Bylaws of the Department of Philosophy

  • University of Nevada, Reno
  • Approved by the Department Faculty on November 6, 2020
  • Approved by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts on January 19, 2021

Table of Contents


Chapter 1. Bylaws

  • 1.1 Authorization

    These bylaws are authorized by Section 2.1.2 of the bylaws of the University of Nevada Reno. These bylaws shall not conflict with either the University of Nevada, Reno bylaws or the bylaws of the College of Liberal Arts.

  • 1.2 Scope of the Bylaws

    These bylaws shall provide for the organizational structure and the personnel policies and procedures for the faculty of the Department of Philosophy. In the event of a conflict, the University and the College of Liberal Arts bylaws shall prevail.

  • 1.3 Adoption of the Bylaws

    These bylaws shall be considered as adopted and in full force and effect upon (1) approval by a two-thirds majority of the eligible regular faculty in a written secret ballot with sufficient notice to allow all eligible faculty to participate and (2) approval by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts.

  • 1.4 Amendments to the Bylaws

    Any faculty member of the Department of Philosophy may propose amendments to these bylaws. Proposed amendments shall be submitted in writing to the chair who shall call a department meeting to discuss the proposed amendment no later than one month after the date of the submission. Proposed amendments shall be put to a vote upon request by a majority of the department's eligible regular faculty at an authorized faculty meeting. A proposed amendment shall be in full force and effect upon (1) approval by a two-thirds majority of the faculty in a written secret ballot and (2) and approval by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts.

  • 1.5 Interpretation of the Bylaws

    If one-third of the regular members of the department questions the interpretation of these bylaws, they may seek a recommendation from a department Bylaws Committee. If a majority of the regular faculty disagrees with the recommendation, the department may seek a ruling from the dean of the college. If a majority of the regular faculty disagree with the dean’s ruling, the department may appeal to the Provost of the University. If a majority of the regular faculty disagrees with the Provost’s decision, the department may appeal to the President of the University for a final ruling.


Chapter 2: Mission and Responsibilities

  • 2.1 Mission

    The primary mission of the Department of Philosophy is to pursue, through research, and to disseminate, through teaching and publication, a deeper understanding of philosophical thought. There is an equal emphasis on research and teaching, which the department regards as mutually reinforcing activities. A secondary mission is to make contributions, through service, to life at the university and to the profession.

  • 2.2 Research

    As an intellectual discipline, philosophy inclusively embraces both ancient traditions of inquiry and commitments to ongoing investigation in a wide variety of domains. Members of the faculty seek to contribute to the discipline by engaging in professional scholarly activities that have, as their ultimate aim, the production of publishable results. For the sake of this end, members are expected to keep abreast of significant developments in the profession, and to participate in its activities.

  • 2.3 Teaching

    The critical habits of mind that philosophical reflection requires represent one of the central values of a liberal-arts education; and since this reflection is inherently integrative in its ambitions, a training in philosophy aims, in virtue of its content as well, to realize these values generally. Members of the faculty promote such values in their teaching by seeking to inculcate in students a serious appreciation of the main lines of historical and contemporary philosophizing, while strengthening their capacity to give, ask for, and evaluate reasons and arguments.

  • 2.4 Service

    Aspiring to work for the common good in their various communities, members of the faculty are expected to make themselves available, as needed, to the department, to the College of Liberal Arts, to the University, or to professional organizations.

  • 2.5 Entrepreneurship and Community Engagement

    Entrepreneurial activity refers to the application of sophisticated research and creative methodologies and innovations to the public domain with the goal of developing a market outside the university. A record of entrepreneurial productivity should be recognized as a significant part of a faculty member’s professional achievements. However, such activity is not required of individual faculty members. Entrepreneurial activity must be appropriate to the faculty member’s discipline and approved by the chair and dean as part of the role statement articulating the distribution of duties. For entrepreneurial activity to count toward a faculty member’s case for promotion and/or tenure, it must be approved by the department chair and the dean of the college in advance of the review. 

