SKIP navigation
College of Education

This page's main content:

                                                             Approved by the Faculty of the College of Education, May 6, 1999          
Revisions Approved by AS&P Committee, April 14, 2010
Revisions Approved by Vote of College of Education Faculty, May 7, 2010
Revisions Approved by the Dean, June 2, 2010
Approved by the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs, July 2010
Revisions Approved by AS&P Committee, November 14, 2012
Revisions Approved by Vote of College Faculty, December 5, 2012
Revisions Approved by Dean, December 12, 2012

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
                          UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA                         

GUIDELINES FOR REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE

 

  • INTRODUCTION

The Board of Regents (BOR) of the University of Nebraska recognizes that teaching, research/ creative activity, and service are essential activities for university faculty and that all three are valued by the university.  The allocation of faculty time to engage in these activities should
reflect the role and mission of the specific campuses.  As stated by the BOR, the University of Nebraska at Omaha (UNO) is a metropolitan institution committed to meeting the educational needs of the Greater Omaha Area, and with statewide responsibility for programs in selected areas.  Major emphasis is on undergraduate teaching, with a diverse mix of master’s degree programs combined with a small number of doctoral programs.  UNO has primary responsibility for the urban-grant activities of the University of Nebraska which include integration and application of knowledge of problems of the urban community and applied research/creative activity on urban issues and greater Omaha area issues.  Scholarship at UNO should emphasize teaching, integration, and application of knowledge.

The BOR has advanced the primacy of teaching while also endorsing the broad concepts of scholarly activity as described by Boyer (1988) in his work Scholarship Reconsidered.  Tenure and promotion policies as well as incentive and reward systems should reflect the melding of teaching, scholarship, and service.
 
            As an urban, metropolitan university, UNO believes that it has a responsibility of stewardship that includes a high level of collaboration with the community. This commitment is best defined as “community-engaged scholarship” (CES) (Boyer, 1996; Cox, 2008). The College of Education shares this belief and takes pride in being highly engaged with the community. Recently, reappointment, promotion and tenure processes have been examined in light of how community-engaged scholarship is recognized and valued in institutions (Jordan, et al 2009; Leugers, et al, 2009).  While initial efforts were aimed at the health professions, CES is applicable to all disciplines. Community-engaged scholarship has been defined as “the application of institutional resources to address and solve challenges facing communities through collaboration with these communities” (Commission on Community Engaged Scholarship in the Health Professions, 2005). This level of scholarship encompasses the traditional RP&T areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service. The key factors that define CES are: 1) the activity is undertaken in collaboration with
community partner or partners; 2) the activity focuses on an identified need which can be addressed through the combined resources of the community and the university; 3) the activity has the potential to be replicated and expanded; 4) the activity can be documented; 5) the activity can be reported and

peer reviewed; 6) the activity may be published in professional journals or presented at professional conferences; and 7) the activity has a demonstrated impact.  Not all activities that a faculty member undertakes will fall under the CES framework. However, those activities that do fit the CES model shall be recognized and valued as part of a faculty member’s record of activity/accomplishment and shall be considered in evaluating applications for reappointment, promotion, and tenure.

In its Conceptual Framework, the College of Education identifies three central principles that guide our approach to preparing candidates who are Dedicated Practitioners, Reflective Scholars, and Responsible Citizens.  These same principles also shape how faculty define their professional careers. As dedicated practitioners, faculty must be knowledgeable in their content; understand learning theories; recognize social, historical, and philosophical foundations of their discipline; address needs of a diverse community; practice ongoing assessment and evaluation techniques; and engage in ongoing critical reflection. This principle is demonstrated in faculty’s performance in the area of teaching. As reflective scholars, faculty understand the value and use of research, monitor their own professional growth, and advance knowledge and practice. This principle aligns with faculty’s performance in the area of scholarship/creative activity. As responsible citizens, faculty cultivate an understanding of the social, political, cultural, and economic influences operating in local and global 21st Century settings that shape the discourse within their individual disciplines and within the communities in which they live and work. This principle is exemplified by faculty’s performance in the area of service (to the university, the profession, and the community).

Basic regulations concerning reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions are contained in the Bylaws of the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska and in the UNO Faculty Handbook.  The latter also calls for the formulation of "more exacting guidelines" by colleges, schools, and departments.  This document is a response to this charge.  It is understood that the policies and procedures established by colleges, schools, and departments must conform to the Regents' Bylaws, the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and campus guidelines and that they require the approval of the college faculty, the college dean, and the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs.

Each faculty member at the rank of assistant professor or above should hold an appropriate terminal degree at the time of initial appointment.  Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure (RPT) evaluations are based on teaching, research/creative activity, and service activities.  Positive evaluations are required for reappointment, promotion, and tenure.  Regular reappointment during the probationary period, for example, does not guarantee continuous appointment (tenure), nor does the award of tenure guarantee promotion.

