Appointment, Evaluation, and Promotion
1.1 The mission of the School of Journalism is to advance the profession of journalism, as explicated in the Mission Statement for the School of Journalism. The school educates people for the profession by guiding them in the acquisition of a broad liberal education, by providing them the techniques and skills necessary to practice the profession, and by instilling a critical understanding of journalism’s principles and traditions. The faculty of the school are to be dedicated to advancing the profession through research and scholarship, media analysis and criticism, and the exemplary practice of journalism. The faculty educates future scholars, teachers, and practitioners of journalism.
2.1 The school’s teaching mission is carried out in the context of daily competitive journalism practiced through the school’s media. Experienced faculty supervisors work side by side with students in the production of news stories and advertising and in the scholarly study of the media. The context gives the Missouri system of journalism education its strength.
2.2 It also provides the foundation on which the school’s extensive continuing education program is built. The program identifies and honors excellence in many areas of journalism practice. The school also raises the level of skill and understanding of working journalists by conducting workshops and other training programs.
2.3 To accomplish its mission, the school has found it essential to hire different types of faculty for the school’s pedagogical, scholarly, creative and service activities. Some have extensive journalism experience. Some have extensive scholarly experience. Some have extensive experience in both scholarship and journalism.
2.4 The School of Journalism enjoys an international reputation for excellence, and the faculty aspires to continue that level of quality. A superior faculty is the surest guarantee of continued excellence. Toward that goal, the journalism faculty established the following procedures and criteria for appointing, evaluating, tenuring, and promoting members of the faculty:
3. Types of Appointment
The school will continue to hire faculty with excellent professional credentials for its tenure track faculty. Such faculty will be expected to produce an impressive body of scholarly or creative products, of a quantity, although not necessarily of the same kind, comparable to that expected of a traditional research scholar in order to gain tenure. In addition, the school will hire professional practice faculty, primarily for the media that serve as teaching laboratories for the school and other positions requiring the extensive use of professional skills. Professional practice faculty will be expected to devote most of their time and their energies to becoming expert teachers and to advancing the practice of journalism through professional seminars, workshops and similar activities. Professional Practice standards and procedures are contained in “Policies on the Appointment of Non-Regular Faculty and the Appointment, Evaluation and Promotion of Non-Regular Faculty (Professional Practice) in the School of Journalism.”
3.1 Two broad categories of faculty contribute to the mission of the school: non-regular faculty and tenure track faculty. The category shall be determined at the time of employment. In cases of appointment to the tenure track, only candidates who show potential for intellectual and professional development and long-term employment should be considered. The School’s Promotion and Tenure Committee shall be consulted before any formal offer of fulltime appointment is made.
3.2 Non-regular faculty without the “professional practice” designation are appointed with no expectation of long-term employment by the university. Those pursuing an advanced degree at the university automatically fall into this category. Others, with the approval of the relevant divisional chair (faculty group chair) and the dean of the school, may be hired as non-regular faculty members for temporary positions. The chief expectation of non-regular faculty members is that they will be excellent teachers.
4. School Promotion and Tenure Committee
4.1 The School Promotion and Tenure Committee shall consist of eleven faculty members: seven tenured faculty elected at large and two four professional practice faculty at a rank of associate or full professor, elected at large. Terms shall be three years, and the terms shall be staggered. The Policy Committee shall conduct the election before the end of the spring semester. Only tenured faculty may vote on the tenure-track faculty appointments to the Promotion and Tenure Committee.
4.2 The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall select its chair annually in the fall.
5. Procedures for Tenure Track Faculty
5.1 Annual Reviews
5.1.1 At the beginning of each academic year, the dean’s office shall provide divisional chairs (faculty group chairs) with a list showing all faculty members in the faculty group, whether they have tenure, the year in which a tenure decision will be mandatory, any probationary credit towards tenure at their time of appointment, their work start date, their appointment start date, their academic rank, and their years in that rank. The non-tenured faculty member shall present an updated dossier that is in accordance with the Office of the Provost’s Call Letter. The performance and activities of each non-tenured faculty member on the tenure track shall be reviewed annually by the divisional chair, using the dossier and the annual review. Each year the divisional chair will submit to the dean a written detailed commentary on the faculty member’s progress. The School shall maintain written annual reviews. It shall be the faculty member’s responsibility to update the dossier and annual review each year with accomplishments since the last evaluation.
5.1.2 The faculty member shall be given a copy of the divisional chair’s evaluation and shall have the right to request, within 30 days of receipt of the evaluation, a meeting with the divisional chair to discuss points in the evaluation with which the faculty member disagrees. Both the evaluation and any written reaction submitted by the faculty member shall be added to the file.