    Community engagement refers to collaboration between institutions of higher education 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. Community engagement may also include public-facing writing or other productions designed to communicate the values of humanist scholarship to a non-academic audience. Although such activity is not required of individual faculty members, a record of community engagement should be recognized as a significant part of a faculty member’s professional achievements. Community engagement must be relevant to the faculty member’s discipline and approved by the chair and dean as part of the role statement articulating the distribution of duties. Community engagement activities can enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhance curriculum, teaching and learning; and contribute to public service.

  • 2.6 Program Review

    External reviews of the department shall be conducted periodically at the initiation of the provost’s office, and the department shall provide a written response to the reviewers’ report.


Chapter 3: Faculty Organization

  • 3.1 Definition of Department Faculty

    The Philosophy Faculty of the University of Nevada, Reno shall be as defined in the relevant sections of the College of Liberal Arts bylaws, the University bylaws, and NSHE Code.

  • 3.2 Definition of Voting Rights

    All voting in the department is restricted to regular faculty (as defined in Section 10 of the college bylaws), and all regular faculty shall have an equal vote on any matter placed before the department, unless, as provided for elsewhere in these bylaws, the faculty member is prohibited from voting on a particular matter. To vote, regular faculty must hold at least a one-half time position (.50 FTE or higher) in the department. For voting purposes, only active faculty are to be considered. The term ‘active faculty’ refers to all regular faculty who are not currently on formal leave or sabbatical. Faculty on formal leave or sabbatical may vote if they choose to do so, however, and in doing so shall be considered active faculty (for the determination of a quorum or voting result). Voting right are governed by UNR bylaw 3.1.7.

  • 3.3 Voting Procedure

    Voting normally will be by a show of hands. If any voting member requests a secret ballot, there shall be one. Except as provided for elsewhere in these bylaws, a simple majority at the meeting is required for a motion to pass, and abstentions are not counted in the vote.

  • 3.4 Proxy Voting

    Proxy voting is not allowed. Any voting shall be done only by participants at the meeting in which the vote occurs.

  • 3.5 Voting by Absent Faculty

    If a faculty member is ill, in the hospital, on sabbatical leave, out of town on university business, or experiencing an emergency, the member may participate at meetings via Skype (or, more generally, via any such technology as allows for virtual participation), and the department will arrange such an option if requested. Absent faculty who participate virtually at a meeting shall be able to vote at that meeting. If a vote by secret ballot is necessary, however, all participating faculty members must have access to it, and no vote shall occur unless the ballot is secret for all.

  • 3.6 Department Meetings

    Meetings of the department shall be called regularly or as the need arises. Meetings may be called by the chair or at the request of one-third of the faculty. Members of the Department of Philosophy faculty shall be given written notification of department meetings at least three days prior to their occurrence. In the case of an emergency, meetings can be called on shorter notice provided that the majority of the department faculty unanimously consents to this action and that every effort be made to contact and consult with all members of the department. The chair shall preside at department meetings.

  • 3.7 Quorum

    A quorum, consisting of a majority of the department’s active faculty, must be present before any matter can be voted on. All departmental actions at meetings shall be made a matter of record. The only business that can be transacted in the absence of a quorum is to take measures to obtain a quorum, to adjourn or to take recess.

  • 3.8 Business at Meetings

    The chair shall conduct business at the meeting according to the bylaws, where applicable, and at the chair’s discretion otherwise. However, if a majority of the participating faculty at a meeting votes to approve, the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order may be followed for any matters not governed by the bylaws.


Chapter 4: Department Chair

  • 4.1 Selection

    Any full-time tenured faculty member above the assistant professor level shall be eligible. A candidate for chair shall be nominated by a majority vote of the department's faculty in the spring semester prior to the beginning of the chair's term of office or whenever a vacancy occurs. Any departmental nomination will be recommended to the dean of the college who, with the approval of the president, will appoint.

  • 4.2 Duties

    In addition to the duties enumerated in other sections of these bylaws the chair shall represent the department faculty and its academic interests to the college and the University, shall call regular meetings of the department faculty, and shall implement college and University policy within the department.