Particular attention will be given to evidence of scholarship in evaluating faculty   performance in all areas.  This emphasis is consistent with the fundamental purpose of the university as an institution of higher learning dedicated to teaching, integration, and application of knowledge.  It is also congruent with the academic responsibility imposed upon faculty members by the Regents' Bylaws (section 4.1e).  Scholarship and intellectual activity are the hallmarks of the university and of its contributions to society.  These characteristics should therefore be reflected in teaching and  service as well as in research/creative activity.

While all tenure/tenure-track faculty are expected to contribute in the areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service, certain disciplines, programs, and departments/school are positioned to aggressively pursue research in specialized areas. Appointments with an emphasis in research are compatible with the college’s conceptual framework and its commitment to the notion of community engaged scholarship as described in the preceding paragraphs. Such appointments will reflect a higher contribution in the area of research/creative activity as shown in the faculty member’s workload. Faculty evaluation, likewise, will place more emphasis on performance in the area of research/creative activity.

Decisions concerning reappointment, promotion, and tenure are largely based on professional
judgments of the value of the faculty member’s work.  Qualitative standards are ascriptive and derive from values associated with a professional culture of the college.  In this sense, they are subjective.

The element of subjectivity does not mean, however, that the evaluation process is   capricious.  The categories of activity to be evaluated, the types of evidence which may be submitted for review, and indications of policy are given in the various guidelines statements.  Evaluation includes the input of advisory committees of one's peers, as well as administrators at varying levels.  Decisions are, therefore, informed by extensive deliberation.  Besides documenting their own cases, faculty members have access to their review files, may formally comment on the materials they contain, and have appeal and grievance procedures available to them.

Often, there are requests for quantitative "criteria."  It is asked, for example, how many publications or creative works are required for one to be judged competent as a scholar.  The  question is understandable, but it betrays a misconception of professional evaluation.  The focus of the process is intended to be on quality, not quantity.  Rather than "How many?" the essential questions are "Does this person have something to say?," "Is it significant?," and "How well is it said?"  These questions are as relevant for teaching and professional service as they are for research and other creative activities.

Of course, quantity is not without importance.  A great idea counts for little if it is not communicated in some meaningful form, and the assertion that one seminal article or creative work   is worth more than volumes of conventional wisdom still presupposes some number, even if   minimal.  For instance, although one must obviously present something for consideration, to say that three articles or creative works are required for tenure can easily constitute a false promise because if the articles or creative works are poor, their number is irrelevant.  Because quantity in the absence of quality carries little weight, stipulating expectations in quantitative terms is deceptive and risks altering the character of the evaluation process.  In sum, faculty members should be urged to make contributions of value.

  • APPLICATION PROCESS

Application Forms

         University reappointment, promotion, and tenure guidelines and application forms are found on the Academic and Student Affairs website. Clickable links are provided on the left side of the page under the heading “inside.”  College of Education Guidelines are located on the college website at http://coe.unomaha.edu/facstaff/rptguidelines.php.

Types of Application

            On the application form cover sheet, applicants must indicate whether they are applying for reappointment, continuous appointment (tenure), or promotion. Untenured Assistant Professors may apply for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor at the same time.

Submission Information

Faculty must formally apply for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Schedules of notification, application forms, and review timelines are published and distributed (electronic notification is acceptable) to all faculty in the fall semester of each academic year. Specific deadline dates are set by the Office of Academic and Student Affairs, the College of Education, and the departments/schools depending on the type of application submitted.
Faculty may use Digital Measures to collect and prepare application materials. Please note that application materials must be submitted in hard copy. Faculty shall submit materials in a 1 1/2-inch three-ring binder which shall include:
1)         the appropriate RPT forms;
2)         self-assessment of the applicant’s work in teaching, research/creative activity, and service;
3)         a descriptive listing of work that adheres to the headings and sub-headings of teaching, research/ creative activity, and service as specified in these guidelines; 
4)         a table(s) that summarizes the data from student evaluations of teaching (See Appendix C);
5)         a blank student course evaluation form;
6)         data sheets showing the course evaluation ratings by students for each course taught, each semester and summer sessions, as appropriate;
7)         a maximum of four samples of best work in the area of research/creative activity;
8)         other selected, supporting documentation (e.g., peer evaluation feedback, etc.); and
9)         a list of all supporting documentation on file with the applicant.

