UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA WILMINGTON
1 November 2009
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING UNCW
POLICY ON TENURE, PROMOTION, AND
INCENTIVE STRUCTURE
In response to recommendation 5.3 of the University of North Carolina Tomorrow Final
Report
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 1
I. COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
Mark Galizio, Psychology, co-chair
Nelson Reid, Social Work, co-chair
Manny Avalos, Academic Affairs
Sue Cody, Randall Library and Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Steve Demski, Public Service and Continuing Studies
Vance Durrington, Department of Instructional Technology, Foundations and Secondary
Education
Carol Ellis, Academic Affairs
Jane Fox, Nursing
Andy Jackson, Psychology and Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Gabriel Lugo, Mathematics and Statistics and Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Bruce McKinney, Communications and President, Faculty Senate
Steve McNamee, Sociology and Criminology
Mark Spaulding, History and former President, Faculty Senate
Curt Stiles, Management and Faculty Senate Steering Committee
II. COMMITTEE CHARGE
The current Committee was created in response to the preceding UNCW report, Process
for Review of Tenure and Reward System, submitted and accepted by the Provost 1
December 2008. That report, the first stage of implementation of recommendation 5.3 of
the University of North Carolina Tomorrow Final Report (December 2007),
recommended a number of steps be taken in the process of the campus consideration of
“refinement and adjustment of the tenure, promotion, and incentive system to place
greater value on faculty involvement and engagement in applied research and outreach.”
The specific recommendations, which have guided the current committee, follow:
RECOMMENDATION #1: … that the proposed UNCW review of its “tenure,
promotion, and incentive system” in regard to engagement and involvement be based
on [a] definition cited [and] that it include departmental-based deliberation of
discipline-specific standards, and that the review take place with consideration of the
specific issues and priorities established by UNCW through the UNC Tomorrow
process.
RECOMMENDATION #2: … that the permanent committee consider a number of
changes to [UNCW RPT] documents that would incorporate the language of scholarly
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 2
engagement and service learning and that that service be defined in terms of
knowledge dissemination and application with specific reference to the state and
region.
RECOMMENDATION #3: … that faculty appointments, in appropriate cases, be
explicit as to service and engagement expectations.
RECOMMENDATION #4: … the 2008/09 committee should be continued. In the
event that any member of the current committee cannot continue we would recommend
that the current structure of representation be maintained. We would also recommend
that a representative of the Nursing faculty be added to the Committee.
RECOMMENDATION #5: The new UNC Tomorrow Tenure and Rewards Systems
Committee should be formed by January 2009 and charged to submit its report with
recommendations for RTP policy or “faculty reward” changes by Nov. 2009 so that any
changes can be considered by the Faculty Senate at its Dec. 2009 meeting and
subsequently submitted to an early 2010 BOT meeting.
RECOMMENDATION #6: … each UNCW department would be asked to review the
proposed changes in light of their own discipline and department purpose and mission.
Importantly, departmental review would establish [a basis for] standards of rigor and
review for scholarly engagement and service that reflect the unique criteria of the
discipline or professional area involved.
III. STATE OF UNCW FACULTY “INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT”
The 2008 Process for Review of Tenure and Reward System report found that the
imperative for engagement is an expression of the belief that a public university has a
responsibility to extend knowledge, and its application, beyond the traditional classroom
and usual boundaries of the campus and “engage” aspects of the public and private
sectors to enhance the cultural, economic, and social development of the state. This
commitment to “public” service, through knowledge dissemination and application, is
clear in the overall UNC mission statement that guides all campuses stating that the
system of multiple campuses is “Dedicated to the service of North Carolina and its
people.” Further it is clear that UNCW as a constituent institution of the UNC system has
both reflected and expanded this service commitment in its mission statement, with
explicit reference to “… enriching the quality of life through scholarly community
engagement in such areas as health, education, the economy, the environment, marine
and coastal issues, and the arts”( http://www.uncw.edu/planning/mission.htm). The
UNCW Strategic Plan notes that engagement is “embedded in both our history and
mission” and refers to public and private sectors, service learning and dissemination and
application of research.
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 3
The 2008 report states that the “UNCW faculty is extensively involved and engaged in a
broad range of activities for and with the community, the region, the state and the nation.
Faculties are directly involved with governmental and social services, schools, health
services, art and cultural groups, and many professional organizations and regional
business entities.” The report documents many of the specifics of this pattern of
engagement from across the university.
