be judged effective by criteria that include the quantity of student participation, the quality and substance of their research activities, and the level of participation in publication activities. Each of these standards will be considered relative to the candidate's disciplinary focus and position.

Scholarship

Faculty effectiveness in scholarship is demonstrated through sustained and commendable performance reflected in the quantity, quality, and impact of scholarly activities such as the discovery, application, and/or assimilation of new knowledge and the dissemination of that knowledge. Such work must result in peer-reviewed journal articles and extramural funding commensurate with the associated discipline.

The quantity of scholarly products will be judged in light of their quality, as documented by the department RPT committee  and external reviewers.  The quality and reputation  of journals and other scholarly venues are key, though these will be assessed relative to disciplinary norms.

In some cases, a relatively small number of products with high impact may satisfy scholarship expectations, whereas in other cases a large number of products may perhaps be insufficient, though this is also relative to disciplinary norms. If the number of products is near an average of 12 scholarly products per year, and one or more of the products are evaluated by the department RPT committee and external reviewers as having limited potential impact in the discipline, scholarship expectations may not be satisfied.

Collaborative work is highly valued in the Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, but candidates are expected to identify their individual level of contribution to joint scholarly  works.  First authors of manuscripts are sometimes graduate students or post-doctoral research associates and the last author is the principle investigator of the research group. Therefore, inferences about the level of contribution should not be made based solely on author order. If the candidate's contribution  to one or more products is docurnen ted as rninirnal, the t ot al nu m ber of scholarly products needs to sufficiently exceed the 1-2 annual average to offset the candidate's limited contributions.

A record of seeking and obtaining extramural funds to support research is also expected. The scope of the grant work and the reputation of granting agencies are qualitative factors that will influence the quantitative expectations for number of peer-reviewed papers and other scholarly products. Most importantly, the candidate must obtain sufficient funding to achieve scholarship objectives defined in their job description and outlined in their approved Montana Agricultural Experiment Station project proposals, and annual goal statements. The department RPT committee, will take into account the fact that funding levels often vary from year to year, so will consider the overall average funding success during the relevant review period.

Other expectations for productivity include appropriate combinations of:

  • reviewed publications, including authored and edited books
  • abstracts and proceedings
  • presentations at scientific meetings
  • awarded patents and licenses
  • peer recognition of effectiveness, such as awards for scholarship, citation rates, review panels, editorships, leadership in the discipline, invited seminars, and invited book chapters and reviews).
  • generation of new knowledge in pedagogy, including study, implementation, and publishing of pedagogical innovations and research.
  • training of postdoctoral associates and technicians, which will be judged effective based upon the quality of mentoring and research guidance as demonstrated by relevant outputs and successes.
  • creation of partnerships, programs, and plans through extension or other community­ based research that 1) leverages the knowledge and resources of the university and the public-private sector to address locally identified issues and problems and 2} applies and disseminates knowledge, and contributes to the public good.

Standards will be considered relative to the candidate's disciplinary focus and position description (i.e., proportional to scholarship responsibilities defined in their job description).

Service

Quantitative and qualitative indicators of faculty performance in service will be judged effective through active and productive participation in appropriate professional, public, and university activities. Activities that would be considered active and productive in this regard may include, but are not  limited to: professional society boards and committees, advisory boards, elected and appointed professional society offices, editorial assignments, and program organization committees; and participation at appropriate levels on department, college, and/or university committees and other substantive, discipline-based service and outreach endeavors. Service is also expected to  include membership  on at least one department, college, Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, or university committee at MSU; committee membership beyond that level is highly valued by the department.

Integration

Integration of teaching, scholarship, and/or service will be achieved by creating synergistic relationships among activities associated with the candidate's disciplinary focus and position description. Activities may include, but are not limited to, bringing new scientific discoveries into the classroom, fostering student learning in the lab or field, engaging the wider community with scholarly products or innovations in teaching, fostering engagement to address community needs, and engaging the professional community in addressing relevant research needs.

Satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for tenure by the candidate's tenure review year will be judged by the overall trajectory of performance in teaching, scholarship, and service as well as integration of at least two of these activities. Expectations will be considered relative to the candidate's disciplinary focus and position description.

Section 8.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

See Section 6.01. In addition, the department head will solicit and provide three internal reviews for inclusion in the dossier as described in Section 6.03.

Section 8.06 Status of Scholarly Products

Because review for retention typically occurs early in a candidate's career, a candidate may choose to include evidence of publications and grant proposals submitted but not yet accepted or other scholarly works in progress.

