First-year Studies (FRST) Program Standards for Faculty Evaluation

-Program name updated 6/2/2014
-Tenure-track Instructor standards added 2019
-Program standards revised Fall 2020 with pandemic provisions
-Program standards revised Fall 2023 to reflect new University standards, provide NTTP standards, and
shift pandemic standards to the secondary (in brackets) position)

 

Introduction to the Document: Following are the standards for faculty evaluation for the First-year Studies
(FRST) program. These standards are linked and numbered according to the approved University standards.
In each section, standards and related discussion specific to the FRST program are italicized.
Please note that faculty members pursuing tenure at the rank of Instructor do not need to provide
documentation of research, scholarship, and/or creative work. As such, Section 2.1.10, the second paragraph
of Section 5.00, and all of Section 6.2 Scholarly and Creative Activity (6.2.1 – 6.2.4.6.11) do not apply to
those faculty members. In contrast, faculty pursuing tenure at the rank of Instructor have an increased
service component, defined in the introduction to 6.3 University and Community Service and outlined in the
summary table at the end of the document.

Note regarding changes to program standards as of Fall 2020: The FRST program recognizes the increasing
challenges in our teaching responsibilities starting in the Fall of 2017 and continuing. The FRST program is
offering more sections of FRST 1000-level courses, and candidates are more likely, as individuals, to be
teaching a larger number and proportion of such courses in their teaching load. Stockton has more students
entering with lower levels of academic preparation, more and more impactful learning differences, and
higher levels of mental illness. Teaching the new student populations adds significantly to the percentage of
time candidates need to spend on teaching. At the same time, and, rightly, the University and program’s
joint greater emphasis on retention has added significantly to the labor of everyone in the University
community, as colleagues spend more time collaborating with other university offices to support students, in
and out of the classroom. Faculty members send and respond to check-in emails, submit and follow up on
alerts, participate in the peer mentor program, support a larger number of students repeating our courses,
and design, implement, and assess changes to increase the chances of student success in the first, second, or
third attempt. Given these increases in teaching demands, the FRST program modified its program
standards to reduce expectations in other areas. As of our fall 2023 update, we note that we’ve now had
more than five years of this increased workload, which appears to now be the norm.

Note regarding COVID-19 pandemic temporary program standard changes: Please note that faculty
members going through the personnel process at any stage starting in September 2020 will likely have been
negatively impacted by the global COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic resulted in problems like, but not
limited to

• cancelled conferences
• delays in review and publication of scholarly and creative work
• a quick change to remote teaching in Spring 2020, potentially resulting in problems with
teaching/learning, student perception due to circumstances not under the control of the teacher
• a change to different teaching modalities for Fall 2020, including most faculty having to move to
hybrid or online teaching due to limited availability of large classroom spaces and family and health
constraints
• significant caregiver challenges
• reduced internal and external grant opportunities
Some of these challenges affected all faculty members, but there is evidence that they have affected women
and faculty of color disproportionately:
• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7302767/

• https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.04.187583v1
• https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.10194

Faculty members of color are also more likely to have been impacted by the illnesses or deaths during the
pandemic, due to its disproportionate impact on communities of color. Faculty with caregiver
responsibilities, not limited to but including parents who’ve had childcare and remote schooling challenges,
have been impacted (note here that although “parent” is being used to be inclusive of a variety of families,
in most cases, women are being much more heavily burdened).
In order to adapt our program standards to ameliorate the negative, and uneven, impacts of the pandemic,
we made changes in place from Fall 2020 through spring 2026 with those changes, set to expire, now in
brackets.