IV. DEFINITION OF “ENGAGEMENT” (Recommendation #1)
The concept of engagement, according to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement
of Teaching, “describes the collaboration between higher education institutions and their
larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial
exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity.”
(http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/descriptions/community_engagement.php?k
ey=1213)
Such “collaboration” is, perhaps, best recognized within the context of grants and
contracts, and in this era of both partnership and declining state subsidy such activity is
essential and must be encouraged. But much “involvement and engagement” on the part
of faculty may go on outside of the more established contexts of grants and contracts
without the attendant elements of organizational and financial accountability. Thus, the
concept of “scholarly engagement” has come to be commonly used to mean engagement
that is clearly knowledge-based, within the faculty member’s area of research and
teaching, and that meets rigorous standards for peer review and documentation of
methods and impacts.
As a guiding definition the 2008 report recommends this, derived from that adopted by
the Faculty Senate Outreach Council at UMASS:
Scholarly Engagement is the creation, integration, application and
transmission of knowledge for the benefit of external audiences and the
University and occurs in all areas of the University Mission: research, teaching
and service. The quality and value of Scholarly Engagement is determined by
academic peers and [with advice from] community partners.
The strength of this definition is its emphasis on substantive knowledge, the fusion of
teaching, research and service, the mutual benefit to campus and community, and
accountability to academic peers and external partners.
In the UNC Tomorrow context the underlying concern is that many UNC campuses have
not facilitated faculty engagement because they have neither developed the mechanisms
that create partnerships and articulate and refine external “demand” nor created a context
of opportunity, incentive and reward for faculty engagement. While we have not found
that UNCW has suppressed engagement, the Committee does believe that the existing
policies and processes in regard to tenure and promotion may not reflect the complexity
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 4
of university objectives or fully represent the full range of activities that faculty engage in
that are materially related to the objectives and purposes of the university.
V. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UNCW PROMOTION AND
TENURE POLICY AND PROCESS (Recommendation #2)
A university is an institution devoted to knowledge: its creation, its expansion, its
dissemination and its application. Every faculty member of the university is selected
because they have specialized knowledge in a particular disciplinary context and are
prepared to contribute to the knowledge base in their field. The purpose of a
reappointment, promotion, and tenure system is to ensure that the qualities that led to
initial appointment are being expressed in the research, teaching, and service/engagement
of a faculty member and that expectations are aligned with the mission of higher
education, the university, and its academic units in particular.
The tenure and promotion policies at the University of North Carolina Wilmington are
designed to recognize faculty who demonstrate their contributions to a discipline’s
knowledge base through their teaching, research, and service/engagement. The evaluation
of faculty is a peer-based process expressing the commitment of the university’s
permanent faculty to continued academic excellence and institutional development.
Tenure and promotion is based on academic and professional merit assessed initially at
the departmental/disciplinary level. It is essential that each of the departments/disciplines
establish appropriate criteria within the context of the mission of the university and the
system.
Community/scholarly engagement is consistent with UNCW’s mission as a
public university and should be acknowledged, valued, and rewarded as part of
comprehensive tenure, promotion, and annual evaluation of faculty. This engagement
can take multiple forms including community-based research and scholarship, service
activities in the community involving disciplinary knowledge application and
dissemination, grant/contract funded projects, research application, technology transfer,
and more. However, engaged research/scholarship, of whatever form, must meet
standards for research and scholarship established at department levels and consistent
with the academic disciplines represented therein. Similarly, engaged service activities
must be knowledge-based and meet the appropriate standards set forth by departments for
such activity. The expectation for level of involvement of scholarly or engaged service
activities may vary across departments or hiring units depending on the subject matter
and mission of departments and academic disciplines represented therein. Therefore,
faculty whose work does not include engaged activities should not be penalized or
denied tenure or promotion on those grounds unless such activities are part of the
clearly articulated mission of the hiring unit or clearly stipulated as part of the
terms of appointment. Although community engagement as part of a
comprehensive evaluation of faculty should be acknowledged and rewarded, such
activity does not diminish the importance and value of the university’s teaching and
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 5
research missions. Therefore, community engagement alone should not be a
substitute for faculty expectations in these other areas.