Article IX. Tenure Review

Section 9.01 Timing of Tenure Review

Faculty are normally reviewed for tenure in the academic year specified in their Letter of Hire, unless extended under the Extending Tenure Review Period policy.

Section 9.02 University Standard

The University standards for the award of tenure are:

  1. sustained effectiveness in teaching and service during the review period, and
  2. integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
  3. accomplishment in scholarship.

Section 9.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Section 8.03.

Section 9.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Teaching, Scholarship, Service, and Integration

Quantitative and qualitative expectations for tenure are the same as for retention {Section 8.04) with the following addition:

  • Evidence provided by the candidate must demonstrate a sustained degree of accomplishment.
  • Faculty with majority research appointments are expected to demonstrate effective mentoring of M.S. and Ph.D. students. The department recognizes that mentoring of M.S. students in particular is most appropriate for some disciplines.
  • Leadership through successful technical management and direction of scholarly teams as a principal investigator is one indicator of accomplishment, though this is not expected of all facult y. The accomplishments of supervised graduate and undergraduate students, postdoctoral research associates, and/or junior faculty members on team-based research projects may be used in part to evaluate the candidate's scholarly contribution.
  • Service is expected to include membership on multiple department, college, or university committees at MSU, and/or relevant external committees (e.g., in professional societies, grant review panels).

Expectations will be considered relative to the candidate's disciplinary focus and position description.

Section 9.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

See Section 6.01. In addition, the department head will solicit and provide four external reviews for inclusion in the dossier as described in Section 6.03. In terms of progress of scholarly products, a candidate should not include evidence of publications that are not yet accepted.

Article X. Promotion to Rank of Associate Professor

Section 10.01 University Standards

The University standards for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor are the standards for the award of tenure. Appointment at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor does not demonstrate, in and of itself, that standards for tenure have been met.

Article XI. Promotion to Rank of Professor

Section 11.01 Timing of Review

Normally, faculty are reviewed for promotion after the completion of five (5) years of service in the current rank, however, faculty may seek promotion earlier if they can establish that they "meet the same standards of effectiveness and accomplishment or excellence used in evaluating candidates after five (5) years in rank."

Section 11.02 University Standard

The University standards for promotion to the rank of Professor are:

  1. sustained effectiveness in teaching and service during the review period, and
  2. sustained integration of no less than two of the following areas during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
  3. excellence in scholarship.

Section 11.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

See Section 8.03.

Section 11.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Teaching, Service. and Integration

Quantitative and qualitative expectations for promotion to rank of professor are the same as for tenure {Sections 8.04/9.04).

Scholarship

Faculty excellence in scholarship is demonstrated through sustained, commendable, and distinguished performance reflected in the quantity, quality, and impact of scholarly activities, such as the discovery, application, and/or assimilation of new knowledge and the dissemination of that knowledge. The record of accomplishment is expected to demonstrate improvement in quality and significance during the course of one's career, while taking into account that accomplishments may unavoidably vary in quality and quantity over the course of an evaluation period . Such work will result in peer-reviewed journal articles and extramural funding, as well as appropriate combinations of reviewed publications, including books; abstracts and proceedings; presentations at scientific meetings; awarded patents and licenses; and peer recognition of effectiveness (e.g., citation rates, review panels, editorships, leadership in the discipline, invited seminars, and invited book chapters and reviews). Scholarship includes generation of new knowledge in pedagogy, including study, implementation, and publishing of pedagogical innovations and research. Scholarly activities may also include creating and leading partnerships, programs, and plans through Extension or other community-based research, that leverages the knowledge and resources of the university and the public-private sector to address locally identified issues and problems; apply and disseminate knowledge; and contribute to the public good. Excellence in scholarship must be documented with an appropriate combination of accomplishments, such as demonstration of impacts and innovative programs beyond accomplishment standards; participation in review panels, proposal reviews, invited papers or symposia; awards of excellence for research, teaching, or Extension; or other evidence of peer and institutional recognition of programmatic excellence.

Leadership through successful technical management and direction of scholarly teams as a principal investigator is one indicator of excellence, though this is not expected of all faculty. The accomplishments of supervised graduate and undergraduate students, postdoctoral research associates, and/or junior faculty members on team-based research projects may be used in part to evaluate the candidate's scholarly contribution.

Expectations will be considered relative to the candidate's disciplinary focus and position description.

Section 11.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

See Section 9.05.