1.0 PREAMBLE

1.1 As a nationally ranked public liberal arts university, Stockton University is committed to high
standards of faculty performance that will sustain and extend the excellence we have achieved. This
commitment embodies the teacher-scholar model central to the liberal arts tradition. In turn, the
dynamic relationship between teaching and scholarship is part of maintaining the currency of the
University’s approach to interdisciplinary learning. While much of this policy focuses on
evaluation of individual faculty members, this policy also affirms that interdisciplinary, liberal arts
education is not the work of an individual, but necessarily involves purposeful collaboration in
order to achieve the University’s mission.
Elaboration: Faculty members in the First-year Studies (FRST) program teach courses in writing,
reading, and mathematics, primarily to first-year students, including FRST-acronym courses, as well as a
variety of other W-designated and Q-designated courses. As part of their responsibilities teaching firstyear students, FRST faculty teach the most underprepared, at-risk students, who must complete 1000-
level FRST acronym courses to remain in college. Thus, FRST faculty must demonstrate particular
facility with the unique pedagogical challenges of teaching underprepared, high-risk students.
1.2 The status of faculty members changes as they earn reappointment, tenure and promotions,
advancement, or move from part-time, temporary, teaching/clinical specialist or visiting
employment to a tenure- track position. As one’s status changes, so do expectations and, in
some cases, the method of evaluation..
1.3 Although formal evaluation processes take place on varied cycles, the University expects the
highest level of professionalism at all times. Faculty are expected to perform their roles in a
manner that reflects positively on themselves and on the University. Education is a shared
enterprise that entails the ability to work well with colleagues and others on campus and to
Page 2 of 19 contribute to institutional, School, and Program goals.
1.4 University expectations of faculty performance fall into two broad areas: those areas of faculty
responsibility traditionally used by institutions of higher education to judge performance and
the continued development of their faculty, and those expectations that reflect obligations of
faculty as University employees.
1.5 Throughout this policy, the term “faculty” shall mean teaching faculty and the term “library
faculty” shall be used to refer to librarians covered under Article XVII of the Master
Agreement. For the purposes of communicating expectations for evaluation, reappointment,
and advancement only, the use of the term “faculty” applies to adjuncts, part-time, and nontenure-track professionals as well.

2.0 STATEMENT OF FACULTY AND LIBRARY FACULTY RESPONSIBILITIES

Statement of Faculty Responsibilities. While individual appointment contracts outline general
responsibilities of a faculty member’s appointment, the evaluation of faculty requires a clear
statement of the responsibilities of all faculty, including those who are tenured. These
responsibilities include sustained and consistent success in: 2.1.1 Teaching, including General
Studies teaching and teaching in all areas where a faculty member is listed as a member of the
Program faculty or associated faculty in the University’s official publications.
Elaboration: Additional details on expectations in these areas can be found in sections 4-6 and in
the table at the end of this document.

2.1.1 Teaching, including General Studies teaching and teaching in all areas where a faculty
member is listed as a member of the Program faculty or associated faculty in the University’s
official publications.

2.1.2 Keeping abreast of developments in one’s areas of teaching responsibility and in pedagogical
innovations as well as incorporating this knowledge into teaching.

2.1.3 Regular and systematic assessment of the achievement of student learning outcomes in one’s
Program and General Studies teaching, as appropriate within the context of Program objectives,
and the use of this assessment in the continual improvements of teaching and professional work.

2.1.4 Precepting as applicable, including facilitation of students’ academic and career
planning/decision making; conscientious attention to students’ progress toward graduation; and
helping students to access resources to reinforce these efforts. Prompt and timely communication
with students and preceptees, including stewardship of student records and the maintenance of
grading and attendance records in a manner consistent with University policy and procedures and
all relevant statutes.

2.1.5 Where appropriate, fulfilling all expectations of faculty required to acquire and maintain
professional or other accreditation of the University’s programs.
2.1.6 Excellence in teaching entails respect for students as members of the Stockton academic
community. Therefore, faculty are expected to respond to student questions in a timely manner,
offering opportunities to converse outside the classroom to enhance student learning where
appropriate.

2.1.7 Positive collaboration with one’s colleagues in the achievement of individual, Program,
School, and University purposes. This includes active participation in Program, School, and other
meetings and providing support for, and contribution to the development of, new faculty and
adjunct faculty.

2.1.8 Regular participation in and support of program activities, including those designed to foster
student learning outside the classroom.

2.1.9 Active participation in faculty recruitment, including efforts to achieve diversity, equity,
inclusion, and belonging.,

2.1.10 Research, scholarship, or artistic/creative work as applicable, which may include the development of grant proposals as defined in Section 6.2.4.6.10, applied research, or other
approaches to the discovery of new knowledge, and where appropriate, its integration with
teaching.

2.1.11 Participation in University organizations and activities such as Faculty Senate, Union
leadership, faculty and University task forces and committees, student recruitment, the maintenance
of positive relations with alumni, and the support of student organizations and activities. A pattern
of ongoing participation in those events that contribute to the intellectual life of the University,
including ceremonial events.

2.1.12 Some uncompensated service is expected of all full-time faculty members.

2.1.13 The use of one’s professional talents, whether based in one’s discipline or not, in service to
the University and to non-University audiences, communities, and/or organizations in a manner that
reflects positively on the University and its purposes.

