Skip to main content

Faculty Tenure and Promotion Procedures

*Revisions passed: September 18, 2024

Purpose: 

To establish the criteria, application procedures, and deadlines for faculty tenure.

I. Definition

Tenure is a condition of presumed continuous employment following the expiration of a probationary period and after meeting the appropriate criteria. After tenure has been awarded, the faculty member’s service may be terminated only for adequate cause; except in the case of retirement or financial exigency as declared by the State Board of Education; in situations where extreme shifts of enrollment have eliminated the justification for a position; or where the State Board of Education has authorized elimination of or a substantial reduction in a program. Tenure Status is available only to eligible, full-time institutional faculty members, as defined by the institution. (For the definition of “adequate cause,” see State Board Policies Section II, Subsection “L.”)

II. Policy Statement

Tenure is a condition that ensures an intellectual atmosphere that is free and open. This encourages a superior faculty to remain at the University, thus strengthening the excellence of the institution. Granting tenure implies a commitment by the institution to defend the academic member’s intellectual endeavors. Likewise, the faculty member who is awarded tenure makes an equally strong commitment to serve the students, the profession, and the institution in a manner befitting an academician. 

Generally, faculty are expected to serve a five-year probationary period before applying for tenure in their sixth year. Exceptions are determined contractually through negotiation with the Dean of the college at the time of hiring. Faculty must apply for tenure and promotion to associate professor (if applicable) by their sixth year. Tenure may be granted to members of the Official Faculty who demonstrate excellence in each of the following four areas: 

  1. Teaching
  2. Scholarly or Research Activities
  3. University and Professional Service
  4. Professional Preparation 

III. Criteria

The following include the criteria used by the School of Social Work in determining performance in areas of teaching, research, service, and professional preparation:

1. Teaching: 

Evidence of excellence shall include, but is not limited to: 

  • The Director’s recommendations and annual evaluations (If the applicant is the Divisional Dean, then the Dean’s recommendations and annual evaluations are used.)
  • Prior evaluations by the School Personnel Committee.
  • Official teaching evaluations by students, including any companion narrative student comments compiled by the School.
  • Narrative Discussion of teaching philosophy, methods, outcomes, and professional development, including ways the candidate has incorporated or implemented feedback about teaching into the delivery of courses and efforts the candidate has made to improve teaching based on formative feedback
  • By the candidate’s two-year review, completion of formal professional teaching development activities through resources available at Boise State (e.g., the Center for Teaching and Learning), and a description of how the candidate has incorporated feedback and learnings from these activities to improve teaching effectiveness;
    • Examples of activities the candidate may complete include a formative teaching evaluation (e.g., Mid-semester Assessment Process through the BSU Center for Teaching and Learning) or certificate program (e.g. BUILD certificate; Course Design Institute) completed within or outside the university. 
  • By the candidate’s four-year review, completion of an independent assessment of teaching based on observation by an independent referee nominated by the candidate and the Personnel Committee and selected by the Divisional Dean.
    • The candidate can choose which course to have evaluated by the referee, and both in-person and online courses can be selected for evaluation,
    • The referee must be a qualified faculty from outside the School of Social Work,
    • The referee must evaluate the candidate’s teaching using Criteria 3 and 4 from the Framework for Assessing Teacher Effectiveness (FATE) rubric by Simonson, Earl, and Frary (2022); if the candidate developed the course, the candidate may request that the evaluator also use Criteria 1 and 2 from the FATE rubric,
    • If the independent assessment of teaching completed before the four-year review is not favorable, the candidate can request a second independent assessment of teaching prior to their candidacy for promotion and tenure. In this case, the candidate must also provide an explanation of how the feedback from the initial independent assessment was used by the candidate to improve their teaching effectiveness. If two independent assessments of teaching are completed, the committee shall evaluate the second independent assessment of teaching and the candidate’s statement of how earlier feedback was used to improve the candidate’s teaching effectiveness.  

In addition to the required elements listed above, candidates may optionally submit the following evidence to demonstrate teaching effectiveness: 

  • Evidence of excellence in course design (e.g., course syllabi, assignments, exams, handouts, and other evidence of encouraging creative and analytical thinking by students)
  • Portfolio or sample of student work
  • Teaching awards or recognitions from the university, college, school, or other institutions of higher education (e.g., Council on Social Work Education).

