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

Article I. Role and Scope of Unit

The faculty, staff, and administrators in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences support the fulfillment of the University's Teaching, Scholarship, and Service mission in the areas of animal science and natural resources and rangeland ecology. Our mission is to create, evaluate and communicate science-based knowledge to enhance the management of livestock, rangelands, and related natural resources (e.g., forages and wildlife) in ways that are economically, socially, and ecologically sustainable. We strive to provide relevant, practical information to meet the needs of our students and external clients throughout Montana and the world. 

The Department of Animal and Range Sciences consists of faculty and programs in two major disciplines: 1) Animal Science, and 2) Range Science. Our combination of range science and animal science in one department meets the needs of our state and makes our program unique in the Northern Rocky Mountain and Northern Great Plains Regions. Together, our Animal Science and Range Science disciplines focus on the sustainable production of livestock on rangelands and seeded pastures. Animal Science programs emphasize the nutrition, physiology, genetics, and management of beef cattle, sheep, and horses. Range Science programs emphasize livestock grazing management, invasive plant ecology and management, rangeland and wildlife habitat ecology, and forages. Our programs derive strength from a balanced and connected faculty. Every tenured and tenurable faculty member participates in Teaching, Scholarship, and Service, commensurate with the proportions assigned in their individual appointment.

Teaching in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences includes Academic Teaching and Outreach Teaching. Academic Teaching primarily includes classroom, laboratory, and field instruction of students formally enrolled in a course of study leading toward a degree. Academic Teaching also includes advising and mentoring undergraduate and graduate students. Outreach Teaching includes presentations (usually off-campus) to students/clients not formally enrolled in a course of study leading to credit toward a degree. Academic Teaching is delivered primarily by faculty with College of Agriculture appointments, while Outreach Teaching is delivered primarily by faculty with MSU Extension appointments. Academic Teaching and Outreach Teaching provide students with a strong foundation in science and ecology which can be used to manage livestock, rangelands, and related natural resources. Our faculty members are committed to using active learning and experiential teaching techniques. Academic courses provide a blend of classroom, laboratory, and field experiences. We strive to cultivate in our students a curious attitude, a desire to continue learning, respect for evidence, tolerance for disagreement, and positive acceptance of change. We strive to ensure that each student has the ability to read, listen and observe accurately; to think clearly, creatively, quantitatively, and qualitatively; to question intelligently; to analyze and interpret data objectively; and to communicate effectively. We challenge our students to excel, and we strive to do so in caring, supportive ways. Undergraduate instruction provides research opportunities and internships, while graduate programs and postdoctoral training provide opportunities for independent research and advanced academic training. Outreach Teaching provides research-based information to help people solve problems and improve their lives. Outreach Teaching programs in the Department target agricultural producers, natural resource managers, extension educators, small acreage landowners, youth, and other citizens 

Scholarship in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences generates new knowledge relevant to livestock, rangelands, and related natural resources. Scholarship also generates: 1) partnerships, programs, and plans through Extension or other community-based research, or 2) new pedagogical knowledge, innovations, or advancements. Our Scholarship focuses on solving problems relevant to Montana, the Northern Great Plains, and the Rocky Mountain West. We respond to immediate needs and emergent issues, and we vigorously strive to maintain the highest standards of objectivity and professional credibility. We value peer review and endeavor to communicate the results and implications of our Scholarship to fellow scientists, agricultural producers, natural resource managers, policymakers, and others. We value cooperative and interdisciplinary Scholarship.

Service by faculty in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences includes professional service, public service, and university service. We actively participate in our professional disciplines (i.e., professional service), and we lend our expertise to help local, state, national, and international organizations meet their goals (i.e., public service). In addition, we contribute to the operations and governance of our department, college, and university (i.e., university service).

Integration of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service is valued within the Department of Animal and Range Sciences because it reflects our commitment to the land-grant mission of our university. Integration leads to synergism which, in turn, creates more effective ways for us to help people manage their livestock, rangelands, and related natural resources.

Article II. Appointment and Advancement of Research Faculty

Research faculty (i.e., assistant research professors, associate research professors, and research professors) are nontenurable faculty whose assignment principally contributes to Scholarship funded by extramural grants. Research faculty have qualifications comparable to those expected of the tenured faculty and tenurable faculty. In addition to their Scholarship responsibilities, research faculty may have Teaching and Service responsibilities, provided these activities comply with the regulations and restrictions of the extramural organization funding their appointment. Teaching and Service activities may include, but are not limited to, supervising graduate students, chairing of graduate student committees, serving on graduate student committees, teaching seminars and courses, and serving on departmental committees, except the Peer Evaluation Committee and the Department Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee (see Article 3(e) and Section 4.01). Research faculty in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences have the right to vote in departmental meetings; however, research faculty cannot vote on curricular matters.