Article XII. Procedures for Update and Revision of the Unit Role and Scope Document

Each January the chair of the LRES Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee will review the document describing its role and scope, defining its responsibilities and obligations in furtherance of the mission of the University, and setting forth the criteria, standards and procedures for review of faculty members. If changes are needed, the chair will present them to tenurable faculty for discussion, agreement, and vote. If no changes are needed in the document, the last updated and approved document shall be effective.

Article XIII. Approval Process

Section 13.01 Primary Academic Unit Role and Scope Document

  1. tenurable faculty and administrator of the primary academic unit;
  2. retention, promotion, and tenure review committee and administrator of all associated intermediate units (usually colleges);
  3. University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee (URTPC); and
  4. Provost.

Section 13.02 Intermediate Academic Unit Role and Scope Document

  • retention, promotion, and tenure review committee and administrator of the intermediate unit;
  • University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee (URTPC); and
  • Provost.

Section 13.03 University Role and Scope Document

  • University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee (URTPC);
  • Faculty Senate;
  • Deans' Council; and
  • Provost.

Appendix A

Definitions from MSU Faculty Handbook

Teaching is the set of activities performed by faculty that fosters student learning, critical and ethical thinking, problem solving, and creativity. It requires the faculty member to have a command of the subject matter, to maintain currency in the discipline, and to create and maintain instructional environments that successfully promote learning. In addition to the instructional responsibilities in the Academic Responsibilities policy, teaching includes incorporation of current pedagogical innovations, incorporation of new technologies and approaches to learning and assessment, course and curriculum design and development; thesis and professional project assistance, mentoring, and participation in student projects, theses, and dissertations; academic and career advising of undergraduate and graduate students; supervision of student teachers, graduate teaching and research assistants, student interns; and any valuable contributions to the university's instructional enterprise.

Scholarship is the original intellectual work of faculty that includes:

  • The discovery, application, and/or assimilation of new knowledge and the dissemination of that knowledge. This work includes conducting research projects; securing and administering grants and contracts; writing/editing books, articles, and other research-based materials representing one's original or collaborative research; developing new clinical practice models; presentations at scholarly conferences.
  • The generation of new knowledge in pedagogy and the dissemination and putting into practice of that knowledge. This work includes creation, development, implementation, study, and publishing of pedagogical innovations (including textbooks, peer reviewed articles and publications); documented studies of curricular and pedagogical issues; and pedagogically oriented research; innovation in community engagement.
  • The generation of new creative products and experiences through composition, design, production, direction, performance, exhibition, synthesis, or discovery and the presentation of that experience. This work includes creating and presenting new works of art, film, theater, music, and architecture; public performance and exhibiting creative works.
  • The creation of partnerships, programs, and plans through Extension, or other community-based research, that leverage the knowledge and resources of the university and the public/private sector to enhance learning, discovery, and engagement; educate and engage citizens; strengthen communities; address locally identified issues and problems; apply and disseminate knowledge; and contribute to the public good.

Service is the contribution of faculty knowledge and expertise to assist and engage individuals and/or organizations to meet goals and solve problems. Service activities generally fall into three categories: professional service, which includes contributions to, or holding office in, a professional society, serving on an editorial board, and reviewing manuscripts for professional journals; public service, which entails providing the faculty member's professional expertise to, collaboration and engagement with, local, state, national, and global communities; and university service, which includes service to faculty governance, serving on university committees, advising student groups, and participation in other activities that contribute to the institution  and its programs.

Integration is the creation of synergistic relationships among the teaching, scholarship, and service contributions of faculty, such as bringing new discoveries into the classroom, fostering student learning in the lab, field, and studio, engaging the wider community with scholarly products or innovations in teaching, or the fostering engagement to address community needs.

Accomplishment is sustained and commendable performance reflected in the quantity, quality, and impact of scholarly activities and products. These activities and products include peer reviewed publications, formal peer-reviewed presentations, or comparable peer-evaluated works appropriate to the discipline. The activities and products must have impact and significance to the public, peers, or the discipline beyond the university.

Excellence is sustained, commendable, and distinguished performance reflected in the quantity, quality, and impact of scholarly activities and products. These activities and products include peer reviewed publications, formal peer-reviewed presentations, or comparable peer-evaluated works appropriate to the discipline. The activities and products must have a notable impact and significance to the public, peers, or the discipline beyond the university.

Dossier is the collection of materials submitted by a faculty member who is being reviewed for retention, tenure, and/or promotion and the materials added thereafter by review committees and administrative reviewers as authorized under the university policies.

Effective July 1, 2019