2.1.14 Any other duties as may be assigned within the context of one’s individual appointment
contract.

 

3.00 OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES OF FACULTY AND LIBRARY FACULTY

There are other responsibilities and expectations of faculty that derive from their employment by
the State and the University. These include:
3.1 Adherence to all policies and procedures of the University as well as public laws,
administrative rules, or other official regulations and directives.
3.2 Adherence to all obligations and procedures outlined in the Master Agreement and all locally
negotiated agreements.
3.3 Regular attendance and performance of one’s professional responsibilities to the University,
consistent with guidelines issued by one’s supervisor.
3.4 Provided reasonable notice has been given, timely responses to all official communications and
requests for information, including the provision to the Program Coordinator and School Dean of a
syllabus for every course each term as well as timeliness in the performance of one’s
responsibilities to the University and its students.
3.5 Regular availability to students, colleagues, and staff.

4.00 EVALUATION OF FACULTY
4.1 It is the policy of the University to evaluate regularly the performance of all faculty, including library
faculty and those who have been granted tenure. The purposes of such evaluation are 1) to provide
probationary faculty with a clear statement of University, School, and Program expectations of
performance; 2) to provide all faculty with timely information regarding the extent to which they are
meeting these expectations of performance; 3) to identify aspects of a faculty member’s performance that
may need improvement in order to meet or continue to meet University expectations; 4) to provide a
foundation for discussions of performance issues between the faculty member and the Dean or other direct
supervisor as well as their peers; and 5) to determine whether a faculty member should be reappointed,
advanced, tenured, or promoted. 

4.2 Adjunct faculty are expected to meet the obligations that derive from employment by the State and the
University listed above, those noted in the Agreement for State Colleges/Universities Adjunct Unit, and
those obligations listed above that focus primarily on teaching, i.e., [2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.6, and 2.1.13].

5.00 UNIVERSITY STANDARDS FOR FACULTY EVALUATION

The University expects faculty to excel in a variety of ways and to balance teaching, scholarship/creative
activity (if applicable), and service effectively. Sustained excellence in teaching is a necessary but not in
itself sufficient condition for tenure or promotion to higher rank or for reappointment to any faculty position
that includes teaching. Scholarship leading to peer-reviewed or other scholarly publications, grants, and/or
creative work and activity is also a requirement for tenure and promotion to higher rank . Exceptions to this
expectation that are not outlined below in 5.1 will be documented in the evaluation process through a
recommendation at any level of review. Faculty are also expected to contribute to University, community,
and/or professional life through service activities. Excellence in teaching and impact of service are sufficient
conditions for reappointment of non-tenure track or other faculty positions that exclude research, scholarly
or creative activity.
Specifically, the University recognizes five scenarios:
5.1.1 Faculty who are hired under the full-time, Tenure-Track Instructor Lines MOA earn Tenure at the rank
of instructor. The emphasis of their work is expected to be on teaching and service. Scholarship and/or
creative activities is not required for the achievement of tenure. However, those seeking promotion to a
higher rank must meet the applicable School and Program standards for that rank .
5.1.2 It is sometimes advisable to appoint, as tenure-track faculty, individuals who have excellent
credentials as practitioners or clinicians in an applied field but have not previously had the need to develop a
scholarly program. Typically, these individuals will have terminal degrees that are not research-based
degrees. Such individuals should be identified no later than year three in their Page 6 of 19 evaluation cycle.
They may be considered for tenure without concurrent promotion to Assistant Professor or Associate
Professor, provided that they have demonstrated a particularly high level of excellence in teaching and
service and that they are deemed likely to meet the standards for promotion in the area of
scholarship/creative activity after attaining tenure.
5.1.3 Candidates who successfully pursue early promotion will be evaluated for tenure based upon their
performance during their entire probationary period and will not be required to pursue additional concurrent
promotion.
5.1.4 Visiting (Article XIII of the Master Agreement) positions in this policy are not eligible for tenure
and/or promotion. However, all faculty members who aspire to apply to a tenure-eligible position may
engage in activities that will be expected of them, should they succeed in attaining a tenure-track position.
5.1.5 Some of the positions in this policy include opportunities for a change from Level III to Level II and
Level II to Level I, as applicable to their appointment and the needs of the University. In no cases is
concurrent level change an expectation for reappointment.
5.2 University Standards
This section outlines University standards for the evaluation of all faculty and the process whereby School
and Program standards, consistent with the University standards, are restated in terms consistent with the
character of the different Schools and disciplines.
5.2.2 The University expects all faculty to meet and sustain these standards with consistent evidence of
positive development in all areas of evaluation. Adjunct, part-time, pre-tenured, tenured and professionals 