Research faculty are appointed on letters of appointment. Appointments are subject to the availability of funds. If funding is insufficient to support a position, the appointment may be terminated before the expiration of the term of the appointment. Research faculty appointments are for a specified time and expire automatically without notice at the end of the term unless renewed prior to expiration. Research faculty have no continuing right to appointment, and time in nontenurable research faculty appointments does not count toward tenure.

Annual reviews of research faculty performance will follow the same annual review process used to evaluate tenured faculty and tenurable faculty (see Article 3). Promotion reviews of research faculty will follow the same promotion review process used to evaluate tenured faculty and tenurable faculty (see Sections 4.01, 4.02, 4.03 and Article 6, Article 7, and Article 8), except that the Department Head will be the final review administrator for research faculty promotion reviews. Research faculty dossiers for promotion reviews will not be forwarded to the College of Agriculture Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee, the Dean of the College of Agriculture, the University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee, or provost.

Article III. Annual Review Process

Each tenured, tenurable, and research faculty member in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences will be evaluated annually by an elected Peer Evaluation Committee and by the Department Head.

  1. Each faculty member will prepare an annual productivity report by the date and following the format requested by the Department Head. Indicators, evidence, and expectations of faculty performance for annual reviews are equivalent to indicators,evidence, and expectations for retention reviews (see Sections 8.03, 8.04, and 05).
  2. The Department Head will transmit each faculty member's annual productivity report to the Peer Evaluation Committee Chair at least ten (10) business days prior to the deadline for evaluation established by the Department Head.
  3. The Peer Evaluation Committee will consider each faculty member's annual productivity report and make a fair, objective, independent, thorough, and substantive review of each faculty member's annual performance, commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the faculty member's appointment during the year under review. The Peer Evaluation Committee will rate the performance of each faculty member using the scale prescribed by the Department Head.
  4. The Peer Evaluation Committee Chair will provide the Department Head a written evaluation/score of each faculty member's annual performance that includes committee's comments and recommendation and a scoring by each committee member.
  5. The Peer Evaluation Committee will be composed of four (4) faculty members serving staggered two-year terms. All tenured faculty, tenurable, and fulltime NTT/research faculty in the Department are eligible for committee membership. Emeritus faculty are ineligible to serve. All tenured faculty, tenurable faculty, NTT, and research faculty in the  department are eligible to vote when electing Department Peer Evaluation Committee members. Animal Science faculty will elect one (1) member from within their ranks, and Range Science faculty will elect one (1) member from within their ranks. The NTT and research faculty will elect one (1) member from within their ranks.  The tenured faculty and tenurable faculty as a whole will elect one (1) at-large committee member who will serve as committee chair. The Department Head will appoint a fourth member. All committee members will serve two-year terms with no limitation on the number of consecutive terms. Committee member terms shall be staggered. At the first election after this document is officially adopted, a new Peer Evaluation Committee shall be formed. Initial terms of office will be only one (1) year for two (2) of the members with these offices determined by lot. The committee will include representation of the major functions of the department (Academic Teaching, Scholarship, Extension), and committee membership will also be inclusive of the categories protected by the university Non-Discrimination Policy. When necessary, the Department Head may appoint a fifth committee member to a one-year term to balance representation.
  6. Annual review by the Peer Evaluation Committee shall be independent of the review by the Department Head.
  7. In addition to annual review by the Peer Evaluation Committee and Department Head, faculty members with MSU Extension appointments will be reviewed annually by the Executive Director of MSU Extension. The Department Head will transmit the Extension faculty members' productivity reports to the Executive Director of Extension at least seven (7) days prior to the deadline for evaluation established by the Department Head. The Executive Director of MSU Extension will review these faculty members' annual productivity reports and make a fair, objective, independent, thorough, and substantive review of each faculty member's annual performance, commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the faculty member's appointment during the year under review and using the same indicators and evidence of faculty performance used for retention, tenure and promotion reviews (see Sections 8.03 and 05).
  8. It is expected that the Department Head will consider the Peer Evaluation Committee's recommendations and, for faculty with MSU Extension appointments, the recommendation of the Executive Director of MSU Extension. However, the Department Head is responsible for the final annual performance rating given each faculty member. The Department Head will include in Department Head evaluation comments provided by the Peer Evaluation Committee.