  • Review/Evaluation Process

Faculty applying for reappointment, promotion, or continuous appointment (tenure) shall be given copies of the university and college guidelines (standards, criteria, procedures) for reappointment, promotion, and tenure (electronic distribution is acceptable). Within the College of Education, the applications are subject to review at four levels; namely, department/school advisory committee, department chair/school director, college advisory committee, and college Dean. The applicant will be given a copy of the comments and recommendations at each level of the         review process. Written comments and recommendations shall be given to the applicant either personally or via confidential campus mail. In all cases, applicants being evaluated have the right to review comments and recommendations, respond in writing, and add materials to their applications prior to the time the applications are forwarded to the next level in the review process. The applicants will have three working days to make written comments concerning the comments and recommendations and to add materials (if desired) at each level of review. If the applicants choose to make written comments, the comments shall be added to the application materials before being forwarded to the next level of evaluation. Figure 1 shows the review progression and steps at each level of review. At each level of review, the applicants will sign a document indicating that they  have reviewed the comments/recommendations and that they have had the opportunity to make written comments. The signing of the document should be done in a private, confidential area. A copy of the signature form is included in the application form materials.

Figure 1.
Levels and Progression of the COE Review of Applications for Reappointment,
Promotion, and Tenure.

Application for reappointment, promotion, and/or continuous appointment submitted by the faculty member to his/her respective department/school.

Level 1              Department/School Review Committee

  • Reviews application materials and formulates written comments/recommendations.
  • Written comments/recommendations provided to the applicant.
  • Applicant is notified that he/she has three working days to review and respond (in writing) to the written comments/recommendations.
  • Any written response and additional materials to support the response provided by the applicant shall be included in the application materials before the application is forwarded to the next level of review.
  • Applicant signs the signature form indicating that he/she has reviewed the written comments/recommendations and has had the opportunity to provide written response and submit additional materials to support the response (if desired).

Application is forwarded to the department chair/school director.
Level 2              Department Chair/School Director Review

  • Reviews application materials and formulates written comments/recommendations.
  • Written comments/recommendations provided to the applicant.
  • Applicant is notified that he/she has three working days to review and respond (in writing) to the written comments/recommendations.
  • Any written response and additional materials to support the response provided by the applicant shall be included in the application materials before the application is forwarded to the next level of review.
  • Applicant signs the signature form indicating that he/she has reviewed the written comments/recommendations and has had the opportunity to provide written response and submit additional materials to support the response (if desired).

Application is forwarded to the Dean’s Office, College of Education.
Level 3              College Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee Review

  • Reviews application materials and formulates written comments/recommendations.
  • Written comments/recommendations provided to the applicant.
  • Applicant is notified that he/she has three working days to review and respond (in writing) to the written comments/recommendations.
  • Any written response and additional materials to support the response provided by the applicant shall be included in the application materials before the application is forwarded to the next level of review.
  • Applicant signs the signature form indicating that he/she has reviewed the written comments/recommendations and has had the opportunity to provide written response and submit additional materials to support the response (if desired).

Application is forwarded to the Dean, College of Education.
Level 4              Dean’s Review

  • Reviews application materials and formulates written comments/recommendations.
  • Written comments/recommendations provided to the applicant.
  • Applicant is notified that he/she has three working days to review and respond (in writing) to the written comments/recommendations.
  • Any written response and additional materials to support the response provided by the applicant shall be included in the application materials before the application is forwarded to the next level of review.
  • Applicant signs the signature form indicating that he/she has reviewed the written comments/recommendations and has had the opportunity to provide written response and submit additional materials to support the response (if desired).

Application is forwarded to the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs for a decision.

Note: At all levels, the faculty member’s signature indicates examination of the comments/recommendations, not agreement with the comments/recommendations.

At all levels of review (department/school committee, department chair/school           director, college committee, and Dean), faculty performance in each of the three major activity categories (teaching, research/creative activity, service) will be rated as outstanding, above average, average, below average, unsatisfactory, or not applicable. Also, at each level of review, written comments/recommendations shall be provided on department/school letterhead or college letterhead as appropriate, signed, and dated. For review committees, the chair may sign on behalf of the committee. For college review committee and academic department/school committee, names of committee members and overall committee vote must be reported on the appropriate form in the application materials.

Review Committees
           
The College of Education Reappointment Promotion and Tenure (RP&T) Committee is elected by vote of the college faculty in accordance with the Constitution and By-Laws of the college. Each academic department/school selects its review committee according to the policies and procedures within that academic department/school. Only full-time, tenured/tenure track faculty are eligible to vote for and serve on the college or academic level (department/school) review committees. Faculty members may participate at only one level of review, That is, a faculty member who serves on the college level review committee may not serve on the department/school review committee at the same time. Furthermore, department chairs/school director are not eligible to serve on either the department/school committee or the college committee.