5.2 Mid-Probation Review of Non-Tenured Faculty
5.2.1 Divisional chairs, the associate dean for graduate studies, and the School Promotion and Tenure Committee will each conduct an especially intensive review of tenure-track faculty members at the mid-point of their probationary periods (e.g., in the third year of a six-year probationary period; in the second year of a four-year probationary period). Divisional chairs and the School Promotion and Tenure Committee should use these evaluations to decide whether the faculty member being evaluated shows enough promise, on the basis of his or her productivity so far, of achieving tenure. Each evaluation shall conclude with a written recommendation either that the member be retained on the tenure track, with suggestions for continuing activities that will strengthen the faculty member’s tenure dossier, or that the member not be retained, with reasons for that recommendation. Divisional chair and the associate dean for graduate studies evaluations shall be reviewed by the School Promotion and Tenure Committee, which shall make its own written recommendation to the dean with reasons for that recommendation. A recommendation that the member be retained does not constitute a guarantee that tenure will be granted. Rather, it should reflect the committee’s and the divisional chair’s best judgment as to whether the member has a good possibility, with additional activities, of achieving tenure at the end of the probationary period.
5.3 Criteria for Promotion and Tenure
The school expects its tenure track faculty to be excellent teachers and advisors, and to work continually to improve the education offered the school’s students. The school also expects its tenure track faculty to demonstrate expertise in their fields by their scholarship and creative achievement. The expectation is that the faculty member will produce intellectual products of both breadth and depth, and of a kind that demonstrate sustained effort since the appointment at MU. The school further expects its faculty to contribute to the school, the university, the public or the profession through service activities. The evidence to be considered, organized in accordance with the Office of the Provost’s Call Letter, shall include but not be limited to the following:
5.3.1 Teaching/Scholarship of Teaching
1. Assessment of course syllabi, assignments and examinations; monitoring of subsequent courses in which the student is expected to build upon an already acquired proficiency.
2. Assessment of student evaluations of teaching effectiveness, through standardized evaluation instruments.
3. Development of new courses or revision and enrichment of established courses.
4. Efforts to enhance teaching through work in professional positions or through participation in seminars, workshops and campus teaching-improvement programs.
5. Receipt of awards or grants for teaching-related activities.
6. Chairing of and membership on graduate student committees.
7. Two to four reviews by senior faculty of classroom teaching representing different semesters and different courses, if possible.
8. Mentoring of students through research co-authorship.
9. Mentoring of students through creative collaboration.
5.3.2 Scholarly and Creative Activities
The School recognizes that the tenure-track faculty are a diverse group of scholars who may demonstrate research excellence in a variety of ways.
184.108.40.206 Types of Research/Scholarship.
Greatest weight is given to articles and monographs in refereed journals and to refereed books from university presses.
Also important are archival conference proceedings, invited journal articles, academic book chapters, law reviews, research awards, regional refereed journals appropriate to the faculty’s area of research, papers presented at refereed conferences, encyclopedia entries, academic book reviews, books from peer-reviewed academic trade presses, and textbooks.
Sole authorship reflects the ability to conduct independent research, which must be reflected in the dossier. Joint authorship will be assessed according to the nature of the candidate’s contribution. Authoring conventions should be explained if they differ from the idea that order of authorship implies level of contribution.
220.127.116.11 Indicators of Quality and Impact
For all publications, the candidate needs to demonstrate the quality, credibility, reviewing process, and reputation of the publishing outlet.
If available, citation indicators from a verified source should be provided for each refereed work, along with quality indicators (e.g. impact factor, acceptance rates) as reported by the journal or press. If available, additional evidence of impact, such as views, downloads, awards, indexes, for each publication should be added.
18.104.22.168 Post-Tenure Scholarly and Creative Activity
In addition to the list above, post-tenure review will also recognize:
Conducting research with broad impacts. Especially encouraged are areas emphasizing diversity (race, ethnicity, class, gender, sexuality, ability, religion, etc.).
Building and maintaining a research center.
Developing tools to aid in research activities in the field.
Books in the popular press about issues related to journalism and/or strategic communication.
Analyses or critical articles on professional subjects in the trade press.
Developing a reputation as an expert media source based on an area of personal research expertise.
Opportunities for research funding vary according to research specialties. Funding is an indication of the quality of scholarship and scholarly activities. Funding may consist of grants, fellowships or other forms of funding. Funding may be internal to the University system (e.g., Research Council) or external to the University system (e.g., state or federal grants). The committee will place greater weight on funding that is external to the University system. Evidence of earnest effort to seek and secure any research funding is important.