Evidence of service on Dissertation/Thesis committees; although all services on dissertation and thesis committees is valuable, serving as chair shall be afforded more credit than service as a committee member

The following are specifically barred from inclusion in the candidate’s packet and may not be used as evidence of teaching effectiveness:

  • Ratings, scores, comments, or evaluations from students or other community members derived from online websites or forums which are not officially sanctioned and regulated by Boise State University (e.g., RateMyProfessor.com). Evaluations on these sites can be easily manipulated and are not valid sources of evidence of teaching effectiveness. 

2. Scholarly, Research, and Creative Activities

Evidence of scholarly excellence may include books and book chapters, non-refereed publications, submitted grant applications, or funded grants, but must include refereed articles in peer-reviewed journals. An average of one peer-reviewed journal article per year is the required minimum (for years on tenure track) at Boise State.

  • To count toward the minimum required number of peer-reviewed journal articles, candidates must demonstrate that each article meets the following criteria; the burden of proof is on the candidate to demonstrate the following are true for each peer-reviewed journal article to be counted:
    • published in a journal that uses an independent, peer-review process to evaluate submitted articles, 
    • published in a journal with a scope and mission related to the social work discipline/ profession; a wide range of journal outlets are related to social work, including those in allied disciplines (e.g., sociology, psychology, medicine, public health, implementation science); however, the burden is on the candidate to demonstrate the link between the journal’s scope and social work policy, theory, research, and/or practice, 
    • published in a journal that maintains high ethical standards and is not predatory; candidates should provide evidence that journals are legitimate publishers of scholarly research, for example, by demonstrating the journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE),
    • the article presents empirical data (quantitative or qualitative) and analyses of data or makes a theoretical, conceptual, or methodological contribution to the literature; even if published in peer-reviewed journals, opinion pieces do not count toward the minimum number of required peer-reviewed journal articles. 
  • To evaluate the quality and strength of the candidate’s scholarly contributions, the Committee shall take into account author order and journal ranking when assessing the candidate’s peer-reviewed journal articles. Assessments of author order and journal quality will be based on the following criteria:
    • Generally, the candidate’s contribution to the work will be evaluated based on author order, with first author receiving the most credit, and other authors receiving lesser credit in descending order of authorship. Exceptions include when an article formally indicates equal credit should be applied to a pair of authors (e.g., co-first-authors or authorship determined randomly on a two-author publication). 
    • While acknowledging the value, and in some cases necessity, of team-based science, single-authored articles demonstrate a high level of independence and will be afforded more credit than articles with multiple authors. 
    • In some fields (e.g., medicine, public health) the last authorship position on an article, sometimes called the senior author, is afforded the same credit as the first author; to receive this credit the candidate must provide evidence that senior authorship is acknowledged within the pertinent discipline and must demonstrate that the candidate’s contribution to the article warrants equal credit with the first author. iv. In order to demonstrate the candidate’s independence as an investigator, the candidate must have at least one first-authored or solo-authored peer-reviewed journal article prior to applying for tenure and promotion; promotion will not be achieved without this requirement being met. 
    • Peer-reviewed articles published in journals that are highly ranked or that have high impact factors relative to other journals within their discipline will be afforded more credit than those published in journals with lower rankings or impact factors within a given discipline; the focus is on the relative journal ranking and impact factor within the candidate’s scholarly area; for example, if the candidate publishes primarily in social work journals, journal rankings and impact factors relative to other social work journals will be considered. 
  • In addition to the above, the Committee shall evaluate the quality and strength of the candidate’s scholarly contributions, including peer-reviewed articles, based on the criteria listed below; as with all criteria, the burden of proof is on the candidate to demonstrate these criteria are met:
    • the total body of scholarly work coheres around a focal area or limited number of focal areas that are pertinent to and advance the social work discipline/ profession. Focal areas may be substantive and/or methodological. 
    • the total body of scholarly work demonstrates the development of the candidate’s expertise and contribution to knowledge within a focal area or limited number of focal areas. 

Evidence may also include peer-reviewed presentations (e.g., oral presentations, papers or symposia) at regional, national, or international conferences; invited presentations at conferences, seminars, or training institutes; research awards from professional societies or organizations in social work or related disciplines; edited books; textbooks; scholarly books; book reviews; submitted grant proposals; funded research grants and contracts; and/or technical reports or research monographs.