Consistent with the principles above the Committee recommends the following changes
in existing RPT Documents in UNCW Faculty
Handbook.(http://www.uncw.edu/fac_handbook/index.htm)
blue =New Language
Policies of Academic Freedom and Tenure
III.B. The tenure policies and regulations herein contained set forth the considerations upon which
appointment, reappointment, promotion, and permanent tenure are to be recommended. These
considerations shall include an assessment of at least the following: the faculty member's demonstrated
professional competence, continued academic and professional growth, potential for future
contribution, teaching effectiveness, research and outreach, and the institution's needs and resources.
VI.A. The decision whether to reappoint a faculty member when a probationary term appointment
expires may be based on any factor considered relevant to the total institutional interests, but it must
consider the faculty member's demonstrated professional competence, potential for future
contributions, and the institution's needs and resources.
Criteria for Reappointment, Promotion, and Award of Tenure
I.
Introduction paragraph 2
It is essential also that the university faculty be composed of individuals with a variety of strengths.
Heterogeneity among faculty in contributions to the university is crucial. Guidelines for reappointment,
tenure, and promotion should be seen in part as a means for fostering and rewarding individual
strengths and competencies among faculty Thus in the following guidelines the examples of the ways
in which contributions to teaching, scholarship and research, faculty engagement, professional
development, and service may be shown should be taken as indicating the variety of ways in which
excellence may be demonstrated rather than as a fixed and exclusive set of common desired activities.
Fixed weightings to be used in determining the relative importance of these different areas should be
avoided in making reappointment, tenure, and promotion decisions.
II. Evaluation areas
A. Teaching
The primary concern of the university is teaching its students. Thus teaching effectiveness is the primary
criterion for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Faculty must be well-trained, knowledgeable, skillful,
and enthusiastic presenters of knowledge. In addition, they should embody for their students the life of
scholarship. Teaching involves not only the transmission of knowledge, but the development of the
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 6
students' desire for knowledge, of the skills for acquiring knowledge and for critical evaluation, and of the
factors that enable the student to assume a responsible position in society. Teaching, then, involves all
aspects of the educative process including distance learning, and outreach programs that extend teaching
beyond the classroom. In addition to teaching courses, these aspects include revising old courses and
developing new ones; developing teaching methods; and assisting, advising, and counseling students in
academic matters. Commitments to learning, to fostering the intellectual development of students, and to
improving educational programs mark the dedicated teacher. The nature of the university demands such
commitment and performance from all its faculty members.
Evaluation should be made of as many aspects of teaching as possible. Formal evaluation of teaching shall
include peer evaluation, student evaluations, and documentation of innovative teaching, curriculum
development, grant-supported outreach, and other teaching-related activities.
B. Scholarship, Faculty Engagement and professional development
Scholarship is expected of every faculty member. Besides a mastery of the fundamentals of a discipline it
involves a thorough familiarity with its various areas, problems, and continuing investigations; it
necessitates staying abreast of the relevant literature and includes the ability and insight to organize,
synthesize, and evaluate effectively the work of others. It is a large component in the makeup of a good
teacher and a necessary ingredient in the conduct of meaningful research and the presentation of research
results. Thus it is a prime responsibility within the academic profession.
As a part of the comprehensive evaluation of faculty for RTP the faculty member’s interactions and
engagement with communities outside the traditional scholarly community should be included when such
interactions and engagement are deemed relevant, i.e. they are scholarly, creative, or pedagogical activities
for the public good, directed towards persons and groups outside UNCW. For faculty engagement to
qualify as scholarly work, the activity must meet critical standards of excellence stipulated at departmental
levels. Evidence of faculty engagement may take many forms such as external grants supporting
community work, publications, technology transfer, funded outreach to public schools and other artistic and
humanistic activities publically recognized as significantly improving the lives of people in the community.
The university encourages faculty members to continue their education throughout their professional lives
Faculty members should seek appropriate advanced study which will (1) enhance their teaching
effectiveness, (2) apprize them of developments in their academic fields, or (3) add new areas of expertise
to the existing programs of the university. Examples of appropriate professional development include
participation in formal coursework, interdisciplinary collaboration, seminars, workshops, and other
specialized training programs.
C. Artistic achievement and research
Artistic achievement is an appropriate responsibility of some faculty members. Depending on the medium
and specialization involved, continuing efforts toward the creation, production, interpretation or criticism of
works of art are expected in some disciplines. Such activity may take many forms: exhibits, concerts,
performances, productions, readings, and writings. The academic artist has a responsibility to enlighten and
enrich society at large with her/his artistic endeavors.