Reappointment


As a rule, faculty members initially serve a probationary period.  During this time, they are appointed for specific terms, normally one year each (see Regents' Bylaws, section 4.4.2).  Although specific term appointments "carry no presumption of renewal," the possibility of eventual promotion and tenure will usually be kept in mind when evaluating faculty members holding such appointments.  Although the early evaluations of new faculty members who have recently obtained their terminal degrees will emphasize teaching and service, attention to research/creative activity should not be delayed.  For their initial review, new faculty should submit a statement which describes their
research/creative activity plans and objectives. For faculty in the first year of their appointment, the chair/director shall recommend initial reappointment via a letter to the Dean.  For reappointment beyond the initial review (second through sixth year), new faculty will follow the usual and  customary procedures defined in these guidelines.   Because of university policy governing who may teach graduate courses, new faculty who are not granted graduate faculty status at the time of initial appointment will be expected to become graduate faculty members by the end of their fourth year of service.  Specific advice on this point in regard to one's program and assignment should be supplied by the appropriate department chair or school director.

Comprehensive Third Year Reappointment Review

            Scheduled, third year comprehensive evaluations for reappointment are especially important  for providing guidance and direction to the faculty members involved. For faculty members with no previous credited experience, this special comprehensive review shall occur in the third year of service. For a faculty member with two or more credited years of experience, this comprehensive review shall occur in the first year of service. These special comprehensive reviews will follow the same process as outlined in Figure 1. At each level of review, the faculty member’s progress toward continuous appointment shall be evaluated and specific recommendations regarding what should be done to strengthen his/her record shall be made.

Promotion to Associate Professor and Continuous Appointment (Tenure)

For promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and/or for continuous appointment (tenure), one must be rated at least average in the areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service. Additionally, one must be judged outstanding either in teaching or in research/creative activity and above average in one of the remaining two categories. This means that an outstanding teacher who is above average in service must also be at least average in research/creative activity and that one who is outstanding in research/creative activity and above average in service must also be at least average as a teacher. Final rating for promotion and continuous appointment must include an outstanding rating in the applicant's primary assignment (i.e., research/creative activity or teaching).

The date by which one must be considered for tenure is specified at the time of initial appointment.  The probationary time period will normally approach the allowable maximum of seven years.  Should a faculty member be on disability leave, it is understood that the College of Education RPT Guidelines will be consistent with the current policy as stated in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Although involving separate decisions, untenured Assistant Professors may anticipate consideration for promotion and tenure at the same time.  Assistant Professors must be considered for tenure during the year specified on their contract, and Assistant Professors will usually be considered for promotion to Associate Professor during the same year.  While a faculty member’s entire career record is relevant for promotion to Associate Professor, documentation of activities in teaching, research/creative activity, and service while at the Assistant Professor rank at UNO are particularly important and should be submitted for review.

 

Promotion to Professor

Associate Professors usually are considered eligible for promotion to Professor after their fifth year of service in their current rank.  While an individual’s entire record of accomplishments is important, only evidence produced since attainment of Associate Professor rank or award of tenure, whichever is later, should be submitted for review for promotion.  Promotion to Professor requires evidence that the candidate has compiled a record of quality teaching, professional service, and has made a significant contribution to research/creative activity.

For promotion to Professor, one must be judged outstanding in two of the three categories, one of which must be either teaching or research/creative activity, and at least above average in the remaining category. Final rating for promotion must include an outstanding rating in the applicant's primary assignment.

This creates four possible patterns for promotion to professor.


                                    Teaching      Research/Creative Activity     Service
                                       OS                                 OS                   AA
                                       OS                                 AA                   OS
                                       AA                                 OS                   OS
                                       OS                                 OS                   OS

  • ACTIVITY CATEGORIES AND DOCUMENTATION

 

This section describes the categories/activities used for preparing application materials and provides guidelines on how to organize and present materials for documenting performance.  While a cumulative record of accomplishments is shown in the CV, only accomplishments while employed on a tenure track line at UNO should be provided for consideration of reappointment, promotion, or tenure.  Though a faculty member's entire career record is important for promotion to Associate    Professor or Professor, only accomplishments since appointment at current rank are considered. 

Entries shall be organized according to the categories and category details as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines in Appendix A. Applicants shall use only those categories and category details in which they have activities to report. Applicants shall keep hard copies of all publications/presentations, and other supporting materials. Documentation shall be organized and maintained by the applicants and be available upon request. A list of documentation materials shall be included in the application materials.


Applicants shall provide a maximum of four samples of their best work in the area of research/creative activity. In the case of a best work that has been accepted, but has not been published or produced, a copy of the manuscript or creative work and a letter from the editor or producer would be appropriate documentation. 