Independent evaluations of scholarship and research based on reviews by extramural referees nominated by the candidate and the Personnel Committee and selected by the Divisional Dean.

Evidence of promise or potential of continuing such contributions in the future. 

3. Service: 

Evidence of excellence may include, but is not limited to: 

  • Professional service in the discipline, such as
    • Editorial Board for academic journal
    • Reviewer of manuscripts or abstracts for a regional, national, or international conference  within the candidate’s area of expertise
    • Chair or member of conference organizing committee within the candidate’s area of expertise
    • Officer-ship in regional, national, or international professional organization within the candidate’s area of expertise
    • Publication of peer-reviewed articles on the ‘scholarship of learning’ (e.g. social work teaching methods and practices)
  • University service, such as:
    • School committees
    • College committees
    • University committees
    • Advisor to student organization
    • Administrative duties or special projects assigned or approved by the Divisional Dean
    • Academic advising and/or other service to teaching and students above and beyond classroom instruction demonstrated by advisee lists and documentation of service to others.
  • Community Service reflecting the candidate’s areas of scholarly and professional expertise and related to the social work discipline/profession, such as
    • Chair or member of boards or councils of governmental or non-profit organizations
    • Pro bono consulting with governmental or non-profit organizations (e.g. evaluations, grant writing, strategic planning)

The following are specifically barred from inclusion int he candidate’s packet and may not be used as evidence of excellence in service: 

  • Community volunteer work or activity that are not related to the candidate’s scholarly and/or professional skills

4. Professional Preparation: 

Evidence of excellence must include

  • Degree: An earned MSW and doctorate in social work or an allied discipline.
  • Full appointment to the graduate faculty. 
  • Five years of full-time experience in an academic rank at an accredited institution of higher learning but no earlier than during their third full year of employment at Boise State University unless approved by the SSW Divisional Dean and the College of Health Sciences Dean. All members of the official faculty must apply for tenure no later than during the sixth year of eligible employment at Boise State University. (For exceptions, see section IX.)
  • At the time of initial employment as a member of the official faculty, the Divisional Dean (in accordance with School policy) shall make a written recommendation to the Dean determining whether service at another institution shall apply toward the years of service required for tenure. Upon approval by the Dean, this agreement shall be included in the personnel file of the faculty member for future reference and communicated in writing from the Divisional Dean to the Personnel Committee.

IV. Responsibility

Faculty members who are eligible and wish to be considered for tenure shall follow the procedures and assemble the documentary evidence listed below. The Divisional Dean may also initiate tenure consideration for faculty members. The Divisional Dean must apprise faculty who meet minimum time requirements for tenure considerations.

V. Procedure

Professional Development Review (PDR): 

A PDR will be conducted for each non-tenured, tenure-track faculty in the School during the Spring of their first year of appointment. The purpose of the PDR is to clarify expectations for achieving promotion and tenure within the School, provide the candidate with feedback regarding their current achievements and plans to generate evidence of excellence in research, teaching, and service, and encourage the candidate as they plan to meet tenure and promotion expectations in the years that follow.

  • The  PDR shall be conducted by the School Personnel Committee and include a personal conference. 
  • The faculty member being reviewed shall provide the Committee by April 15 in the year of the PDR a Portfolio that includes their up-to-date curriculum vitae, a letter (no more than 4 pages) outlining their plans for development and for demonstrating excellence in teaching, research, and service for the upcoming years. In addition, if the candidate wishes, s/he may provide a statement of teaching philosophy, a summary of evidence of excellence based on the criteria described above, and any other material that will assist the review. Although the review process is intended to provide helpful feedback and guidance, the burden is on the tenure-seeking faculty to provide evidence and information that will be helpful in generating formative input for the faculty member’s progress toward tenure/ promotion.
  • The School Personnel Committee will conduct the PDR on the basis of the materials submitted. The PDR shall provide relevant feedback on the candidate’s teaching, scholarship, and service in a written report. Future evaluations of the candidate will address the extent to which the candidate was responsive to this feedback. 
  • Based upon the findings of the Personnel Committee, its chair will prepare by April 30 a written assessment of the candidate’s current status and plans for professional development, with a copy forwarded to the School Divisional Dean for inclusion in the faculty member’s personnel file. The Personnel Committee will conduct an in-person meeting with the faculty member to provide feedback and address any questions.