Article IV. Primary Review Committee and Administrator

Section 4.01 Primary Review Committee-Composition and Appointment

The Department of Animal and Range Sciences is a primary academic unit. The Department's Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee evaluates retention, tenure, and promotion dossiers submitted by tenurable and tenured faculty. The Department's Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee also reviews promotion dossiers submitted by research faculty of the Department of Animal and Range Sciences. Upon completion of a fair, objective, independent, and substantive review of a candidate's dossier, the Department's Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee will make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and promotion, as applicable and commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment during the Review Period. The committee will provide a written recommendation that includes a rationale for its recommendation and a vote tally of its members. The committee will forward one copy of its recommendation to the Department Head, and the committee will forward another copy to the candidate. Only members of the committee may be present when the committee reviews, deliberates, and votes. Review administrators may not attend committee meetings.

The Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee of the Department of Animal and Range Sciences will be composed of four tenured faculty at or above the rank of Associate Professor, with at least two of the four members at the rank of Professor if feasible. Emeritus faculty are ineligible to serve, and no faculty member can serve on the Department Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee  during a year that their dossier is reviewed. All tenured faculty, tenurable faculty, and research faculty in the department are eligible to vote when electing Department Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee members. Animal Science faculty will elect one (1) member from within their ranks, and Range Science faculty will elect one (1) member from within their ranks. The tenured  faculty, tenurable  faculty, and research faculty as a whole will elect one (1) at-large committee member who will serve as committee chair. The Department Head will appoint a fourth member. All committee members will serve two-year terms with no limitation on the number of consecutive terms. Committee member terms shall be staggered. At the first election after this document is officially adopted, a new Department Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee shall be formed. Initial terms of office will be only one (1) year for two (2) of the members with  these offices determined  by lot. The committee will include representation of the major functions of the department (Academic Teaching, Scholarship, Extension), and committee membership will be inclusive of the categories protected by the university Non-Discrimination Policy. When necessary, the Department Head may appoint a fifth committee member to a one-year term to balance representation. Before conducting retention, tenure or promotion reviews, committee members will attend bias-literacy training offered by the university. The Department  Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee will be available for service throughout the academic year. Faculty on extended leave are ineligible to serve. Committee membership will be reported to the Provost by the date established by the Provost.

Section 4.02 Primary Review Administrator

The Primary Review Administrator is the Department Head of the Department of Animal and Range Sciences.

Section 4.03 Identification of Responsible Entities

It is the responsibility of the Department Head to:

  1. Establish the Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee by facilitating the election and appointment of members as described in Section 4.01.
  2. Select external reviewers and solicit review letters as described in Section 6.03. 
  3. Select internal reviewers and solicit review letters as described in Section 6.03.
  4. Assuring the following materials are included in the Dossier:
    1. Internal and external reviewer letters of solicitation, letters from reviewers and, in the case of external reviewers, a short bio-sketch of the reviewer should be included in the Dossier.
    2. Applicable Role and Scope Document
    3. Letter of Hire, any Percentages of Effort changes, all annual reviews, and all Evaluation Letters from prior retention, tenure, and promotion reviews at MSU.
    4. Candidate's teaching evaluations from the Review Period. If the evaluations are not in electronic format, the unit will provide evaluation summaries. Upon request by review committees and review administrators, the unit will provide access to the original evaluations to review committees and administrators during the review. 
  5. Maintain copies of all review committee evaluation letters and internal and external review letters after the review.  

Section 4.04 Next Review Level

College of Agriculture Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee

Article V. Intermediate Review Committee and Administrator

Section 5.01 Intermediate Review Committee-Composition and Appointment

The Intermediate Review Committee is the College of Agriculture Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee, with composition and appointment as described in the College of Agriculture Role and Scope document.

Section 5.02 Intermediate Review Administrator

Dean of the College of Agriculture

Section 5.03 Level of Review following Intermediate Review Administrator

University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee

Article VI. Review Materials

Section 6.01 Materials submitted by Candidate

Materials submitted by a candidate for external review must include:

  • A comprehensive Curriculum Vitae (CV) with Teaching, Scholarship, and Service activities of the candidate;
  • A brief statement that identifies the candidate's area of Scholarship; and
  • Selected articles, publications, creative endeavors, or other evidence from the Review Period that, in the candidate's judgment, best represents their scholarship.