Besides artistic achievement, research understood as original investigation is also an important function of
higher education. By continuously adding to the store of human knowledge, research enriches society at
large while contributing greatly to vitality and depth in teaching. The university therefore encourages
faculty members to engage in scholarly research.
Since the communication of knowledge is a central function of an educational institution, public rendition
of a faculty member's research is highly desirable and may assume a variety of forms, which may be
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 7
addressed to her/his professional colleagues or to society at large. Such renditions may include books,
reviews, articles, reports, lectures, seminars, and papers presented at meetings.
In evaluating a faculty member's artistic achievement or research, attention will be directed to its vitality,
integrity, originality, and overall quality, as judged by professional colleagues on and off campus.
D. Service
The university encourages and expects its faculty members to apply their talents and abilities in service to
the university, to organizations and to the community at large.
Service within the university is expected of all faculty members. Such service normally includes
participation on departmental, school or college, and university-wide committees, and willing assistance in
supporting the functions and purposes of the university.
The university shall also recognize and encourage faculty service to professional and scholarly
organizations. Examples of such service include leadership in professional and learned societies,
evaluations of manuscripts and research proposals, editorial board work, and other professionally related
activities with or without compensation.
It is also appropriate for faculty members to serve in an educational advisory or informational capacity at
the local, regional, state, national, and international levels. This service should ordinarily be an outgrowth
of professional training and/or one's affiliation with the university. Examples of such activities include
conducting workshops, consulting, and serving on advisory boards with or without compensation.
Format
IV. Contribution to Teaching
A. Required subcategories:
1. Courses taught (a non-chronological list of course numbers and titles)
2. Sample course materials (a small number of representative items is sufficient)
3. Summary of student evaluations

This must include a "Report of SPOT Question 16 by Semester," prepared in a standard format by
the Office of Institutional Research.
 In addition, the candidate may provide:
 additional SPOT reports received prior to the previous two-and-one-half years, and/or
 his or her own qualitative interpretation of SPOT results.
 However, any additional material must be appended to the officially prepared, standardized SPOT
report.
 Candidates and chairpersons are discouraged from making statistical calculations or quantitative
analyses.
4. Summary of peer evaluations of teaching
5. Academic advising within the department
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 8
B. Optional subcategories:
If there are no items to be listed under an optional subcategory, simply omit that subcategory. Number
remaining subcategories sequentially.
1. Courses developed/revised/new to the individual or to the university
2. Special initiatives/incentives in teaching; cite specific examples
3. Efforts to improve teaching, evidence of self-learning, and evidence of commitment to fostering the
intellectual development of students
4. Grants and fellowships related to teaching at all levels including K-12.
5. Honors, listings, or awards related to teaching
6. Membership in professional societies primarily devoted to teaching
7. Attendance at professional meetings or sessions primarily devoted to teaching
8. Completion of continuing education, workshops, symposia, or other specialized training programs
primarily devoted to teaching
V. Research, Scholarship, and Artistic Achievement
A. Required subcategories:
Each required subcategory must be listed. If there are no items to be reported under a required
subcategory, write "none."
1. Refereed publications (including juried or peer-reviewed performances, exhibits, artistic
works, productions or writings)
a. Published
b. Accepted for publication
c. Under consideration








Give complete bibliographic references for materials already published or accepted for
publication.
Include letters from editors confirming works accepted for publication
List separately materials under consideration for publication.
List works in reverse chronological order, with most recent first.
2. Publications (or performances, exhibits, artistic works, productions or writings) not listed
in the refereed category (e.g., abstracts, book reviews)
a. Published
b. Accepted for publication
c. Under consideration
Give complete bibliographic references for materials already published or accepted for
publication.
Include letters from editors confirming works accepted for publication
List separately materials under consideration for publication.
List works in reverse chronological order, with most recent first.
3. Research grants or research fellowships
a. Awarded (include dates and amounts)
b. Applied for (include dates and status)
4. Grants or research fellowships for off-campus study or professional development
a. Awarded (include dates and amounts)
b. Applied for (include dates and status)
5. Presentations (including readings, lectures) at professional meetings
6. Faculty engagement.
a. Research or artistic efforts.
b. Grants awarded and applied (include dates and status).
c. Funded outreach to public schools and STEM involvement.
d. Technology Transfer and Patents.
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 9
e.
7.
Collaborative efforts with the community resulting in recognized benefits for the
public good.
f. Reviewed publications resulting from work in the community.