Biennial Tenure Progress Reviews:

Tenure Progress Reviews (TPRs) will be conducted for each non–tenured, tenure-track faculty in the School at two time points prior to their application for tenure and promotion: in the candidate’s second and fourth years of service, respectively, in alignment with timelines and reviews required by the university and college. The purpose of these reviews is to assist the non-tenured faculty by monitoring his/her progress and providing him/her advice and encouragement as s/he works toward earning tenure. 

  • Each TPR review shall be conducted by the School Personnel Committee and include a personal conference.
  • Membership on the School Personnel Committee shall be limited to the regular tenured faculty of the School.
  • The faculty member being reviewed shall provide the Committee by February 1 in each year of review with a Tenure Portfolio that includes: the curriculum vitae; the School Divisional Dean’s annual evaluation(s) from all years of service at BSU to date; statements of teaching, research, and service which summarize the candidate’s achievements in each area respectively, describe how the candidate has met the criteria outlined in this policy, and describe the candidate’s future plans for further development; summary of official BSU teaching evaluations for years to date; peer-reviewed publications and other scholarly works; and, provide any other material that will assist the review. Although the review process is intended to provide helpful feedback and guidance, the burden of proof is on tenure-seeking faculty to put forth the best case possible so that the reviewers can assess both the quantity and quality of submitted work. The Tenure Portfolio should be limited in scope only to the evidence and criteria described in this policy. 
  • The School Personnel Committee will conduct TPRs on the basis of the Tenure Portfolio and School standards for teaching, scholarship, and service. The TPR shall provide relevant feedback on the candidate’s teaching, scholarship, and service in a written report.
  • Based upon the findings of the Personnel Committee, its chair will prepare by March 18 an annual written assessment of Progress Toward Tenure in accordance with University policy for submission to the faculty member, with a copy forwarded to the School Divisional Dean for inclusion in the faculty member’s personnel file. The Personnel Committee will conduct an annual meeting with the faculty member to provide feedback and address any questions.
  • The Divisional Dean is responsible for forwarding a copy of the TPR to the Dean of the College by April 1 of each year of review. If necessary, the Divisional Dean should assist the faculty member with a plan of improvement.

Eligibility: 

Faculty members become eligible to apply for tenure during the sixth year of service on the Official Faculty (for definition of Official faculty, see the BSU Faculty Constitution, Article II).  All members of the Official Faculty must apply for tenure no later than during the sixth year of eligible employment at Boise State University. (See also Section VIII.) Exceptions to this time line are described in section IX.

Under extraordinary circumstances and in compliance with State Board of Education policy, the following criteria and rules are established for acquiring tenure:

  • Full-time appointment in a ranked position as a faculty member at an accredited institution of higher education may be accepted at full value (year for year).
  • A faculty member whose prior service is considered to be of a nature sufficient to waive the normal six year requirement may be considered for tenure no earlier than during his or her third full year of employment at Boise State University, except as authorized by the Divisional Dean and the college Dean. At the time of initial employment as a member of the Official Faculty, the Divisional Dean (in accordance with School policy) shall make a written recommendation to the appropriate Dean determining whether service at another institution shall apply toward the years of service required for tenure. Upon approval by that Dean, this agreement shall be included in the personnel file of that faculty member for future reference.
  • In extraordinary circumstances, a candidate may apply for tenure and promotion to associate professor in their fifth year of service on the Official Faculty, if: (a) the candidate has demonstrated exceptional achievements beyond their peers in all three areas of research, teaching, and service which fully meet and exceed the criteria for tenure and promotion, and (b) the early application for tenure is approved by the Divisional Dean and College Dean.

Independent Assessment of Teaching: 

Successful candidates for tenure in the School of Social Work must demonstrate proficiency in teaching in an independent evaluation conducted by a third-party observer. An independent observer shall be selected from a list of nominees of commensurate academic rank provided by the candidate and by the School Personnel Committee. An independent observer should not have a personal relationship with the candidate. The Divisional Dean shall select an independent observer from the nominees and obtain their commitment to conduct an assessment based on observation of the candidate’s teaching in either in-person or online formats. The independent reviewer shall be required to reveal the nature of any relationship with the candidate in a written assessment of classroom teaching. The independent reviewer shall use the teaching evaluation criteria, standards, and rubrics established by this policy as described above and shall produce a written report in accordance with guidelines promulgated by the School’s Personnel Committee. The Divisional Dean shall provide the candidate with a copy of the assessment report.