  • 4.3 Term of Office

    The term of office for the chair shall be for three contract years normally beginning on July 1 of the first contract year and ending June 30 of the third contract year. Normally, a chair may serve no more than two consecutive terms.

  • 4.4 Evaluation

    For chair evaluation, see Section 5.1.9.

  • 4.5 Removal

    Should one-third of the continuing faculty at any time desire that the chair step down, they may upon written notification (five working days) to the continuing faculty call a meeting to vote upon the question. Should a majority of the continuing faculty in secret ballot vote affirmatively, the recommendation shall be made to the dean. Either a majority or minority report, explaining the reasons for or against the recommendation, may accompany the reporting of the vote to the dean. Upon approval by the dean, new nominations shall be made and an election held.

  • 4.6 Acting Chair

    In the event a chair is unable to perform his or her duties, or resigns before the end of his or her term, an acting chair shall be nominated by a majority vote of the department faculty to serve until a new chair can be selected. Nominees for the position of acting chair of the department will be recommended to the dean of the college, who, with the approval of the president, will appoint.


Chapter 5: Departmental Committees

  • 5.1 Personnel Committee

    The Personnel Committee is an advisory body that makes recommendations to the chair, except in the case of the chair’s evaluation.

    1. Membership

      The Personnel Committee shall consist of three faculty members of at least associate rank (Rank III or 0(III)). Personnel Committee members will be elected by the faculty members of the department on regular appointment. Personnel Committee members will not participate in the deliberation of their own case. If the number of eligible faculty is less than three, the dean, in consultation with the department chair, will appoint sufficient outside members to make up a committee of three.

    2. Term of Service

      The term of membership will be three years. Terms will be staggered to produce continuity of membership. In order to produce staggered terms, the initial terms of the first Personnel Committee (and only of the first Personnel Committee) will be three years, two years, one year.

    3. Elections

      Nominations and elections to the Personnel Committee will normally take place annually in November. The procedure for the election of Personnel Committee members will be: faculty members on regular appointments will make nominations; nominees will declare whether they are willing to run; each regular faculty member may vote for as many candidates as there are committee members to be elected; the candidates with the most votes win. If there is a tie, each regular faculty member gets one vote to break the tie and the candidate with the most votes wins. If a tie remains, the winner will be determined by the flip of a coin.

    4. Committee Chair

      The committee shall select a chair from among its members.

    5. Vacancy

      If any member of the Personnel Committee must resign before end of term, a member will be elected by the regular members of the department to complete the remainder of the term.

    6. Duties

      The Personnel Committee shall perform the following duties:

      1. Annual evaluation of regular and contingent members of the department in each of the three areas of teaching, research and service (or, in the case of regular non-tenure-track faculty, teaching and professional development).
      2. Annual evaluation of the chair.
    7. Recommendation to the Department Chair

      Except in the case of the evaluation of the chair, the committee will recommend its evaluation in writing to the chair. The chair may then elect to disagree in specific cases with the committee for cause, and will inform the committee of any such disagreement. The evaluation of the chair will be communicated in writing to both the chair and the dean.

    8. Faculty Evaluation

      The annual evaluation of regular and contingent members of the department in each of the three areas of teaching, research (or in the case of non-tenure-track faculty, professional development), and service will utilize annual evaluation materials submitted by the department member, the member’s role statement for that year, and, when appropriate, consultation with other faculty. Annual evaluation materials will include, in addition to a completed annual evaluation form, evidence in support of claims made, as specified in Chapter 6 of these bylaws.

    9. Chair Evaluation

      The percentages accounting for the basis of the chair’s evaluation normally are 25% teaching, 25% research, 50% chair/service, unless otherwise negotiated with the dean. For the purposes of annual evaluation, the chair will turn in a detailed report of goals and performance, which will be made available to all faculty and staff. Evaluation of the department chair, as chair, will utilize a confidential questionnaire approved by a majority vote of the regular faculty. The questionnaire will be filled out by the regular faculty, the contingent faculty, instructors and classified staff.