 

Applicants shall determine whether a particular presentation, publication, or activity best represents teaching, research/creative activity, or service and list it in only that category.   Should a single activity be substantial in terms of effort and time and represent a substantial contribution in more than one area, the applicant shall indicate specific contributions (as a percentage) in each area. As an example, activities/projects that fit the criteria of community-engaged scholarship may have components that cut across teaching, research/creative activity, and service. Faculty should describe these components and assign a percent value to each component by area. Each component shall be reported in the corresponding area (teaching, research/creative activity, or service) as appropriate. The total percentage for the project shall equal 100%.

I.       TEACHING

The scholarship of teaching is a process of seeking and imparting knowledge which makes the scholarship of discovery, the scholarship of integration, and the scholarship of application meaningful.  The scholarship of teaching seeks to encourage students to become critical thinkers.  As indicated by the Board of Regents’ Policy Statement, teaching is the first priority with special emphasis on the undergraduate student.  Graduate education is also a   vital part of the mission. A detailed list of categories/category details included under     teaching is provided in Appendix A.

Faculty members are encouraged to provide several types of evidence of teaching.  The following list illustrates recommended forms of documentation.  A summary table of student evaluations of teaching must be included, but it is not to be the sole basis of judgment.

If workload hours were assigned for special projects or activities in any of the categories listed below, the workload allocation, the semester and year it was awarded, as well as the nature of the assignment shall be noted.  (For example:  Fall Semester 2005, 3 hours, course development.  Spring Semester 2006, 3 hours, curriculum revision.)

1.   Reflective Critique/Self-Assessment

Faculty shall submit a reflective critique of the scholarship of teaching that includes a discussion of teaching philosophy, teaching goals, teaching load, analysis of courses taught, course development or revision, use of technology, teaching methodologies, advising role, and impact on students.  Reflect on strengths and areas of improvement in teaching and supervision.  Faculty shall rate their own teaching as outstanding,  above average, average, below average, or unsatisfactory and give a rationale for the rating. This rating shall appear in the last sentence of the reflective critique/self-assessment.
2.   Course/Instructor Evaluations
Acceptable types of evidence are the data from the standard college/university        Student Evaluation of Instruction Questionnaire. Data from course/instructor
evaluations shall be reported in table format using the template provided in Appendix C. Data shall be sequential for all courses taught and shall be arranged starting with the most recent semester first. A blank copy of the student evaluation questionnaire shall be included as well as printed copies of the results from each course taught each semester and summer session, as appropriate.

Faculty members should not use students’ written comments from the course evaluation forms in this section. Student comments, however, may be used in the faculty reflective critique if they are used to assist the faculty member in making a point.

Letters of testimony from students or former students should not be included unless those letters have been solicited by the department/school committee and represent a fair sampling of student opinion.

 

3.         Active/Experiential Learning

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A.  For internship/practicum coordination (3.1), please indicate the course, the number of students involved, and the number of hours required. For internship/practicum/project/student teaching supervision (3.2), please indicate the course, the number of students supervised, and the number of visits/meetings. Please note, the faculty member must have been assigned workload time for these activities in order to include the activity in the application.
4.         Peer Evaluation/Peer Observation

Letters and written reports of observations of teaching by colleagues and the chair/director are appropriate and may be included in the application notebook.


5.         Teaching Awards/Recognition

Indicate all nominations for awards and awards received.

6.        Advising

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A. For honors project director (6.4), please provide student’s name, title of the project, and completion date (actual graduation or projected date of graduation).  For thesis/specialist project/dissertation committee activity (6.5), please indicate role (i.e., chair, member, reader), give student’s name, and completion date (actual graduation or projected date of graduation). For student advising (6.6), provide   number of students advised, level (undergraduate, graduate), and program. For supervision of research (6.7), please give student(s)’ name(s), research title, description of student  role, and completion date (actual or projected date of completion). For supervision of independent study course(s) (6.8), please give the course and section number and number of students supervised. [Note: the faculty member must have been assigned workload time for this supervision.]


 

7.        Curriculum Development

Describe the development or major revisions of courses or programs in the department/school. Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A.

8.       Community-Engaged Scholarship: Teaching

This may be a single project or may be part of a larger project that has components in more than one area. If part of a project that cuts across areas, please describe the  portion of the project related to teaching and assign a percentage of the whole project  to this area. If this was a collaborative project involving other faculty at UNO, the percentage you report should reflect your contribution to the project.

9.        Grants

Describe the purposes and objectives of the grant and give particulars concerning granter, amount of grant, duration, etc.

In collaborative efforts, percent of individual’s contributions shall be specified.
10.       Professional Development

Please note that TABS information and Teaching Circles are included in this category.

II.     RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY

As indicated by the Board of Regents’ Policy Statement on the Relationship of Teaching, Research/Creative Activity, and Service at the University of Nebraska, research/creative activity plays a vital role at the University of Nebraska, and the pursuit of new knowledge in diverse areas of endeavor should be encouraged.  Faculty should pursue basic research and applied research/creative activity or both which apply to diverse areas, populations, and geographic areas.  The College of Education endorses scholarly activities of Discovery, Integration, and Application, as described in Ernest Boyer’s (1988) Scholarship Reconsidered.