Materials submitted by a candidate for the Dossier must include:

  • The "Cover Sheet", obtained from the Provost's office;
  • A comprehensive CV with Teaching, Scholarship, and Service activities of the candidate;
  • A Personal Statement that includes a description of the candidate's area of Scholarship; and
  • Separate self-evaluations for Teaching, Scholarship, Service, and Integration summarizing the evidence demonstrating that the candidate meets the standards for the attainment of retention, tenure, or promotion, as applicable. Each self­ evaluation shall include a summary of activities, selected products or accomplishments, and evidence of recognition itemized by year over the relevant Review period.

All documents and materials submitted by a candidate shall be considered confidential. The Department Head is responsible for collecting and maintaining the confidentiality of these documents until transmitted to the chair of the  Department's Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee. Each member of the Department's Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee shall be responsible for the strict confidentiality of review documents during committee deliberations. No copies of any materials submitted by candidates shall be retained by any committee member.

Section 6.02 Documentation of Collaborative Scholarly Contributions Candidates are expected to establish independent lines of Scholarship. Candidates also are expected to participate in collaborative Scholarship. The autonomous role played by the candidate in collaborative scholarly projects and products (e.g., publications, grant proposals, community-based partnerships, etc.) should be delineated in the dossier. For example, contributions in a scientific publication could be documented following this format: Jane Doe, John Black and Judy White designed the studies. Jane Doe conducted the experiments. Jane Doe, John Black and Jill Brown, a graduate student of Jane Doe, analyzed the data. All authors participated equally in writing the manuscript.

Section 6.03 Peer Review Solicitation Procedure

External reviewers are individuals from outside MSU who are qualified to provide an independent and objective evaluation of the candidate's performance commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment during the Review Period. External reviews from four (4) respected authorities appropriate to the candidate's area of Scholarship are required. In advance of the deadline established by the Department Head, the candidate shall provide the Department Head with the names, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses of three (3) qualified potential external reviewers. The candidate is prohibited from notifying any of the three (3) individuals they nominate. The Department Head shall obtain an external review from one (1) person suggested by the candidate, and three (3) persons not nominated by the candidate, for a total of four (4) external reviewers. External reviewers shall provide a brief vita to accompany their evaluation of the candidate. External reviewer names and their evaluations of a candidate's performance shall remain confidential.

Internal reviewers are individuals from within MSU (inside or outside the department) who are qualified to provide an independent and objective evaluation of the candidate's performance commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment during the Review Period. Internal reviews from three (3) respected authorities appropriate to the candidate's area of Scholarship are required. Internal reviewers cannot be current members of the Department of Animal and Range Sciences Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee. In advance of the deadline established by the Department Head, the candidate shall provide the Department Head with the names, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses of three (3) qualified internal reviewers. The candidate is prohibited from notifying any of the three (3) individuals they nominate. The Department Head shall obtain an internal review from one (1) person suggested by the candidate, and two (2) persons not nominated by the candidate, for a total of three (3) internal reviewers. Internal reviewer names and their evaluations of a candidate's performance shall remain confidential.

Internal and external reviewers will be asked to prepare a written in-depth assessment  of the candidate's performance, commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment during the Review Period. The Department Head will provide internal and external reviewers the Department of Animal and Range Sciences' Role and Scope document (i.e., this document) and its Appendix. Internal and external reviewers also will be provided the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment during the Review Period; a comprehensive Curriculum Vitae with Teaching, Scholarship, and Service activities of the candidate; a Personal Statement that includes a description of the candidate's area of Scholarship; and separate self­ evaluations for Teaching, Scholarship, Service, and Integration summarizing the evidence demonstrating that the candidate meets the standards for the attainment of retention, tenure, or promotion, as applicable; and selected articles, publications, creative endeavors, or other evidence from the Review Period that, in the candidate's judgment, best represents their Scholarship.

Article VII. Applicable Role and Scope Documents

Section 7.01 Retention Review

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

Section 7.02 Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor Review

Candidates for tenure are reviewed under the standards and indicators in the Role and Scope Documents in effect on the first day of employment in a tenurable position. Candidates may select a more recent, approved Role and Scope Document by notifying the Department of Animal and Range Sciences Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee.