Extramural Review: 

Successful candidates for tenure in the School of Social Work must demonstrate (1) a record of substantive contributions to the profession through scholarship and research that seeks to advance the profession and its state of the art and (2) a promise or potential of continuing such contributions in the future. The applicant shall provide evidence of the quality and significance of the candidate’s scholarship and research. Appropriate evidence shall include evaluations by peers and experts from outside Boise State University who are knowledgeable in the candidates’ field. While the School may request outside evaluations of a candidate’s teaching and service accomplishments, the primary goal of extramural review is to obtain an assessment of the candidate’s record of research, its impact on social work, and his or her potential for future growth as a scholar.

Extramural reviewers shall be selected from a list of potential outside reviewers provided by the candidate and by the School Personnel Committee. Extramural reviewers should be selected on the basis of commensurate academic rank and expertise in a particular area of research and scholarship. They should not have a personal relationship with the candidate. Examples of personal relationships to be avoided include, but are not limited to, dissertation advisors, major professors, current and former co-workers and colleagues, fellow graduate students, and coauthors on peer-reviewed manuscripts. 

The Divisional Dean shall select nominated external reviewers from both lists and obtain their commitment to participate in extramural review. Extramural reviewers shall be required to reveal the nature of any relationship with the candidates in their written evaluations. 

A Candidate’s tenure portfolio shall include (inserted by the School of Social Work Divisional Dean) at least three (3) outside peer reviews representing nominees from both lists. Documentation supporting the qualifications of the reviewers and their relationships to the candidate should also be included. 

Tenure Portfolio:

 Candidates shall submit their materials for tenure and/or promotion review via the university’s approved electronic, internet-based submission system and shall comply with all related guidelines pertaining to the process and formatting of the materials, including page limits where applicable. The Divisional Dean shall maintain a copy of the university’s procedures and guidelines and will share this information with the candidate and assist the candidate as needed. The candidate bears ultimate and final responsibility for ensuring that the materials provided build a strong case for the candidate’s tenure and promotion by demonstrating excellence in all areas and confirming that all requirements for tenure and promotion have been met. 

Process:

In granting or denying tenure to a faculty member, the following procedures shall be used:

  1. The School Personnel Committee shall review each candidate’s qualifications and make recommendations for the granting of tenure and/or promotion. This review shall be conducted on the basis of the candidate’s tenure application and School criteria and procedures outlined in this document. The Personnel Committee then will make its recommendation in writing to the Divisional Dean, with a copy to the candidate, indicating the number of votes to award and/or deny tenure and/or promotion.
  2. The Divisional Dean shall make his or her own written evaluation and recommendation. Both the Personnel Committee recommendation and the recommendation of the Divisional Dean shall be appended to the official Tenure Application by the Divisional Dean, who shall forward the portfolio to the College Promotion and Tenure Committee. No additional material may be added to the application at this or any later time unless so requested by the College Tenure and Promotion Committee or an administrative official. The candidate retains the option of withdrawing the application at any point in the process unless the application is made in the final year of the maximum probationary period for tenure, in which case a final tenure decision must be made.
  3. The College Promotion and Tenure Committee shall review the qualifications of the candidate for tenure and shall make its recommendation about the granting of tenure to the candidate. This review shall be based on the college tenure policy. The committee shall notify the faculty member in writing of its recommendation within three working days of the decision. If the recommendation is to deny tenure, the faculty member may, within five working days of the notification, request a meeting with the committee. If requested, the committee must grant a meeting with the faculty member within five working days of the request.
  4. The Dean shall make his or her recommendation to grant or deny tenure and/or promotion.  The Dean shall notify the faculty member in writing of his/her recommendation within three working days of the decision.   If the recommendation is to deny tenure, the faculty member may, within five working days of the notification, request a meeting with the Dean. If requested, the Dean shall grant a meeting within five working days of the request. The Dean shall make a final recommendation and forward that recommendation to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, who in turn forwards his/her recommendation to the President. 
  5. The President (in consultation with the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs) shall make his or her decision to grant or deny tenure. The President shall notify the faculty member of his or her decision.   If the decision is to deny tenure, the faculty member may request a meeting with the President, within five (5) working days of the notification. The President shall grant such a meeting within 30 days, if requested.