On-going research projects, programs and goals
B. Optional subcategories:
1. Honors or awards for:
a. Research or artistic efforts
b. Professional development efforts
2. Membership in professional societies
3. Attendance at professional meetings
4. Supervision of graduate or undergraduate theses or extensive projects that involve
research or artistic efforts
5. Special research or artistic efforts (e.g., participating on a team at an off-campus
laboratory, performing in a statewide orchestra)
6. Special initiatives in on-campus scholarly or professional development
7. Continuing education, workshops, symposia, or other specialized training programs
attended or completed
8. Formal off-campus traineeships
9. Professional consultancies resulting in professional development
a. Paid
b. Pro bono
10. Other scholarly or professional efforts
VI. Service
A. Required subcategory: Service to the university
1. University committee memberships, leadership positions, or administrative duties
2. College or school committee memberships, leadership positions, or administrative duties
3. Department committee memberships, leadership positions, or administrative duties
B. Optional subcategories:
1. Service to the university
a. Student counseling; student advising other than routine work with department
advisees (as in the Center for Academic Advising, clubs, campus groups, etc.)
b. Other service to the university
2. Service to professional or scholarly organizations
a. Leadership in professional or learned societies
b. Leadership in seminars or short courses taught to professionals in the candidate's
discipline
c. Professionally related activities (e.g., manuscript editor or editorial board
member, artistic juror, grant or accreditation reviewer, advisor/leader/director in
workshops or consultations)
i.
Paid
ii.
Pro bono
d. Other professional service
3. Community service
a. Professionally related activities (e.g., boards, offices, presentations, workshops,
continuing education programs, clinical or consultative services, newspaper or
magazine articles for the lay public)
i.
Paid
ii.
Pro bono
b. Other community service
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 10
VII. Chair's Evaluation

Normally the evaluating officer is the department chair (or acting/interim chair). In the case of the
School of Nursing, it is the chair of the School of Nursing RTP Committee. In the case of Randall
Library, it is the chair of the Randall Library Promotion Committee. In certain other cases, it may
be the dean.
 In all cases, the evaluation must be signed and dated by the evaluating officer.
 If written departmental expectations for RTP decisions are required by the standing policies of the
college or school, include a copy.
A. Required subcategories:
1. Summary and evaluation of teaching that includes both student and peer evaluation of
teaching as well as all other aspects of evaluation so that no single component of teaching
evaluation is overweighted




It is helpful to include commentary on the following components: student evaluation of teaching,
peer evaluation of teaching, annual evaluations, and documentation of teaching-related activities.
Appendix J of the Faculty Handbook states "All RTP recommendations shall include a qualitative
interpretation of SPOT results by the department chairperson . . . ."
2. Summary and evaluation of research, scholarship, and artistic achievement that includes a
critical assessment of the value to the discipline of the applicant's contributions
It is extremely helpful to include a characterization of the quality of journals in which the
candidate's publications have appeared.
Also very useful is a description of appropriate criteria for evaluating scholarly or creative work
within the discipline of the candidate. (Many professional organizations now have published
definitions of scholarly and professional work in their fields.)
3. Summary and evaluation of service
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 11
VI. Recommendations Regarding Incentives and Recognition for
Scholarly Engagement (Recommendation # 1)
The incentive system in a well-ordered institution of higher education must be related to
the mission and goals of that institution. Recognizing the visibility of our commitment to
the Cape Fear region and the state of North Carolina in our mission statement and
strategic plans, incentives must be introduced that encourage and reward engagement
with our publics.
The fundamental processes of faculty accountability and evaluation for tenure track
faculty appointments involve annual departmental and peer-based review and the
university process of retention, promotion and permanent tenure. Additionally there are
‘incentives” reflected in research support structures and teaching excellence rewards. But
there are few university-based opportunities to recognize faculty achievement with
respect to regional engagement and/or to provide financial incentives that will encourage
faculty to engage in scholarly efforts that distinguish our university as an institution
committed to the well-being of our region.
We offer several such proposals for consideration.
 The UNCW Distinguished Scholarly Engagement Award, established to confer
recognition for distinguished service to the community similar to the recognition
conferred by the various campus teaching and research awards.
 The UNCW Engaged Faculty Fellowship Program, designed to support an
expanded model of the role of faculty as engaged scholars by providing incentives
for creating projects and programs that address the needs of our community while
also meeting a rigorous definition of scholarship.