serving on non-tenure-track contracts are expected to sustain an overall pattern of excellence consistent with
their rank and/or assigned responsibilities.
5.2.3 The University recognizes that faculty members, either in response to evaluations or in the interest of
continuing vitality, may create individual paths towards excellence in a blend of teaching, service and/or
scholarship/creative activity, as applicable, that allows them to distinguish themselves. Consistent
accomplishment over time will be evaluated positively, while recognizing that a candidate’s relative
contributions to the campus community in terms of teaching/librarianship, scholarly/creative/professional
activity, and service normally will vary over time. Therefore, short periods of relatively less activity in one
area should be complemented by greater activity in the others, producing balance and a consistently high
level of accomplishment overall.

6.00 ELABORATION OF UNIVERSITY STANDARDS FOR TEACHING FACULTY

6.1 Teaching
6.1.1 Educating students, both inside and outside the classroom, studio, or laboratory is the University’s
primary purpose. Therefore, performance in teaching carries the greatest weight in the evaluation of
faculty. All aspects of teaching, including preceptorial teaching, will be evaluated in order to gain a clear
understanding of each faculty member’s performance.
Elaboration: Because teaching first-year students, including those who are at highest risk
academically, is central to the mission of the FRST program, and because this teaching requires unusual
amounts of time, commitment, energy, and creative talent, teaching performance carries a higher weight
than scholarship and service in the evaluation process. Such emphasis is consonant with the University’s
primary focus on teaching.
6.1.2 In broad terms excellence in teaching is characterized by:
6.1.2.1 A thorough and current command of the subject matter, teaching techniques and methodologies of
the disciplines one teaches.
Elaboration: In the FRST program, we expect faculty members to demonstrate deep
understanding of fundamental content principles and diverse practices that underpin teaching and
learning in reading, writing, or mathematics.
6.1.2.2 Sound course design and delivery in all teaching assignments – whether program or General
Studies, introductory or advanced offerings — as evident in clear learning goals and expectations, content
reflecting the best available scholarship or artistic practices, and teaching techniques aimed at student
learning.
Elaboration: As appropriate, course goals and expectations should be consistent with written
course standards previously established by the program. Among courses for which standards exist are all
FRST-acronym courses, as well as other W-designated and Q-designated courses usually taught by
program faculty.
6.1.2.3. The ability to organize course material and to communicate this information effectively. The
development of a comprehensive syllabus for each course taught, including expectations, grading and
attendance policies, and the timely provision of copies to students.
6.1.2.4 Demonstration of respect for students as members of the academic community through timely
feedback and responses to student communications.
6.1.3 Where appropriate, additional measures of teaching excellence are:
6.1.3.1 Ability to use technology in teaching.

6.1.3.2 The capacity to relate the subject matter to other fields of knowledge.
Elaboration: In the FRST program, we especially value the ability to help students make
connections between their course work and everyday life, present or future academic work, and
prospective careers.
6.1.3.3 Seeking opportunities outside the classroom to enhance student learning of the subject matter.
6.1.3.4 The ability to lead, promote, and/or participate in successful credit-bearing experiences in
community engagement, service-learning, faculty-sponsored/mentored research, and global
education.
6.1.3.5 Ability to create an inclusive and respectful environment.
Summary Elaboration of 6.1 Teaching: Although candidates have choices about what evidence to
provide to support each particular teaching standard, the program notes that all candidates’
files are expected to include the following items:
• Syllabi
• Student evaluations
• Teaching observations
• Self-evaluation of teaching
With respect to syllabi, minimum required sources of evidence are a representative
syllabus for each course taught since a) hire, if file is for purposes of reappointment up to and
including the tenure decision, or b) attainment of present rank, if file is for purposes of post
tenure promotion.
With respect to student evaluations, given that our approach to writing, reading, and
mathematics in FRST is distinctive, comparisons of student evaluations in similar courses at other
institutions may not be meaningful, even in adjusted scores. Also, we note that there is now
substantial research evidence of gender bias, racial bias, and bias against instructors whose
native language is not English, among other likely biases, in student ratings of faculty, and so
student evaluations and student comments should be interpreted and applied with extreme care,
so as not to unfairly disadvantage some candidates or unfairly advantage others. Among myriad
publications on this topic are these two:
• Fan, Y.; Shepherd, L.J.; Slavich, E.; Waters,D.; Stone, M.; Abel,R., & E. L. Johnston. (2019).
Gender and cultural bias in student evaluations: Why representation matters. PLOS ONE.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0209749
• Chavez, K, & Mitchell, K. (2020). Exploring bias in student evaluations: Gender, race, and
ethnicity. PS: Political Science and Politics.
Candidates can choose whether to include additional items, as they determine would be
helpful to evaluators. Such items might include the following:
• Course assignments
• Student work (with or without instructor feedback)
• Test results
• Evidence of successful adjustments in pedagogy or course design during a semester or
from semester to semester
• Relevant scholarship
• Discussion of relevant training experiences