Scholarship of Discovery is synonymous with basic research.  This activity adds to human understanding through various forms of investigation.  This area of scholarship investigates problems by means of an appropriate design and methodology and interprets findings within an explanatory framework.  Studies which are theoretical, experimental, analytical, or descriptive-interpretive are among the standard forms of inquiry.


Scholarship of Integration brings together disparate facts or research findings from various sources and disciplines.  Oftentimes related ideas and findings are presented in a new perspective.  This activity interprets, adds context to, and explains research results from an interdisciplinary perspective.
Scholarship of Application is service-related and links an individual’s expertise in scholarly areas to specific scholarly problems.  It includes applied research and outreach to schools, businesses, communities, and individuals. This area of scholarship is where theory and practice interact.

Each of these types of scholarship is valued by the college and each is important to fulfilling its role and mission.  In all cases, scholarship entails disciplined inquiry in which a justified problem is investigated.  Recognized forms of scholarly activity include, but are not limited to, theoretical studies, case studies, application/best practices studies, descriptive-interpretive studies, and evaluative studies.  In addition, scholarly activity includes preparation of technical reports (e.g., accreditation reports), interim and final reports of grant activity, and monographs on specific topics.  

Other creative work includes instructional materials such as textbooks, learning programs, and books of readings; artistic creations (dance and art); and educational hardware, software, and web sites.  Instructional materials representing a new conceptual departure in   the teaching of a subject or the application of an improved pedagogical process are more  highly regarded than those which merely update or essentially duplicate existing materials.

Publications, presentations, and performances shall be listed following an accepted bibliographic form. The publications manual of the American Psychological Association   (most recent edition) is highly recommended.  In cases of joint authorship, one's role in the publication or creative work shall be clearly indicated.  A single copy of each published     book, book chapter, published work, or adjudicated creative work shall be available upon request as supporting documentation.  Single as well as collaborative work is valued.  All authors/creators are to be listed in order of contribution or as they will or did appear in the publication/presentation/performance.  The percent of contribution of the reporting author/creator is to be reported in parentheses at the end of the citation.

If an item has not yet been published or presented, it shall be listed as "in press" or “in progress.”  Work published, in press, or already presented will be taken as the strongest evidence of scholarly/creative activity, though activity in progress is relevant to evaluation of the faculty member's continuing scholarly and creative interests.


Faculty shall indicate whether a particular manuscript is submitted (under review), accepted, in press, or published.

If workload credit or professional development leave was assigned for special projects or activities in any of the categories listed below, the credit allocation, the semester and year it was awarded, as well as the nature of the assignment shall be noted.  (For example:  Fall Semester 1995, 3 hours, research.  Spring Semester 1996, 3 hours, grant writing.)
1.         Reflective Critique/Self-Assessment

Write a reflective critique of research/creative activity performance.  Indicate how the scholarship forms of discovery, integration, and application relate to the faculty member’s discipline and interest. The reflective assessment and reflection might include strengths, areas for improvement, the importance of the work, the reputation of the journals, publishers, conferences, performance, etc. Faculty shall rate their   own research/creative activity as outstanding, above average, average, below average, or unsatisfactory and give a rationale for the rating. This rating shall appear in the   last sentence of the reflective critique/self-assessment.

2.        Publications

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A. In all instances, only manuscripts that have been published, are in press, or have been accepted for publication shall be reported in these categories. Provide full bibliographic information in APA style. For multiple author entries, show percent of your contribution. For manuscripts accepted, but yet not published, provide documentation of the acceptance (e.g. letter from the Editor).

            3.        Community-Engaged Scholarship: Research/Creative Activity

This may be a single project or may be part of a larger project that has components in more than one area. If part of a project that cuts across areas, please describe the  portion of the project related to research/creative activity and assign a percentage of   the whole project to this area. If this was a collaborative project involving other    faculty at UNO, the percentage you report should reflect your contribution to the project.

4.        Presentations at Professional Conferences

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A. Provide full bibliographic information in APA style. For multiple  author entries, show percent of your contribution. Indicate how the item was selected (invited, competitively selected, etc). Indicate the status of the entry (presented, accepted). Proposals submitted but not yet accepted should be shown under Works   In Progress.

5.         Creative Activities

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A. For performances (5.5) and exhibitions (5.6), please indicate whether these were juried or rated in some manner and the score/rating received.

6.         Projects (includes creations and inventions)

Describe the item and note its utility and significance.

7.        Works in Progress
           
Show all manuscripts, conference presentations, etc. that are in progress. This includes those items submitted and under review, under revision, or not yet completed. You may show anticipated submission dates. For multiple author efforts, please show expected percent of your contribution.