5.3.3 Service/and or Administration
22.214.171.124 Various types of service are valued at the School, including but not limited to:
faculty group, school, campus, system committee and administrative work;
service to scholarly associations, such as moderating a panel or serving as an officer;
reviewing for refereed journals, paper competitions, and book proposals;
serving as editor, guest editor, or an editorial board member for refereed;
journals and academic presses;
serving as a scientific advisory board member;
reviewing for academic awards, scholarships, or grants;
guest speaking (for example, as a keynote, as a panelist, or for a class).
126.96.36.199 Post-Tenure Service
In addition to service above, post-tenure reviews will also recognize:
service to non-academic professional organizations (for example, judging competitions, developing conferences, or contributing to workshops);
consulting, journalistic, or strategic communication efforts that benefit the general public;
reviewing external tenure dossiers;
service on an accrediting team.
5.4 Procedures for Tenure Recommendations
5.4.1 No later than the spring semester prior to the fall semester in which the divisional chair plans to forward a recommendation on tenure, the divisional chair shall begin an intensive review of the candidate’s qualifications. The Associate Dean for Graduate Studies will provide a written evaluation of the candidate by the beginning of the fall semester. The School Promotion and Tenure Committee will begin its review in the fall semester.
188.8.131.52 As part of the review, the divisional chair must solicit letters of evaluation of the candidate’s work from outside this institution. The evaluators must be academics at the rank of full professor at peer institutions or higher. Exceptions can be made if an explanation is proffered as to why an internationally and/or nationally recognized non-academic or a non-full professor could offer the best review based on research area. The candidate may submit up to six names for this process, of which the divisional chair will select three. The divisional chair will solicit letters from three additional evaluators not named by the candidate. The evaluators should be asked to comment on the candidate’s scholarly or creative accomplishments, the candidate’s national and/or international reputation, and the candidate’s comparative standing with peers in the discipline. The divisional chair will adopt the Provost’s requirements for external reviews and will normally solicit these evaluations in the spring semester prior to the fall semester in which the divisional chair plans to forward the recommendation.
184.108.40.206 The Associate Dean for Graduate Studies will provide a written evaluation of the candidate by the beginning of the fall semester, which will be included in the candidate’s materials to be evaluated by the School Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Associate Dean may ask for and evaluate any or all portions of the candidate’s record.
220.127.116.11 The School Promotion and Tenure Committee will evaluate the candidate’s research, teaching, and service. This review will include the external evaluations, and the evaluations written by the divisional chair and the Associate Dean.
5.4.2 The same procedures shall be used to develop a recommendation on an application for promotion from associate professor to full professor, except that only committee members holding the rank of tenured full professor may vote.
5.4.3 Action by the School Promotion and Tenure Committee on Tenure and Promotion Recommendations
1. Disqualification. A member of the Promotion and Tenure Committee whose own promotion recommendation is under the committee’s consideration shall be disqualified from deliberations and voting on his or her own case. The committee shall select a replacement from the tenured faculty at the appropriate rank.
2. The School Promotion and Tenure Committee shall review the dossier of materials on candidates for promotion and/or tenure and vote on the recommendations. The committee can request additional information from the nominee, divisional chair, and others. The nominee has the right to appear in person before the committee.
3. Discussions of the committee are confidential. The P&T chairperson is empowered to summarize the decision of the committee, particularly as they relate to negative recommendations.
4. Voting shall be by ballot. Only tenured associate professors or full professors on regular appointment may vote on applications for promotion to associate professor. Only tenured full professors on regular appointment may vote on applications for promotion to full professor.
5. Only the following recommendations will be made by the committee: “recommend approval,” or “do not recommend approval.” A simple majority renders the decision.
6. If fewer than five members of the school committee are eligible to vote on promotion to full professor, the Policy Committee shall appoint temporary replacements who shall serve only for the cases for which the School Promotion and Tenure Committee does not have at least five three qualified members.
5.4.4 The dean shall forward to the campus level all recommendations (positive and negative) of the Promotion and Tenure Committee along with his or her recommendations and comments. Copies of the school’s criteria for promotion and tenure shall accompany the recommendations of the dean to the campus level.
5.5 Hearings and Appeals: Faculty members shall be immediately informed by the divisional chair of the School Promotion and Tenure Committee’s recommendations. The candidate for tenure or promotion shall have the right to a hearing for reconsideration before the faculty body voting on tenure or promotion applications. The candidate shall also have the right to appeal a negative recommendation to the School Promotion and Tenure Committee and to the dean and to such other appeals as may be provided for by campus policy.