Section 7.03 Promotion to Professor Review

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

Article VIII.  Retention Reviews

Section 8.01 Timing of Retention Review

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

Section 8.02 University Standard

The standards for the retention of probationary faculty members are:

  1. Effectiveness in Teaching, Scholarship, and Service during the Review Period;
  2. Integration of no less than two (2) of the following during the Review Period: Teaching, Scholarship, and Service; and
  3. Satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for tenure by the candidate's tenure review year

The definitions of Teaching, Students/Clients, Scholarship, Service, Integration, Effectiveness, Accomplishment, and Excellence are provided in the Appendix. 

Section 8.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Indicators are the categories of products and activities used to evaluate the candidate's performance. Some indicators may be given more weight, for example a prestigious national award may be given more weight than an award from the university. Also, the faculty in the Department of Animal and Range Sciences is comprised of individuals with performance expectations that differ depending on their disciplinary focus and the proportion of their appointment in Teaching, Scholarship, and Service. Therefore, although the following examples of performance indicators apply to all faculty, the weighting of each indicator given by internal reviewers, external  reviewers, review committees, and review administrators must depend upon the candidate's  disciplinary  focus and proportional appointment during the Review Period. The following paragraphs provide examples of performance indicators that may support the attainment of standards in Teaching, Scholarship, Service, and Integration. The examples provided below are not inclusive of all possible indicators.

Examples of performance indicators that may support the attainment of standards in Teaching: Results of periodic and systematic peer evaluation based on class visitations; peer review of course materials including syllabi and examinations; the results of periodic and systematic student evaluation, appropriately documented and explained; supervision of undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral research projects, theses, and dissertations; teaching awards; summaries of learning outcomes assessments; evidence of student success; and scholarly products co­ authored with students and projects with student collaborators.

Examples of performance indicators that may support the attainment of standards in Scholarship: Publications in peer reviewed journals; presentations at scientific conferences; development of intellectual property; awards of extramural funding; non-refereed publications such as magazine articles, Extension bulletins, technical reports, and newsletter articles; creation of impactful knowledge that serves local, national or international audiences; and creation of partnerships, programs, and plans through Extension or other community-based research.

Examples of performance indicators that may support the attainment  of standards in Service: Participation in the governance of MSU at the departmental, college, or university levels; contributions to departmental projects and programs; mentoring faculty colleagues; leadership roles in professional organizations; serving as journal editor or referee of scholarly papers or proposals; and applying professional expertise in public service activities.

Examples of performance  indicators  that may support the attainment  of standards in Integration: Incorporating research results from the candidate's scholarship into course curricula, seminars, or workshops (Scholarship/Teaching); collaborating in scholarly products or activities with students (Scholarship/Teaching); providing scientific consultation to a community foundation (Scholarship/Service); lending research expertise through service on review panels or editorial boards (Scholarship/Service); research career advising  to  a  student (Scholarship/Teaching); teaching a professional development seminar to a local school board (Teaching/Service).

Section 8.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Faculty performance will be judged relative to the candidate's disciplinary focus and commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment  during the Review  Period. The Department of Animal and Range Sciences expects candidates to create high-quality programs of Teaching, Scholarship and/or Service that are consistently  productive, impactful, and nationally respected. The Department also expects that over time candidates' Scholarship will demonstrate increasing independence  from  earlier  mentors, and the Department  expects candidates to demonstrate that they can acquire the resources necessary to sustain their Scholarship activities (e.g., extramural funding, graduate or undergraduate students; travel support; etc.).

The usual Departmental expectation for acceptable scholarly productivity is that candidates with a 25% appointment in Scholarship average one refereed journal article and one poster or oral presentation at a regional/national/international scientific meeting per year during the Review Period. These usual expectations are to be pro-rated based on a candidate's appointment. For example, a candidate with a 50% appointment in Scholarship is expected to average two refereed journal articles and two posters or oral presentations at regional/national/international scientific meetings per year, whereas a candidate with a 15% appointment in Scholarship is expected to average 0.6 refereed journal articles per year and 0.6 posters or oral presentations at scientific meetings per year. However, regardless of the quantity of products, the quality of the scholarly products and their contribution to the candidate's discipline is of primary importance. In some cases, a relatively small number of products with high impact may be acceptable for satisfying scholarship expectations, while in other cases a large number of products may not  be sufficient if internal reviewers, external reviewers, review committees, or review administrators document the products to have little to no impact. Also, if the candidate's contribution to one or more scholarly products is documented as minimal, then it is expected that the number of scholarly products would need to sufficiently exceed the average to offset the candidate's limited contributions.