    10. Compilation of Results

      The Personnel Committee will compile the results of the questionnaire and forward them both to the chair and to the dean. Compilation will include both tabulating percentages and recording all written comments (except in cases where comments are inappropriate – for example, comments that do not pertain to the role of the chair). There will be a separate tabulation for each of two groups: regular faculty as one group and as a second group, contingent faculty, instructors and classified staff. There will be no overall compilation of the results of the two groups. Evaluation of the chair in the areas of teaching and research will be conducted by the Personnel Committee.

    11. Delivery of Compiled Results

      The chair of the Personnel Committee will give the compiled results from each of the three groups to the department chair, who may, if desired, attach comments and will send a memo to the dean summarizing the overall results of the evaluation of the chair with the compiled questionnaire results and any comments by the chair attached.

  • 5.2 Promotion and Tenure Committee
    1. Nomenclature

      This committee shall review promotion applications (for, e.g., Rank IV and 0(IV) cases), tenure applications, and tenure applications in conjunction with promotion applications (for Rank III). The comprehensive label ‘Promotion and Tenure Committee’ (and the abbreviation ‘P&T Committee’) will be used in these bylaws for the sake of terminological elegance.

    2. Duties

      In addition to the activities identified in Section 5.2.1, the P&T Committee shall assist the department chair in conducting (i) annual progress-toward-tenure letters and third-year reviews of Rank II faculty and (ii) progress-toward-promotion letters for Rank III, Rank, 0(II), and 0(IIII) faculty.

    3. Membership

      For promotion applications, the P&T Committee shall consist of all faculty members who hold the rank under consideration or above. For tenure applications, the P&T Committee shall consist of all tenured faculty members. If the number of those who hold that rank or who have tenure is less than three, the dean, in consultation with the department, will appoint sufficient outside members to make up a committee of three.

    4. Committee Chair

      The P&T Committee shall select a chair from among its members. The department chair is an ex officio non-voting member of the Committee.

    5. Evaluation of Record

      The faculty member under consideration will make all evaluation materials available to the P&T Committee. The faculty member’s entire professional record will be considered, although the greatest weight will be on the record since the last promotion and/or since being hired by the university.

    6. Recommendation to the Department Chair

      The P&T Committee will make a recommendation to the department chair in a written report, which will be forwarded to the dean. The department chair will make a recommendation in a written report, which will be forwarded to the dean. Should the department chair’s recommendation differ from that of the P&T Committee, the department chair will, in his or her written report, state reasons for disagreeing. P&T Committee members who disagree with the decision of the committee may write a minority report to the department chair, including reasons for disagreeing, which will be forwarded to the dean. The department chair’s written report and any minority report will be made available to the Committee.

  • 5.3 Search Committee
    1. Membership

      Whenever the Department of Philosophy receives authorization to conduct a search for a new or replacement faculty member, a search committee shall be constituted and the following procedures shall be used: The search committee shall consist of a minimum of three members of the regular faculty, and all members of the regular faculty (including regular non-tenure-track faculty) are eligible to serve. The department chair shall appoint three persons to the committee, but any member of the regular faculty who is willing to serve may also serve. The department chair, in consultation with the search committee, shall appoint a regular faculty member from outside the department to serve on the committee.

    2. Committee Chair

      The department chair can either choose to chair the search committee or appoint the committee chair from the eligible department faculty.

    3. Duties

      The search committee shall:

      1. Prepare a written job description listing explicitly (i) minimum qualifications necessary to apply, and (ii) professional responsibilities;
      2. Identify and conform to all university and affirmative action regulations;
      3. Recruit a highly qualified and diverse pool of applicants;
      4. Receive and respond to all applications;
      5. Interview candidates;
      6. Arrange and schedule all search committee meetings for selecting final candidates;
      7. Arrange and supervise campus visits of final candidates;
      8. Report its recommendation to the department.
    4. Recommendation to Appoint

      Any recommendation to appoint a candidate will be made by a vote of the department’s eligible faculty in accordance with CLA Bylaws (11.B.1.b.). The department chair shall inform the dean of the department’s vote, and may append comments in the chair’s report. Any voting member of the eligible faculty who disagrees with the decision of the department may file a minority report with the department chair, who shall attach it to the chair’s report to the dean.