8.        Research/Creative Activity Awards/Recognition


Indicate all nominations for awards and awards received.

9.        Research/Creative Activity Grants

Describe the purposes and objectives of the research/creative activity and give particulars concerning granter, amount of grant, duration.  List grants and their funding status (e.g., awarded, not funded, submitted, approved but not funded).

10.       Professional Development
                        Please note that Research Triangle is included in this category.


 

III.    SERVICE

This section deals with professional service activities.  An important characteristic of all service in this category is its professional nature.  Only activities which are directly related to the role and mission of the college, which directly assist the profession, or in which one clearly functions as a representative of the profession and/or the university shall be noted.  Faculty members shall describe their service in terms of specific responsibilities and achievements.

If workload credit was assigned for special projects or activities in any of the categories listed below, the credit allocation, the semester and year it was awarded, as well as the nature of the assignment shall be noted.  (For example:  Fall Semester 1995, 3 hours, MOEC Task Force.  Spring Semester 1996, 3 hours, AAUP Executive Committee.)

1.         Reflective Critique/Self-Assessment


Write a reflective critique of service performance.  This might include a discussion of such factors as time commitment, duties, and outcomes of various committees; the nature of involvement with local schools, agencies, or organizations; and the impact    of the service.  Reflect on strengths and areas of improvement in service activity.  Faculty shall rate their own service activity as outstanding, above average, average, below average, or unsatisfactory and give a rationale for the rating. This rating shall appear in the last sentence of the reflective critique/self-assessment.

2.         Service in the University
Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A. For all entries, please indicate dates of service or when the activity occurred. For administrative service (2.1), the faculty member must have received assigned workload time for the activity (e.g., graduate program chair).

3.         Service in the Profession

An important characteristic of all service in this category is its professional nature. Only activities which directly assist the profession, or in which one clearly functions  as a representative of the profession should be noted. Entrepreneurial professional activities (e.g., consulting and private practice) are acceptable to the extent permitted by the Regents' Bylaws.

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A. For all entries, please indicate dates of service or when the activity occurred. Also, indicate the scope of service (local, regional, national, international) and level of contribution (chair, member, percentage of contribution, etc.).

4.        Service in the Community

Service activities taking place outside the university for the direct benefit of some outside group are appropriate for this category.  Working with children in a learning disabilities clinic or training paramedics in resuscitation techniques are examples of such off-campus based service. Serving on boards and consulting with business, governmental bodies (e.g. Nebraska Department of Education, Mayor’s Office, etc.) are also included in this category.

Follow the category detail list as shown in the Entry Order Guidelines provided in Appendix A.

5.       Community-Engaged Scholarship: Service
This may be a single project or may be part of a larger project that has components in more than one area. If part of a project that cuts across areas, please describe the portion of the project related to service and assign a percentage of the whole project to this area. If this was a collaborative project involving other faculty at UNO, the percentage you report should reflect your contribution to the project.

6.        Service Awards

Indicate all nominations for awards and awards received.

 7.       Service Grants

Describe the purposes and objectives of the grant and give particulars concerning granter, amount of grant, duration, etc.

In collaborative efforts, individual contributions shall be specified.

8.        Professional Development

Report activities that contribute to furthering your knowledge, skills, dispositions related to serving the university, the profession, and the community (e.g., attending workshops/seminars on service learning; completing special training to serve as an officer in a professional organization.

 


APPENDIX A

Entry Order Guidelines
for
RP&T Application and Annual Review

A.  TEACHING*

1.  Reflective Critique/Self Assessment
(Required for RP&T application. Check with your department chair/school director to see if this is required by your unit for Annual Review.)
2.  Course/Instructor Evaluations
3.  Active/Experiential Learning
3.1  Internship/Practicum Coordination*
3.2  Internship/Practicum/Project/Student Teaching Supervision*
3.3. Project Organization
3.4 Service Learning
3.5  Other  (e.g., Student Publications, etc.)
4.  Peer Evaluations/Observations 
5.  Teaching Awards/Recognition
6.  Advising
            6.1  Assistance with Capstone Project
            6.2  Career Advising
            6.3  Faculty Support – Student Awards in Academic or Performance Competitions
            6.4  Honors Project Director*
            6.5  Theses/Specialist Project/Dissertation Committee (Chair, member, reader)*
            6.6  Student Advising*
            6.7  Supervision of Research (Undergraduate, graduate)*
            6.8  Supervision of Independent Study Course(s)*
            6.9  Other         
7.  Curriculum Development
            7.1  Course Analysis/Development
            7.2  Curriculum Analysis/Revision
            7.3  Curriculum Development
            7.4  Program Analysis/Development
8.  Community-Engaged Scholarship: Teaching
9.  Teaching Grants*
10.  Professional Development (e.g., TABS, Teaching Circle, etc.)