 A fund, established to “seed” sustained, scholarly efforts in the community with
modest sums of financial support, The UNCW Scholarly Engagement
Innovation Fund.
 An informal group of faculty, perhaps identified as The UNCW Community of
Engaged Scholars, organized to provide opportunities for the mentoring by
senior faculty of junior faculty who wish to establish a credible, scholarly
program of teaching and research that reflects considerable engagement with the
community and that leads to professional recognition including reappointment,
tenure and promotion.
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 12
The first two proposals are recommended by this committee for immediate faculty and
administration consideration. Funding for these two programs has been identified within
the current Division for Public Service and Continuing Studies budget. The last two
proposals are offered to begin a conversation about the character of a larger set of
integrated, reinforcing initiatives that represent a more comprehensive approach to
encouraging faculty engagement. More complete descriptions follow:
UNCW DISTINGUISHED SCHOLARLY ENGAGEMENT
AWARD
Nature and Purpose of the Award
The UNCW Award for Distinguished Scholarly Engagement is offered to recognize excellence in addressing crucial
regional or national issues through scholarly activity. The university will confer one award each year. Recipients will
receive a medallion to wear at official ceremonies and a one-time stipend of $1500. The announcement and
presentation of the awards will be made at the fall faculty meeting.
Criteria for Consideration
A candidate for the Distinguished Scholarly Engagement Award must be a full-time member of the UNCW faculty,
nominated by his or her department chair.
Procedure for Nomination
A complete application will consist of the following items, and must be submitted to the Office of the Provost by …




A description of significant record of accomplishment that reflects the application of scholarly, creative or
pedagogical activities for the public good, directed towards persons and groups outside UNCW. The description
should include evidence of successful outcomes; an explanation of how these activities contribute to the mission
of the nominee’s department; documentation of extramural funding, if awarded; description of collaborations with
community partners; and other evidence of scholarly excellence, e.g., peer-reviewed publications generated by the
faculty member’s community-focused work or teaching evaluations if nominated on the basis of communityfocused teaching pedagogy.
Endorsement of the nominee’s scholarly community work by community partners and the dean.
A copy of the nominee’s resume or curriculum vitae.
Optional material which documents the nominee’s activities, e.g., pamphlets, brochures, newspaper articles.
Selection Process
The provost will appoint members of the selection committee, which will include the vice chancellor for public service
& continuing studies, the director of the Center for Leadership Education and Service, up to two previous
Distinguished Scholarly Award recipients, and two members as recommended by the president of the Faculty Senate.
After review of the nominations, this committee may solicit additional information about the nominees. The committee
will recommend candidates in rank order to the provost.
UNCW ENGAGED FACULTY FELLOWSHIP
PROGRAM
As a partnership between the divisions of Public Service & Continuing Studies and Academic Affairs, the UNCW
Engaged Faculty Fellowship Program supports an expanded model of the role of faculty as engaged scholars.
The UNCW strategic plan states that service to the people of the region and North Carolina is “embedded both in our
history and our mission.” An engaged university must have a visible presence and meaningful impact on the economic
and social development of its region as well as on the region’s cultural and intellectual life. The UNCW Engaged
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 13
Faculty Fellowship Program is representative of our university’s commitment to enhance our scholarly regional
engagement efforts by identifying and supporting faculty members who have incorporated or wish to incorporate
regional engagement in their teaching or research activities, or who have research and teaching areas which have public
service implications.
This program is for faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences and the professional schools. The university will offer
one Engaged Faculty Fellowship each academic year to a full-time faculty member who best meets the criteria
described below. Funding will be provided in the form of a $5,000 stipend. A modest operating budget also will be
provided to the fellow, including funding to attend regional and national seminars, workshops, or conferences.
Administrative support will be provided by the Division for Public Service and Continuing Studies.
Favorable consideration will be given to applicants who demonstrate the potential to contribute significantly to the
engagement agenda of the university. The focus of the fellowship may concern either of the following themes:


Development or implementation of a scholarly community engagement program or activity that benefits the region
and contributes to the research or teaching plan of a faculty member, department, or school and college, for
example a departmental service learning curriculum plan.
Advancement of community engagement as a scholarly enterprise. This infrastructure development role may
include investigating national and regional models for university support of scholarly engagement activities,
including financial support; creating a forum for discussion of engagement as a scholarly enterprise, including
examination of RPT issues; or developing a seminar series bringing together academic and community leadership
to discuss the role of UNCW in our region.