  • 5.4 Events and Awards Committee
    1. Membership

      The eligible voting members of the department shall comprise a committee of the whole. The department chair may empanel subcommittees, as needed, and the department chair, in consultation with the faculty, shall appoint members to the subcommittees.

    2. Committee and Subcommittee Chairs

      The chair of the committee shall be the department chair. A subcommittee shall select a chair from among its members.

    3. Duties

      Through a delegated subcommittee (if needed), the Events and Awards Committee shall be responsible for making annual recommendations to the department concerning the content of all official departmental events—colloquium talks, named lectures or workshops, ad hoc conferences (for faculty or students)—and for ensuring adequate coordination between any events. Likewise, the committee shall annually review and recommend scholarship candidates to the department. All expenditures of departmental funds (including any funds overseen by the department) in connection with activities under the purview of the committee are subject to the approval of the department chair.

  • 5.5 Ad Hoc Committees
    1. Bylaws Committee

      The Bylaws Committee shall be convened when a third of the regular faculty question the interpretation of department bylaws and solely for the purpose of reviewing the interpretation question and making a recommendation to the department. The committee shall be composed of the duly elected members of the Personnel Committee.

    2. Other Committees

      Except where stated elsewhere in these bylaws, the chair may establish ad hoc committees as needed, and will appoint their members. All such committees shall function as advisory to the department.


Chapter 6: Tenure and Promotion

  • 6.1 Eligibility for Tenure

    A probationary full-time or part-time member of the academic faculty in Rank II, III or IV shall be eligible for appointment with tenure at any time during the probationary period of employment.

  • 6.2 Initial Appointment with Tenure

    An initial appointment may be made with tenure following NSHE Code (Chapter 3.4.3).

  • 6.3 Process for Consideration for Tenure or Promotion

    The process and calendar for evaluating and recommending faculty for tenure or promotion shall in all cases adhere to the bylaws, policies, and procedures of the College of Liberal Arts, the UNR Bylaws (Sections 3.3 and 3.4), and the NSHE Code Chapter 3.

    1. Calendar

      Any faculty member who wishes to be proposed for promotion and/or tenure the following academic year shall inform the department chair of this wish and conform to the college calendar.

    2. Process for Initiating Consideration for Early Tenure or Promotion

      Faculty should normally come up for tenure during the sixth year of their probationary period. If the faculty member has an extraordinary record prior to the sixth year, the department chair will initiate a process of consultation with the P&T Committee and the dean that may lead to a recommendation that the faculty member apply for tenure and/or promotion early.

    3. Process for Initiating Consideration for Promotion in Other Cases

      UNR Bylaws Section 3.3.5 states that faculty in Ranks III and (0)III shall be evaluated in writing by the department and/or dean regarding progress toward promotion no later than the end of the sixth full academic year in rank. In consultation with the P&T Committee and/or dean, the department chair shall prepare a written report as needed, and shall make an informal recommendation for or against a promotion application. If the department chair recommends a promotion, the P&T Committee shall review the candidate’s application, in accordance with the procedures described in Section 5.2. A faculty member may initiate the process for consideration in any year in which the member is in rank.

    4. Candidate Application

      The candidate shall prepare an application for promotion and/or tenure, in accordance with UNR and NSHE policies. This application should include supporting materials related to each component of the candidate’s record: instruction, research and scholarly activity, and service.

    5. Solicitation of Evaluations

      The department chair shall solicit independent evaluations of the candidate's scholarship in accordance with policies set forth by the College, UNR, and NSHE. Ideally, five evaluations will be solicited, with no fewer than four and no more than six.

    6. Candidate’s List of Potential Peer Reviewers

      The candidate shall submit to the department chair a list of potential peer reviewers. A list of five or six potential reviewers is recommended. This list should describe the candidate’s relationship with each potential reviewer. The candidate shall notify the department chair of any potential conflicts of interest or reasons not to consider a particular reviewer.