In interpreting the evidence presented in files, the FRST program faculty emphasizes the
importance of using multiple indicators. Each indicator alone is an imperfect measure of teaching
quality, but together, they can form a useful and meaningful mosaic for evaluation. In some cases, one
indicator can help explain or moderate the story told by another. As candidates prepare their selfevaluation as a guide to the multiple indicators of their excellent teaching, those indicators should
include things similar to the following examples:
A clearly stated, sound philosophy of teaching, linked to a teacher's pedagogical practice
• Teaching observations, student evaluations, and other evidence that indicate regular use of
relevant pedagogical techniques for the students, subject, and course learning objectives
• Fall 2020-Spring 2026: A pattern of IDEA summary results in which at least half of scores are
“similar” or “higher” and/or the preponderance are 3.3 or higher
• Pre-Fall 2020, and post-Spring 2026: A pattern of IDEA summary results in which the
preponderance of scores are “similar” or” higher” and/or the preponderance are 3.5 or higher.
Within the portfolio, the faculty member’s self-evaluation of teaching will serve as the primary guide
to the evidence contained in the file for the evaluation of teaching. We expect that each candidate will
refer to relevant evidence as well as University, School, and Program standards in demonstrating the
effectiveness of teaching in the self-evaluation.

6.2 Scholarly and Creative Activity
6.2.1 6.2.1 The teacher-scholar model recognizes that a serious and continuing commitment to
engaging in scholarship or creative activity of one’s disciplinary and/or interdisciplinary work
consistent with rank and/or assigned responsibilities, enriches teaching and is the foundation of
sustained excellence within the classroom.

Elaboration: Teacher-scholars serve as important models of academic life, especially for first- year
students. Scholarly and creative work contributes to the academic world and enriches society by
expanding our knowledge base, leading to real-world applications, and inspiring us. In addition, given
the unique pedagogical challenges noted above and in the context of the nature of the responsibilities of
FRST faculty, scholarship about pertinent pedagogy is valued as much as other creative and scholarly
work.

6.2.2 Publications and creative work in support of reappointment and tenure are those achieved during the
tenure candidate’s probationary period. Activity in support of a post-tenure promotion or range
adjustment is that work completed since the most recent promotion or range adjustment.
Elaboration: The FRST program is a microcosm of the institution with respect to the diversity of
scholarly and creative work among our faculty. Examples of acceptable activities range from theoretical
mathematical research to educational research to personal essays to poems to performance. Because
these diverse forms of scholarly and creative work each warrant assessment consistent with the
scope and nature of the work, we recognize that each of these forms requires different degrees of time,
effort, and focus.
6.2.3 The University recognizes a wide variety of scholarly vehicles: disciplinary or interdisciplinary
research, pedagogical research, applied research, integrative scholarship, community engagement and
service-learning, artistic or creative activity, and grant writing. Scholarly or creative activities may take
many forms and use different vehicles to communicate with the broader academic community.
6.2.3.1 The University recognizes that the time and effort required to complete scholarly or artistic projects may vary markedly among disciplines and sub-disciplines. Such variance is
addressed in approved School and Program standards.
6.2.4 The burden is always on the candidate to document the excellence of one’s work. In cases of shared
or multiple authorship, clarification of the degree of one’s participation is expected. In cases of
conference presentations or proceedings, clarification should be provided with regard to the selectivity of
the review process. Typically, central to judgments regarding scholarly and creative activity are:
6.2.4.1 The capacity to bring scholarly or creative projects to completion.
6.2.4.2 A mix of scholarly activities appropriate to one’s appointment e.g., in some cases scholarly
activity will be primary, in others creative activity.
6.2.4.3 Judgments of the worth and significance of the work by those qualified to make such judgments.
These may include disciplinary peers, professional organizations, ad hoc groups, such as evaluation,
judging, or refereeing panels.
6.2.4.4 Documentation of the impact of one’s work
• with students
• within the scholarly area
• within higher education generally
• on documented standards of best practices in pedagogy
• in the application of one’s work
• as evident in citations of one’s work
• on public policy or institutions
• in the artistic/cultural realm •
or in an educational setting
6.2.4.5 Just as in the case of traditional scholarship involving the discovery of new knowledge, when
one’s work consists of pedagogical, integrative, or applied scholarship, its significance may be
documented by demonstration of clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant
results, effective presentation, and reflective critique. Presentation before peers and colleagues and
advancing the discipline are also expectations of alternate forms of scholarship.
6.2.4.6 The University understands excellence in a variety of scholarly or creative activities to embody the
following:
6.2.4.6.1 Books should be published by reputable academic or trade presses and reviewed in
appropriate journals.
6.2.4.6.2 Articles, essays, reviews, and creative writing should be published in appropriate
scholarly/creative journals or venues, whether print or electronic. Some assessment should be made
as to the quality of the journal in which the piece appears, in particular, its scholarly/creative
reputation and whether or not the journal or proceedings are peer reviewed.
6.2.4.6.3 Scholarly and creative activity that involves students as co-presenters, co-participants, or
coauthors.
6.2.4.6.4 A presentation should be evaluated on the quality of its content and on the prestige of the
meeting where it was delivered. Qualitative judgments are best made when copies of presentations
are made available. National and regional meetings should rank higher than local meetings in most
instances. Scholarly presentations should be ranked more highly than non-scholarly ones. 