VI. Deadlines

  • Candidates for tenure and/or promotion must notify their department that they plan to apply no later than February 1 of the calendar year in which they plan to put forward their application. Note that this deadline is the academic year prior to the academic year in which the candidate will formally apply for tenure and/or promotion. 
  • By April 1 of the academic year preceding the tenure and/or promotion application, the Divisional Dean shall select nominated external reviewers from both lists and obtain their commitment to participate in extramural review. Extramural reviewers are required to reveal the nature of any relationship with the candidates in their written evaluations. 
  • By September 1 of the academic year in which the candidate applies for tenure and/or promotion, the Divisional Dean shall include the extramural review letters, and documentation supporting the qualifications of the reviewers and their relationships to the candidate, in the Candidate’s tenure and/or  promotion portfolio, for review by the School Personnel Committee. 
  • By September 15 of the year in which the candidate applies for tenure, the candidate shall submit the tenure and/or promotion portfolio to the Divisional Dean, who shall ensure that the portfolio is made available to the School Personnel Committee for review.
  • By October 10, the School Personnel Committee shall forward its recommendation regarding the candidate’s tenure and/or promotion to the Divisional Dean and shall include its letter within the candidate’s portfolio. 
  • By October 15, the Divisional Dean shall forward the tenure and/or promotion portfolio, including the school personnel committee and  Divisional Dean recommendations, to the college Promotion and Tenure Committee.
  • By December 1, the candidate shall be notified of the recommendation of the college Promotion and Tenure Committee.
  • By December 15, the college Promotion and Tenure Committee shall forward the tenure and/ or promotion portfolio and all recommendations concerning the awarding of tenure and/or promotion to the Dean.
  • By January 15, the Dean shall notify each candidate of his or her recommendation.
  • By January 31, the Dean shall forward all tenure and/or promotion recommendations sent to him or her, and his or her own recommendation, to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
  • By March 1, the President shall notify each candidate of his/her decision.
  • This time line may be adjusted by any of the reviewing parties with due notification.

VII. Failure to Achieve Tenure

A decision to recommend tenure or to deny tenure must be made during the sixth year of tenure-eligible employment. If this decision is to deny tenure, the faculty member’s next contract shall be a one-year, terminal contract unless the Divisional Dean and Dean of the College recommend that the individual continue in a different role within the school.

  1. Extension of the Tenure Probationary Period

VIII. Extension of that Probationary Period

An extension of the tenure probationary period may be granted under certain circumstances which may impede a faculty member’s progress toward achieving tenure, including responsibilities with respect to childbirth/adoption, significant responsibilities with respect to elder/dependent care obligations, disability/chronic illness, or circumstances beyond the control of the faculty member. 

The procedures for requesting an extension are:

  1. The faculty member provides a written request to the Provost. 
  2. Requests for extension of the probationary period with respect to childbirth or adoption must be made within one year of the birth or adoption. Other requests should be made in a timely manner, proximate to the events or circumstances which occasion the request. All requests should include appropriate documentation. 
  3.  A request for extension of the probationary period with respect to childbirth and adoption responsibilities carries with it the presumption of approval for a one-year extension. Except to obtain necessary consultative assistance on medical or legal issues, only the Provost will have access to documentation pertaining to a request related to disability or chronic illness. For request other than childbirth and adoption, elder/dependent care obligations, and disability or chronic illness, the provost will, at his or her discretion, determine if consultation with the dean and/or department is appropriate. The Provost shall notify the faculty member, department chair, and dean of the action taken. 
  4. Multiple extension requests may be granted. All requests for probationary period extensions shall be made prior to commencing with a tenure or contract renewal review. 
  5. If a probationary period extension is approved, a reduction in scholarly productivity during the period of time addressed in the request should not prejudice a subsequent contract renewal decision. 
  6. Because an extension is only granted when a faculty member’s progress toward tenure is impeded, the faculty member’s productivity over the entire probationary period should be evaluated as if the extension never occurred; that is, the faculty member’s accomplishments over the extended probationary period should be viewed as if they had been accomplished in the shorter standard probationary period—the additional time due to the extension should not be a factor in the evaluation.

IX. Revision of School Tenure Procedures

The School may make periodic revisions to these procedures by a majority vote of the tenured faculty.