Collaborative work is highly valued in animal science and range science, and single­ authored publications are not required to satisfy expectations of scholarly productivity. Also, standards for determining author order vary within and across disciplines, so internal  reviewers, external reviewers, review committees, and review administrators should not make inferences about level of contribution based on author order. The candidate is expected to identify the level of individual contribution to each scholarly product (see Section 6.02).

Faculty performance in Teaching will be judged effective if it is substantial with regard to content and course offerings; provides students with relevant, science­ based knowledge to enhance the management of livestock, rangelands, and related natural resources in ways that are economically, socially, and ecologically sustainable; challenges students to think critically and communicate effectively; and it is consistently evaluated as good or better by students, colleagues or peers.

Faculty performance in Scholarship will be judged effective if it is substantial with regard to the  quality and  number of scholarly activities and products; generates new knowledge, programs, or plans relevant to livestock, rangelands, related natural resources, or pedagogy; responds to immediate needs and emergent issues relevant to the sustainable management of livestock, rangelands, or related natural resources; the results and implications of Scholarship are communicated to fellow scientists, agricultural producers, natural resource managers, policymakers, youth, or others; and the candidate's Scholarship maintains the highest standards of objectivity and professional credibility.

Accomplishment in Scholarship will be achieved if the quantity, quality, and impact of scholarly activities and products is considered sustained and commendable by internal reviewers, external reviewers, review committees, and review administrators. A candidate's Scholarship is commendable when it is recognized and respected for its high quality. The activities and products must have impact and significance to the public, peers, or the discipline beyond the university.

Excellence in Scholarship will be achieved if the quantity, quality, and impact of scholarly activities and products is considered sustained, commendable, and distinguished by internal reviewers, external reviewers, review committees, and review administrators. A candidate's Scholarship is distinguished when it is eminent and influential in the candidate's discipline. The activities and products must have notable impact and significance to the public, peers, or the discipline beyond the university.

Faculty performance in Service will be judged effective if it includes active and productive participation in the candidate's professional discipline (i.e., professional service); or if the candidate provides expertise to help local, state, national, or international organizations meet their goals (i.e., public service); or if the candidate contributes positively to the operations and governance of the department, college, or university (i.e., university service). In addition, effective faculty performance in Service requires that the candidate actively and regularly participates in departmental activities (e.g., faculty meetings, retreats, commencements, etc.).

Participation in public service activities that are not primarily related to the candidate's professional expertise, although encouraged relative to good citizenship, will not be considered for effectiveness in Service.

Section 8.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

It is the responsibility of the candidate to demonstrate to the satisfaction of internal and external reviewers, review committees, and review administrators that the standards of performance have been met for retention, tenure, or promotion, as applicable, commensurate with the percentages of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service assigned in the candidate's appointment during the Review Period. The following paragraphs provide examples of evidence of performance indicators that may support the attainment of standards in Teaching, Scholarship, Service, and Integration. The examples provided below are not inclusive of all possible forms of evidence.

Examples of evidence that may address performance indicators in Teaching: the number of courses, seminars or workshops taught or team-taught relevant to the Department's mission; number of new courses developed; number of courses or outreach teaching presentations for which major review or revision was completed; use of innovative teaching technologies or methods; assessments of learning outcomes; number of undergraduate students advised; number of graduate student committees chaired; accomplishments of currently or previously mentored students (e.g., undergraduate researchers, graduate students, research associates, or postdoctoral research associates); number of graduate student committee memberships; number of students/ clients taught in Extension seminars or workshops; number of site (ranch/farm) visits with individual instruction or operation critique; number of one-on-one information transfers to individuals; number and prestige of honors or awards received by the candidate for their teaching; and evaluation of the candidate's teaching techniques and effectiveness by peers, colleagues, current or former students/clients.