    7. Selection of Peer Reviewers

      The department chair shall select reviewers who can provide expert, objective assessments of the candidate in accordance with the policies set forth by the Office of the Provost. No more than half of the peer reviewers will be chosen from the candidate’s list of potential reviewers. To identify other peer reviewers, the department chair may consult colleagues in the candidate’s area of study within the department or at other institutions. Peer reviewers from relevant fields other than Philosophy may be secured to assess interdisciplinary, collaborative, or non-traditional scholarship appropriately. Peer reviewers will be provided with supporting materials (curriculum vitae and scholarly work), as provided by the candidate. The department chair’s letter to potential peer reviewers shall follow the guidelines provided by the Office of the Provost.

    8. Role of the Promotion and Tenure Committee

      Members of the P&T Committee shall be responsible for a written evaluation of the candidate's record; however, a committee member applying for tenure or promotion may not review any promotion or tenure applications in the same year that the member applies. For each component of the candidate’s record, this written evaluation shall be dependent on multiple indices of assessment as specified in Section 6.4. The candidate's entire file (application, peer-review letters, and supporting materials) shall be available for review by the P&T Committee.

    9. Recommendation of the Promotion and Tenure Committee

      The P&T Committee shall meet to make a recommendation to the department chair. Determinations in each area of the candidate’s record, as well an overall determination of the record, shall be made by majority vote of the P&T Committee in a secret ballot.

    10. Chair’s Report to the Dean and College

      The department chair shall prepare a summary evaluation of the candidate, to be submitted with the application and supporting materials, including the external peer reviews, to the dean and the college personnel committee. The report will include the recommendation of the P&T Committee and all votes taken by the Committee, as well as the department chair’s own judgment. If the department chair’s judgment differs from the recommendation of the P&T Committee, the chair shall explain the reasons for disagreement in the report. Whatever the outcome, the chair shall share the report with P&T Committee.

    11. Decision

      The recommendation of the P&T Committee to appoint with tenure or to promote is an advisory opinion, and at the departmental level the department chair’s judgment decides the disposition of the application. If the decision is positive, the application moves forward to the dean and college for further review; if negative, the application does not move forward.

    12. Right to Reconsideration

      If a candidate receives a negative decision for promotion and/or tenure at the departmental level, the candidate has the right to have the decision reconsidered, according to the procedures in the NSHE Code (Chapter 5.2.3 & 5.2.4).

    13. Joint Appointments

      In tenure and/or promotion decisions for joint appointments where Philosophy is the tenure home, the chair or director of the joint-appointment department or program (or a designated representative at the appropriate rank) will serve as a voting member of the P&T Committee (in the case of the joint appointment only). All college guidelines on joint appointments shall be followed.

  • 6.4 Standards and Ratings for Appointment with Tenure

    Consideration of a recommendation for appointment with tenure shall include (i) Standard One (Teaching), Standard Two (Research), and Standard Three (Service) and (ii) shall apply the available ratings for these standards, in accordance with the conditions for appointment with tenure stated in Subsection 3.1.2 of the NSHE Code. In order to be considered for tenure an academic faculty member must receive an “excellent” rating in either Standard One or Standard Two and no less than a “satisfactory” rating in Standard Three. The available ratings are “excellent,” “commendable,” “satisfactory,” and “unsatisfactory,” and no other rating terminology shall be used in evaluating the applicant for appointment with tenure. The burden of demonstrating that standards have been met lies with the candidate.

    1. Standard One: Teaching

      A record of effectiveness as a teacher includes, but is not limited to, demonstrated teaching competence and efficiency in the classroom, the ability to communicate effectively with students and demonstrated skill in handling classroom and other duties related to teaching at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Considerations in evaluating teaching include the instructor’s reliability in discharging teaching responsibilities; the ability to generate student interest and engagement; the extent of preparation and innovation; creation or revision of courses; supervision of independent studies, theses and dissertations; service on students’ graduate committees in Philosophy and other departments insofar as the faculty member’s field permits it; and professionalism and care in evaluating, advising, and otherwise interacting with students.