*Please see RP&T Guidelines for additional information.      
Goals and Objectives (Required for Annual Review only.)


B.  RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITY*

1.  Reflective Critique/Self Assessment
(Required for RP&T application. Check with your department chair/school director to see if this is required by your unit for Annual Review.)
2.  Publications*
            2.1 Books
            2.2 Reports
            2.3 Monographs
            2.4 Chapters and Section in Books or Monographs
            2.5 Articles in Scholarly Journals
            2.6 Abstract/Paper in Conference Proceedings
            2.7 Article in Magazines (include newsletters and bulletins)
            2.8 Publications for Non-Professional Audiences
            2.9 Instructional Materials
            2.10 Creative Works (includes Computer Software)
            2.11 Tutorials
            2.12 Multimedia Productions
            2.13 Book/educational material reviews published in professional journal
3.  Community-Engaged Scholarship: Research/Creative Activity*
4.  Presentations at Professional Conferences*
4.1 Keynote Speaker
4.2 Panel
4.3 Paper
4.4 Poster Session   
4.5 Round Table
4.6 Teaching (workshop/seminar/demonstration)
5.  Creative Activities*
            5.1 Choreography
            5.2 Compositions (e.g., music, multimedia, etc.)
            5.3 Design (e.g., costume, lighting, set, multimedia, etc.)
            5.4 Director (e.g., artistic, music, stage)
            5.5 Performances
            5.6 Exhibitions 
6.  Projects (includes: creations, inventions, etc.)
7.  Works in Progress
8.  Research/Creative Activity Awards/Recognition*
9.  Research/Creative Activity Grants*
10.  Professional Development (e.g., Research Triangles, grant writing workshop, etc.)

*Please see RP&T Guidelines for additional information
Goals and Objectives (Required for Annual Review only.)


C.  SERVICE*

1.  Reflective Critique/Self Assessment
(Required for RP&T application. Check with your department chair/school director to see if this is required by your unit for Annual Review.)
2.  Service in the University
            2.1  Administrative Service* 
            2.2  Assistant Director of School
            2.3  Center/Lab Supervisor
            2.4  Chair of Department
            2.5  Committee Chair
            2.6  Committee Member
            2.7  Director of Graduate Programs
            2.8  Director of School
            2.9  Director of Undergraduate Programs
            2.10 Director of Special Activities/Centers (Must be part of assigned workload)
            2.11 Library Liaison
            2.12 Other
            2.13 Peer Mentoring
            2.14 Program Review
            2.15 Special Assignment
            2.16 Special Projects
            2.17 Supervision of Graduate Assistants
            2.18 Web Site Design and/or Maintenance
3.  Service in the Profession*
            3.1  Accreditation Reviews, Educational Institutions
            3.2  Book/Instructional Materials Reviews for Publishing Companies
            3.3  Chairing a Conference Session
            3.4  Collaborations/Partnerships in the Community
            3.5  Program Coordinator of Conference
            3.6  Development of Conference
3. 7 Editorships*
3.7.1 Editor
3.7.2 Assistant/Associate Editor
3.7.3 Editorial Board Member
3.7.4 Manuscript (ad hoc) Reviewer
3.7.5 Review of Books & Educational Materials for publishers
            3.8  Federal Review Process (NSF, NIH, etc.)
            3.9  Holding Office (local, national, international)
            3.10  Interviewed for Media Source
            3.11 Jurist
            3.12 Membership in Professional Associations/Organizations
            3.13 Paper Discussant at a professional conference/meeting
            3.14 Panelist at a professional conference/meeting
            3.15 Reviewer of Conference Proposals
            3.16 Local Arrangements for a Conference
4.  Service in the Community
            4.1  Accreditation Visitations and/or Other External Evaluation Teams
            4.2  Advising Government Agencies and Private Organizations
            4.3  Board Member
            4.4  Consulting for Businesses and Other Private Agencies
            4.5  Consulting for Government
            4.6  Consulting for Public Agencies/Non-Profit
            4.7  Expert Witness
            4.8  Grant-Related Activities
            4.9  Guest Lecturer
            4.10 Holding Office
            4.11 Informational Talks and Presentations
            4.12 Instructor at Noncredit Workshops and In-service Programs
            4.13 Interview for Media Source
            4.14 Leadership Position in Community Organization
            4.15 Presentation to Community Groups
            4.16 Volunteer Work
            4.17 Community Links
            4.18 Other
5.  Community-Engaged Scholarship: Service*
6.  Service Awards
7.  Service Grants
8.  Professional Development*

*Please see RP&T Guidelines for additional information
Goals and Objectives (Required for Annual Review only.)