Examples of evidence that may address performance indicators in Scholarship: the number of peer-reviewed publications, technical reports or handbooks; number of books or book chapters; the reputation and stature of the academic outlets in which articles are published; number of presentations or invited presentations at professional conferences, meetings or symposia; number of competitive and non­ competitive extramural grants funded; amounts of extramural funding received; number of non-refereed publications such as magazine articles, Extension bulletins, and newsletter articles; number of research projects completed or in progress; number and impact of partnerships,  programs or plans developed  through Extension or other community-based research (e.g., short-courses, certification programs, data collection programs, records programs, land management plans, etc.); number of videos, media or Internet articles that communicate the results and implications of the candidate's Scholarship; relevance of Scholarship to the Department's mission; number of patents, copyrights, licensing agreements, etc. applied for or received resulting from the candidate's Scholarship; number and prestige of honors or awards received by the candidate for their Scholarship activities; and evaluation  of the candidate's scholarly products and  impacts by peers, colleagues or clients.

Examples of evidence that may address performance indicators in Service: the number of leadership positions in professional or public organizations relevant to the candidate's area of Scholarship and relevant to the Department's  mission; number of committee, board or panel memberships in professional or public organizations relevant to the candidate's area of Scholarship; editorial responsibilities; number of manuscripts or grant proposals reviewed; the reputation and stature of the journals or grantors for which  manuscripts  or grant proposals were reviewed; number of university, college or departmental committee memberships or leadership positions; mentoring or other assistance provided to faculty or staff members; number of student organizations or functions advised or assisted; number and prestige of honors or awards received by the  candidate for their Service activities; and evaluation of the candidate's Service activities and impacts by peers, colleagues or clients.

Examples of evidence that may address performance indicators in Integration: the number of technical consultations to public organizations relevant to the candidate's area of Scholarship (Scholarship/Teaching or Scholarship/Service); number of students advised or mentored about careers in research or service relevant to the candidate's area of Scholarship (Scholarship/Teaching or Service/Teaching); number of students/clients instructed about results from the candidate's research (Scholarship/Teaching); research projects or hypotheses resulting from participation in Teaching or Service activities (Teaching/Scholarship or Service/Scholarship); number of professional development seminars presented to public service organizations (Teaching/Service); and evaluation by peers, colleagues or clients of the candidate's Integration of Teaching, Scholarship, or Service activities.

Section 8.06 Status of Scholarly Products

Because candidates for retention will be reviewed early in their career, retention reviews may consider publications, presentations, or other scholarly products not yet completed [e.g., publications or presentations submitted (with acknowledgement from publisher) but not yet accepted]. In contrast, tenure and promotion reviews may not consider scholarly products that have been submitted, but not yet accepted (see Sections 9.05 and 11.05).

Article IX. Tenure Review

Section 9.01 Timing of Tenure Review

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

Section 9.02 University Standard

The University standards for the award of tenure are:

  1. Sustained effectiveness in teaching and service during the Review Period, and
  2. Integration of no less than two of the following during the Review Period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
  3. Accomplishment in scholarship.

Section 9.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Indicators and weighting of faculty performance for tenure reviews are equivalent to indicators for retention reviews (see Section 8.03).

Section 9.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Quantitative and qualitative expectations of faculty performance for tenure reviews are equivalent to expectations for retention reviews (see Section 8.04).

Section 9.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

Evidence of faculty performance indicators for tenure reviews is equivalent to evidence for retention reviews (see Section 8.05), except that only scholarly products that have been completed or accepted for publication/presentation within the Review Period may be considered. Scholarly products that have been accepted for publication but not yet published or presented, or scholarly products that have been published or presented but not readily available through university databases must be included among materials submitted by the candidate. 

Article X. Promotion to Rank of Associate Professor

Section 10.01 University Standards

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

Article XI. Promotion to Rank of Professor

Section 11.01 Timing of Review

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

Section 11.02 University Standard

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

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

Section 11.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Indicators and weighting of faculty performance for promotion reviews are equivalent to indicators and weighting for retention  reviews  (see Section 8.03).

Section 11.04 Quantitative and Qualitative  Expectations

Quantitative and qualitative expectations of faculty performance for promotion reviews are  equivalent to expectations for retention  reviews (see Section 8.04).

Section 11.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

Evidence of faculty performance indicators for promotion reviews is equivalent to evidence for retention reviews (see Section 8.05), except that only scholarly products that have been completed or accepted for publication/presentation within the Review Period may be considered. Scholarly products that have been accepted for publication but not yet published or presented, or scholarly products that have been published or presented but not readily available through university databases must be included among materials submitted by the candidate.

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

The Department of Animal and Range Sciences Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee is responsible for annually reviewing and, when needed, revising the Department's role and scope document, subject to approval as outlined in Article 13. Revisions must be approved by a majority vote of the Department's tenured and tenurable faculty. Any tenured faculty, tenurable faculty, or research  faculty member in the Department  may suggest revisions to the Department's  role and scope document.