X. Promotion to Full Professor

The rank of Full Professor represents the highest academic achievement that can be attained. This rank should be reserved for those individuals who are truly and demonstrably outstanding among their peers. Thus, a candidate for Full Professor is expected to have achieved additional distinction since appointment to Associate Professor.

Promotion to Full Professor is not an automatic right, but a position earned only when the candidate demonstrates outstanding levels of professional achievement as defined by the standards of the department, college, and university.

Candidates for promotion to Full Professor are expected to maintain the Social Work standards set forth for promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure after their promotion. Candidates for promotion to Full Professor are expected to have distinguished themselves in the following ways: 

  • Service: With regard to demonstrating excellence in service, candidates for promotion to full professor must meet all standards set forth for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor with Tenure
  • Teaching: With regard to demonstrating excellence in teaching, candidates for promotion to full professor must meet the following criteria:
    • A pattern of satisfactory official student evaluations
    • Satisfactory annual department chair’s evaluations
    • Narrative discussion of teaching philosophy, methods, and efforts to improve teaching effectiveness (e.g., use of technology, attending teaching/education development sessions, etc.)
    • Evidence of academic advising and/or other services to teaching and students above and beyond classroom instruction
  • In addition, candidates may submit the following as evidence of teaching effectiveness:
    • Peer reviews of teaching effectiveness (e.g., via independent observation of in-person or online instruction),
    • Teaching awards,
    • Evidence of teaching effectiveness from data collected on student learning,
    • Examples of exemplary student work or accomplishments achieved due to the candidate’s coursework or mentoring 
    • Appointment as a visiting professor at another institution of higher education, 
    • Receipt of a teaching-focused Fullbright Award or appointment as a Fullbright Specialist, 
    • Publication of peer-reviewed research related to teaching & learning
  • Scholarship and Research: To demonstrate distinguished excellence with regard to research and scholarship, the candidate must demonstrate significant contributions to the field of social work as evidenced by meeting all of the criteria listed in section X.C.3.a – e. The candidate must show how the accomplishments in this section relate to the candidate’s research area and to the profession of social work. Note that the candidate must meet all five criteria, inclusive of X.C.3.a. – e.
  1. National and/or international recognition and reputation for scholarship in the candidate’s research area as measured by external letters of review;
  2. Publication of peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles, at a rate of one per year, on average, during the five years prior to applying for promotion to full professor. Several of these articles should appear in mid to high level Social Work journals or journals in related fields. Author order and journal ranking will be considered using the criteria described above; 
  3. Completion of additional scholarly output not used to satisfy criteria X.C.3.b, related to the candidate’s area of research, and comprised of any items from the following list (X.C.3.c.i – c.vii) at a rate of one per year, on average, during the five years prior to applying for promotion to full professor:
    1. Publication of peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles; These should appear in mid to high level Social Work journals or journals in related fields. Author order and journal ranking will be considered using the criteria described above;
    2. Peer-reviewed national or international conference presentations, inclusive of oral presentations, presented papers, symposiums, and roundtables, but excluding posters;  
    3. Written reports on internally-funded or unfunded research; 
    4. Publication of invited or peer-reviewed book chapters or monographs;
    5. Publication of policy briefs, white papers, technical reports, or research reports of program evaluations relevant to the candidate’s research for governmental, community, or private organizations;
    6. Submission of research or service grant proposals to a national or international external funder, inclusive of governmental (National Institutes of Health, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) and non-profit funders (e.g., William T. Grant Foundation); 
    7. Completion of comparable research products that must be approved on a singular basis by a majority vote of the full Personnel Committee and must be documented and justified in the candidate’s letter. If the candidate wishes to use a scholarly product that is not on the list above (X.C.3.c.i-vi.) in partial satisfaction of criteria X.C.3.c, the candidate must provide written justification demonstrating why the product represents equal or greater achievement than the other outputs on the list. The full Personnel Committee shall vote on whether the proposed product counts toward the candidate’s total outputs necessary to satisfy criteria X.C.3.c, with a majority vote in favor necessary for acceptance. This decision will be documented in the candidate’s letter and the Personnel Committee’s review. Only two of the candidate’s five required outputs for criteria X.C.3.c may be accepted using this exception process; the other outputs must come from the list (X.C.3.c.i-vi). 
  4. Completion of one additional major research or scholarly contribution to the field, not used to satisfy criteria X.C.3.b or X.C.3.c, and related to the candidate’s research area, where major contributions are defined as any item from the following list (X.C.3.d.i – d.v):
    1. Publication of a scholarly book or monograph; 
    2. Principal investigator (PI), Co-PI, or Multiple PI (MPI) on an externally-funded research or service grant from a U.S. governmental agency (e.g., National Institutes of Health; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) or a large, nationally or internationally recognized foundation or non-profit organization (e.g., Robert Wood Johnson, William T. Grant); 
    3. Completion of a nationally or internationally recognized research fellowship or appointment that is competitively awarded and denotes the candidate’s national and/or international reputation within their designed research area. The burden of proof is on the candidate to demonstrate that the position (a) is competitively awarded, (b) represents national or international recognition for scholarship and research in the candidate’s area, (c) involves substantial research work and associated products, and (d) is an achievement equivalent to the other items on this list. The full Personnel Committee shall vote on whether the proposed item counts toward satisfaction of criteria X.C.3.d., with a majority vote in favor necessary for acceptance. This decision and rationale will be documented in the candidate’s letter and the Personnel Committee’s review. Examples of activities that may meet this criteria include:
      1. Fulbright Research Awards (typically one full semester or academic year);  
      2. Fulbright-Fogarty Fellowships in Public Health (typically one full semester or academic year); 
      3. Fellowships with the National Science Foundation, National Academy of Sciences, or National Academy of Medicine; 
    4. Publication of five additional peer-reviewed scholarly articles; These should appear in mid to high level Social Work journals or journals in related fields. Author order and journal ranking will be considered using the criteria described above;
    5. Completion of five additional research outputs from the list in section X.C.3.c.i – c.vi. 
  5. Promise of continuing such contributions in the future. The candidate must provide evidence and make a compelling argument, through demonstration of future plans or projects underway, of the promise for scholarly output to continue in the future. The adequacy of the candidate’s evidence and argument shall be assessed by the Personnel Committee members charged with evaluating the candidate’s materials.  