      1. Multiple Evaluation Measures

        Evaluation of instructional proficiency will be based on multiple measures, examples of which include: peer observations of teaching; review of syllabi and other instructional materials; review of assessment data and examples of students’ work; and student evaluations.

      2. Variations

        Depending on individual role statements and departmental expectations, teaching may also involve additional or variant expectations that differ from traditional classroom roles. These may involve collaborations with community partner institutions and organizations as delineated in role statements.

    2. Standard Two: Research

      A record of effectiveness in research demonstrates ongoing commitment to intellectual work in the discipline of philosophy, the primary evidence for which consists in the publication of original scholarship in distinguished disciplinary venues. The record should also indicate promise of continued professional growth.

      1. Publications

        Traditionally, published books, articles, and book chapters substantiate research achievement in philosophy. For appointment with tenure, research achievement may be demonstrated by the publication of a peer-reviewed monograph or by a series of substantial peer-reviewed articles (or article-equivalent chapters in peer-reviewed collections). Books under signed contract with publishers, and articles and/or chapters accepted for publication shall be included in the evaluation. To be considered fully, however, a book manuscript must be in press or approved by the board of the publisher.

      2. Other Scholarly Activities

        Other scholarly achievements such as book reviews and conference papers, external grants, participation in conference panels, invited addresses, or editing a collection of papers also count as research. Although such achievements cannot substitute for published work (as described in Section, they can contribute significantly to the overall research record.

      3. Collaborative Research

        If publications or other scholarly activities involve collaboration with other persons (as co-authors or co-creators), such achievements shall be evaluated on the basis of the candidate’s contributions to the work, and in the research record such contributions may be regarded in the same way as single-author or single-creator items if they are substantially equivalent to those items. Evidence supporting the extent of the candidate’s contribution shall be required, and supplementary memoranda of understanding may document appropriate evaluation indices and expectations for collaborative research.

      4. Variations

        Conceivably new research modalities may arise (involving, e.g., digital media) that do not eventuate in results of a traditional character. If a faculty member’s path to tenure includes work in a new modality, the relevance of that work to the research will need to be demonstrated, and should be formally delineated either at the time of hire or in an annual role statement agreed upon by the faculty member, the department chair, and the dean. Supplementary memoranda of understanding may document appropriate evaluation indices and expectations for new modalities.

    3. Standard Three: Service

      In addition to Standards One and Two, an academic faculty member being recommended for appointment with tenure must receive a rating of “satisfactory” or better in the area of service.

      1. Institutional Service

        Institutionally, service may take the form of contributions to the university through service on departmental, college, university, or NSHE committees; activity in university affairs; sponsorship of or participation in other than required education activities; and other work that furthers departmental, college, or university goals.

      2. Professional Service

        Professionally, service may take the form of activities performed on behalf of the discipline through membership and participation in professional organizations and meetings; organizing and hosting of scholarly conferences, workshops, and colloquia; election to boards of scholarly and academic organizations; editorial activities (as editor or as reviewer) for professional journals and academic presses; day-to-day management or oversight of scholarly programs or initiatives; and related forms of involvement in the discipline of philosophy.

      3. Outreach

        Service may take the form of engagement with the local, national, or international community through activities that bring the faculty member’s knowledge and expertise to audiences outside academia. These may include outreach instruction and public lectures at K–12 schools, local agencies, or community groups; service on boards of directors or committees of businesses, government agencies, or community groups engaged in activities related to the faculty member’s field; and sharing knowledge and expertise through traditional media (e.g., newspapers or non-specialist periodicals) or non-traditional media (e.g., blogposts or podcasts).

    4. Areas of Entrepreneurship and Community Engagement

      These areas are described, and their potential relevance to tenure identified, in Section 2.5. Examples of community engagement are given in Section (under Standard Three). This classification of the examples notwithstanding, types of engagement do vary in detail, and some types might be classifiable under either Standard One or Two. For purposes of tenure consideration, the classification of a faculty member’s engagement activity under Standard One or Two requires approval of the department chair and dean. Also, while engagement activities can enhance a faculty member’s record, faculty whose work does not include these activities shall not be penalized.