6. Conferral of Tenure
6.1 The conferral of tenure is an important step for both the individual and the university. Tenure shall be granted only to faculty who have demonstrated competency since their appointment at MU and who can be expected to continue to make significant contributions to the mission of the school. Tenure normally is granted only after the full probationary period specified in the university academic tenure regulations has been served. The criteria used to evaluate a faculty member’s qualifications for tenure are those criteria for promotion to associate professor. Normally, a recommendation for promotion to that rank will accompany a recommendation for the granting of tenure if the candidate was hired at a rank below that of associate professor.
7. Promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor
Candidates should have demonstrated continued professional growth and a high level of competency that would be expected of a permanent member of the journalism faculty. A person should only be appointed or promoted to an associate professorship if he or she has achieved national and/or international recognition for scholarly or creative activities and shows promise of becoming a leading figure in the discipline. Further, candidates should have demonstrated that they are excellent teachers and should have demonstrated significant service.
8. Promotion from Associate to Professor
The position of professor is the highest academic rank. This rank must be earned by demonstrable achievement. Promotion to professor shall be granted only to those who have achieved national and/or international reputation based on their excellence in scholarly or creative activities. Further, candidates should have demonstrated that they are excellent teachers and should have demonstrated exemplary service.
9. Other Evaluation
In addition to all of the review and evaluation procedures described above, all faculty members shall be evaluated annually by their divisional chairs (faculty group chairs) even if they are not under review, according to the above procedures, for retention, promotion and tenure.
9.1 The evaluation of the annual report will be used by the administration to help determine appropriate salary decisions.
9.2 As part of the evaluation process, modifications may be made in the focus of responsibilities as appropriate to the interests of the school and the faculty member. Such modifications should be as explicit as possible and retained in the faculty member’s file.
9.3 During the course of the academic year, the activities of each faculty member should be documented when possible by placing information in his/her file. The documentation is primarily the responsibility of the faculty member.
9.4 In the School of Journalism, each tenured faculty member shall, prior to the end of each academic year, negotiate with the divisional chair of her or his faculty a work plan for the following year. The plan will specify the goals for work in teaching, research and service. This plan shall be signed by both the faculty member and the chair. The work plan becomes the reference point for the annual evaluation performed by the chair. When the tenured faculty member is due for a five-year review, the work plans and annual evaluations form the basis of the review.
10. Post-Tenure Review
At five-year intervals after tenure is granted, a tenured faculty member will resubmit the following to their divisional chair (faculty group chair): annual reports and evaluation statements for the past five years, with a concise summary statement of research, teaching, and service activities for the five-year period, and a current curriculum vitae. The first five-year review will be done five years after the tenure decision or the last formal review of the faculty member for promotion to associate professor/full professor. Faculty hired with tenure will be reviewed five years after they are hired.
10.1 Based on the five-year report, the divisional chair will evaluate the faculty member’s overall performance for the five-year period as “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory,” according to standards described in Section 5. The faculty member will receive this information in a written evaluation in which the divisional chair notes the specific reasons for a “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory” recommendation. If the evaluation is unsatisfactory, then the five-year report with chair’s evaluation will be sent to the School Promotion and Tenure Committee.
10.2 The dean reviews the materials and the divisional chair letter and submits a “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory” determination on a report form that goes to the Provost’s office.
10.3 In the event of an unsatisfactory evaluation by the divisional chair, School Promotion and Tenure Committee will perform its own full review of the performance of the faculty member over the five-year period, based on the standards described in Section 5. An unsatisfactory decision by the School Promotion and Tenure Committee will require a 5/7 majority vote. The faculty member will receive this information in a written evaluation. The five-year evaluation process will be complete if the School Promotion and Tenure Committee does not reach an unsatisfactory decision. In the event that the School Promotion and Tenure Committee concurs with the divisional chair’s judgment of unsatisfactory performance, the School Promotion and Tenure Committee’s written evaluation will describe in detail its rationale for the unsatisfactory evaluation, and the subsequent process, specified in the UM Collected Rules and Regulations 310.015, will be followed.
10.4 The criteria by which a divisional chair, School Promotion and Tenure Committee, and/or Dean, will evaluate a faculty member are the same criteria listed in sections 8 and 5.3 of this document in the areas of teaching, research, and service.
Adopted April 1995
Revised May 2006
Revised October 2008
Revised May 2010
Revised July 2011
Revised November 2015