Following his or her year of service as an Engaged Faculty Fellow, the Fellow will be expected to:


Serve as a mentor for future faculty fellows.
Provide continued support and leadership in making scholarly community engagement a hallmark of UNCW.
A complete application will consist of the following items and must be submitted to the vice chancellor for Public
Service and Continuing Studies by February XX.




A description of the project to be undertaken as a fellow. This will include the goals/outcomes of the project, a
description of how the goals/outcomes will be accomplished, and a plan for assessment and dissemination of the
results.
A proposed budget for resources needed for the project.
A letter of support from the department chair and dean.
A copy of the faculty member’s resume or curriculum vitae.
The selection committee will consist of up to two members of the Faculty Senate Committee on Public Service and
Continuing Studies, the director of the Center for Leadership Education and Service, the associate dean for research,
and up to two former Engaged Faculty Fellows. The Committee will recommend candidates in rank order to the
provost and the vice chancellor for public service and continuing studies, and a selection will be announced by March
XX.
VII. Recommendations Regarding Faculty Appointments being
“explicit in regard to service and engagement” (Recommendation #2)
Excellence in their field of study is the standard for all members of UNCW faculties, but
expectations regarding the nature of faculty contributions vary appropriately among
individuals and departmental units. The value of heterogeneous faculty contributions is
recognized in our tenure document which seeks to foster and reward various “individual
strengths and competencies among faculty.” The document thus avoids prescribing
fixed, common activities and the activities of most faculty members are properly
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 14
recognized and rewarded under the guidelines of current policy. However, in some cases
units may have expectations of a faculty member that emphasize the importance of
contributions in a particular domain (for example, community engagement, technology
transfer, or designing an accredited program with the discipline). Current policy allows
“additional guidelines”
(http://www.uncw.edu/fac_handbook/employment/RTP/coll_school.htm) to be developed
at the departmental, school or college level. While the extent of use of such “additional
guidelines” in a formal way is unknown to the Committee, the more formalized use of
such an option would certainly be a way to ensure that faculty work in engagement, that
is consistent in focus and substance with that specified, would be recognized and
rewarded.
The Committee believes that in such cases, involving disciplines and programs or
departments with complex and multiple objectives, that it may be of value for the faculty
member and department chair (in consultation with Senior Faculty) to develop a
statement at the time of appointment that specifies the mutual responsibilities and
expectations associated with the position. At some universities (e.g., North Carolina
State) a mutually derived contractual statement is required of all faculty appointments
and such a requirement may ultimately be seen as appropriate for UNCW. At this time
the Committee recommends that departments have the option of developing a
“Contractual Statement of Mutual Expectation (CSME)” with new faculty members.
When departmental expectations of a faculty member warrant special consideration, a
CSME can be developed between the faculty member and department that specifies the
nature of the expected faculty contributions. This document would ordinarily be
developed at the time of the appointment and would require approval by the appropriate
dean and by the provost. The document would become a part of the faculty member’s
RPT dossier and would be used in annual and post-tenure reviews.
The CSME could be changed during the faculty member’s career by approval of all
parties. The CSME would specify the mix of responsibilities expected of the faculty
member in as much detail as possible and might indicate the percentage of effort
expected in the various domains of faculty activity. The expectations should be closely
linked to the mission and goals of the faculty member’s unit and those of UNCW. They
must also be consistent with the UNCW criteria for promotion and tenure. Approval by
the appropriate dean and provost would assure that the workload requirements specified
in the CSME are a) fair to the faculty member, b) meet the needs of the department in a
fashion appropriate to the unit and UNCW mission, and c) are consistent with universitywide standards for promotion and tenure.
VIII. Conclusion
This report submitted to the Office of the Provost completes the task of the UNCW
Committee for Review of the Tenure and Reward System. The recommendations
contained herein are based upon a careful review of the character of “engagement” on the
UNCW campus, the essential mission and purposes of the university, and the current
state of recognition and reward for those activities by tenure track members of our faculty
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 15
that may be properly construed as engagement as it is defined within the UNC Tomorrow
construct. It is essential that the consideration and implementation of these
recommendations be departmentally-based and discipline-specific.
We respectfully submit these recommendations to the Office of the Provost and the
UNCW Faculty Senate in the belief that the implementation of these recommendations
will further support the mission of the university and the role of faculty in realizing that
mission.
UNCW Review of Tenure and Reward System
Page 16