Article XIII.  Approval Process

Section 13.01       Primary Academic Unit Role and Scope Document

  1. Tenured faculty, tenurable faculty, and Department Head of the Department of Animal and Range Sciences;
  2. College of Agriculture Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee and the Vice President of Agriculture;
  3. University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee; and
  4. Provost.

Section 13.02 Intermediate Academic Unit Role and Scope Document

  1. College of Agriculture Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee and Vice President of Agriculture;
  2. University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee; and
  3. Provost.

Section 13.03 University Role and Scope Document

  1. University Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee;
  2. Faculty Senate;
  3. Deans' Council; and
  4. Provost.

Appendix

Policy: RETENTION, TENURE, AND PROMOTION REVIEW - DEFINITIONS

Effective date:       July 1, 2017

Review date:         July 1, 2020 Revised:

Responsible Party: Office of the Provost

Candidate means any tenurable faculty member who is being reviewed for retention, tenure, or promotion.

Areas of Responsibility in the context of retention, tenure, and promotion, refers to the components of MSU's mission: teaching; scholarship; service.

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

Scholarship is the original intellectual work of faculty that includes:

  • The discovery, application, and/or assimilation of new knowledge and the dissemination of that knowledge. This work includes conducting research projects; securing and administering grants and contracts; writing/editing books, articles, and other research-based materials representing one's original or collaborative research; developing new clinical practice models; presentations at scholarly conferences.
  • The generation of new knowledge in pedagogy and the dissemination and putting into practice of that knowledge. This work includes creation, development, implementation, study, and publishing of pedagogical innovations (including textbooks, peer reviewed articles and publications); documented studies of curricular and pedagogical issues; and pedagogically-oriented research; innovation in community engagement.

The generation of new creative products and experiences through composition, design, production, direction, performance, exhibition, synthesis,  or discovery and the presentation of that experience. This work includes creating and presenting new works of art, film, theater, music, and architecture; public performance and exhibiting creative works.

 

  • The creation of partnerships, programs, and plans through Extension, or other community-based research, that leverage the knowledge and resources of the university and the public/private sector to enhance learning, discovery, and engagement; educate and engage citizens; strengthen communities; address locally identified issues and problems; apply and disseminate knowledge; and contribute to the public good.

Effectiveness is successful performance, appropriate to years of service.

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

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

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

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

Academic unit is the designation for the various departments, schools, and colleges within the university. Primary academic units, typically departments, are the units in which a faculty member's tenurable position  resides. Intermediate  units, typically colleges, are units that support more than one primary unit.

Primary review committees and Intermediate promotion and tenure review committees are the promotion and tenure review committees of the primary and intermediate academic units, respectively.

Primary review administrators and Intermediate review administrators are the administrators of the primary and intermediate academic units, respectively. 

Primary Review Unit is the academic unit in which the candidate's tenurable position resides.

Intermediate Review Unit, if applicable, is the academic unit that includes the candidate's primary academic unit.

Role and Scope Document is the document prepared by each academic unit that describes its responsibilities and obligations in furtherance of the mission of the university. It includes the indicators, standards, and procedures that, in conjunction with university standards, policies, and procedures, govern the reviews of its faculty members.

Indicators are the categories of scholarly products and activities used to evaluate performance of the faculty undergoing review. Peer reviewed articles, juried exhibitions, published monographs, teaching evaluations, peer review of teaching, teaching awards, and other recognition are examples of indicators.

External Review is the critical evaluation of a faculty member's scholarly products and activities by respected authorities in their field who are not affiliated with the university.

Internal Review is an evaluation by individuals within the university other than Review Administrators and Review Committee members.

Review Period is the period of performance to be considered  for review. The review period  for retention and tenure begins on the first day of employment  in a tenurable position and ends on the deadline established by the provost for submission of dossiers. If hired with credit for years of service, the review period includes the time of prior service specified in the letter of hire. The review period for promotion to professor is the period from the end of the previous review period for the candidate's last mandatory review to the deadline established by the provost for submission of the dossier for promotion  to professor. 

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

Evaluation Letters are the letters submitted by review committees and administrative reviewers that include the recommendation and rationale  regarding the retention, tenure, or promotion of the candidate. 

Student, for purposes of references related to retention, promotion, and tenure, includes the clients served by the MSU Extension faculty.