In addition to meeting the minimum criteria described above, candidates for full professor may demonstrate their excellence and achievement in research through any of the following:

  • Invitations to give keynote addresses at national or international conferences; 
  • Publishing in international journals and/or presenting at peer-reviewed international conferences;
  • International collaboration on research; 
  • Service on international dissertation committees; 
  • Additional contributions to research such as professional or non-refereed publications and conference or professional presentations.

Five years of full-time service as Associate Professor at an accredited institution of higher learning is necessary for promotion to the rank of Professor. (Note that promotion to Professor is not assumed to be automatic after any time period.)  The individual may apply for promotion during the fifth year of experience, but no earlier than during his or her third year of employment at Boise State University, except under extraordinary circumstances.

The applicant for Professor shall provide evidence of quality and significance of the candidate’s scholarly, research, and/or creative activities.  Appropriate evidence shall include evaluations by peer experts (external reviews) from outside of Boise State University who are knowledgeable in the candidate’s field.   Extramural reviewers shall be selected from a list of potential outside reviewers provided by the candidate and by the School Personnel Committee. Extramural reviewers should be selected on the basis of commensurate academic rank and expertise in a particular area of research and scholarship. They should not have a personal relationship with the candidate. Examples of personal relationships to be avoided include, but are not limited to, dissertation advisors, major professors, current and former co-workers and colleagues, fellow graduate students, coauthors, etc. 

The Divisional Dean shall select nominated external reviewers from both lists and obtain their commitment to participate in extramural review. Extramural reviewers shall be required to reveal the nature of any relationship with the candidates in their written evaluations. 

At least three (3) outside peer reviews representing nominees from both lists are required as part of the tenure portfolio. 

The Committee to evaluate applications for Full Professor within the School of Social Work shall consist of a minimum of three members. The committee shall include all Full Professors within the School, excluding the Divisional Dean. If there are not three or more Full Professors within the School who can comprise the committee, the Divisional Dean will invite Full Professors from related disciplines to serve on the Committee until such a time as at least three members are selected. The Divisional Dean shall select candidates based on their rank (Full Professor) and expertise in related areas. The Committee of Full Professors will vote on the applicant’s application for promotion and will draft a letter with their vote and rationale for their decision. 

Procedures and timelines for promotion to full professor shall be the same as those outlined above for tenure and promotion to associate professor.

XI. Implementation

This policy is now in effect. DATE: April 16, 2024