  • 6.5 Criteria for Promotion

    The following provisions for promotion at various ranks are consistent with the University Bylaws and NSHE Code provisions for conducting promotion evaluations:

    1. Promotion to Rank II and to Rank 0(II)

      A faculty member in Rank I or Rank 0(I) shall be eligible for promotion to Rank II or Rank 0(II) when the faculty member has attained a Ph.D. degree in philosophy or an appropriate related field and has demonstrated potential for developing professional achievement in teaching, research, and service.

    2. Promotion to Rank III and Rank 0(III)

      A faculty member in Rank II or Rank 0(II) shall be eligible for promotion to Rank III or Rank 0(III) when the faculty member has established a substantial record of achievement in teaching, research, and service (Rank III) or teaching and professional development (Rank 0(III)).

      1. Standard One: Teaching

        A record of effective teaching must be documented through the measures described in Section 6.4.1.

      2. Standard Two: Research

        A record of scholarly achievement must be documented through the measures described in Section 6.4.2. The candidate’s entire scholarly record will be considered, but greater weight will be given to accomplishments made while at UNR. For promotion to 0(III), professional development takes the place of research, but research may be included in professional development, if the faculty member’s role statement allows for its inclusion.

      3. Standard Three: Service

        A modest level of service on departmental committees must be documented through the measures described in Section 6.4.3. It is understood that in order to focus on scholarly publication, untenured faculty will not be expected to carry heavy service loads. If time-consuming departmental service is performed by untenured faculty, expectations regarding other forms of service should be reduced proportionately. For promotion to 0(III), professional development may take the place of service, or service may be included in professional development, if the faculty member’s role statement allows for its inclusion.

    3. Promotion to Rank IV

      A faculty member in Rank III shall be eligible for promotion to Rank IV upon establishing a sustained record of excellence. Such a record includes a scholarly reputation judged significant by peers in the field; distinguished professional service; and distinction in teaching and related activities. Where relevant, exceptional administrative achievement should be taken into material consideration.

      1. Standard One: Teaching

        A record of effective teaching must be documented through the measure described in Section 6.4.1. Moreover, a substantial contribution to the curriculum is typically expected (e.g., developing new courses or fields of study, offering graduate seminars, chairing MA committees, supervising independent studies, or mentoring students).

      2. Standard Two: Research

        A record of scholarly achievement must be documented through the measures described in Section 6.4.2. Ongoing development of a research program and evidence of prominence in the discipline are expected. All scholarship produced in-rank at any institution will be considered as part of the record. In cases involving alternative forms of scholarship or of dissemination, appropriate standards for promotion will be established in advance through role statements and memoranda of understanding agreed upon by the department chair and the dean.

      3. Standard Three: Service

        A level of service that includes contributions made to the university beyond the department level (e.g., college, university, or NSHE committees or administrative assignments) must be documented. Professional service marking the faculty member’s stature in the larger scholarly community (e.g., manuscript reviews, service on professional committees, external department evaluations, and positions in professional organizations and on editorial boards) is expected.

    4. Promotion to Rank 0(IV)

      A faculty member in Rank (0)III shall be eligible for promotion to Rank (0)IV upon establishing a sustained record of excellence, and there must be a notable record of effectiveness, efficiency, and ability to perform assigned duties, as specified in annual role statements and (if relevant) memoranda of understanding. Distinguished performance in teaching, through measures described in Section 6.4.2., and evidence of ongoing pedagogical growth and commitment to the practice of teaching are expected. Evaluation of proficiency may be based on curriculum development, success in planning and implementing pedagogical initiatives that extend beyond traditional classrooms, the expansion of outreach activities that promote public learning, assessment activities, undergraduate advisement, and any collateral service responsibilities. Continued professional development is expected, and may take various forms, as indicated in Discipline-appropriate engagement, while not required, also provides important evidence of accomplishment.