 

Competitive selections as well as presentations receiving disciplinary acknowledgement for
excellence should be noted. In most disciplines a record of scholarship based on presentations alone
will not be evaluated as highly as one including refereed publications.
6.2.4.6.5 Work in the arts may be evaluated by a number of different measures: assessment of its
quality by peers or professional critics; the reputation of the gallery, museum, or other artistic venue
where it is shown or presented; the respect afforded the organization for which it is performed or
under contract; or some other measure of its success or impact (e.g. royalties, awards, or impact on
public debate or on other artists).
6.2.4.6.6 Other forms of scholarly or creative activity that may appear in emerging scholarly or
artistic media may be included as well, provided that comparable standards of peer review can be
applied to them.
6.2.4.6.7 Where reviews are included in a file as evidence of the worth of a candidate’s scholarly or
artistic work, attention should be given to the professional credentials of the reviewer and the
reputation of the journal or publication as specified in School and/or Program standards.
6.2.4.6.8 Professional activities undertaken as a practitioner or consultant are considered
scholarly activity when they go beyond the routine application of knowledge to the creation of
new knowledge and the development of new standards for practice. Such qualities distinguish
between scholarship and professional service. Those making the judgments regarding the
standards for applied research necessarily involve more than clients and include academic
peers familiar with the area of practice under consideration.
6.2.4.6.9 In those disciplines with strong expectations of practice to maintain current
competency, appropriate standards for determining the significance of this work will be
developed at the Program level and approved through the standard procedure. rants or
monetary awards that are funded or reviewed as fundable from governmental or
nongovernmental organizations are considered examples of scholarship if those grants and
awards are subject to external peer review.
6.2.4.6.10 Grants or monetary awards that are funded or reviewed as fundable from
governmental or nongovernmental organizations are considered examples of scholarship if
those grants and awards are subject to external peer review.
6.2.4.6.11 Faculty engaged in community outreach can make a difference in the communities
and beyond by defining or resolving relevant social problems or issues, by facilitating
organizational development, by improving existing practices or programs, and by enriching
the cultural life of the community. Scholarship may take the form of widely disseminating the
knowledge gained in community-based projects in appropriate professional venues in order to
share its significance with those who do not benefit directly from the project.
Elaboration: We recognize and value that FRST faculty members frequently engage in
community-based, academic partnerships leading toward grant acquisition or other
scholarly/creative activity.
6.3 University and Community Service
Whereas the FRST program is the primary program in the relatively small School of General
and Graduate Studies, requiring a disproportionate amount of committee representation, and since
FRST program faculty are also often responsible for a variety of university-wide programs such as
Writing, QUAD, and first-year seminars, their service demands are unusually high. Nevertheless, while
quantity of service demands is important in the FRST program, our expectations are commensurate 
with the University Standards in that the impact and effectiveness of one’s service is the central point.
Documentation of the effectiveness of service might include items like letters detailing individual
contributions from selected committee chairs or persons in leadership positions of organizations.
Faculty members pursuing tenure at the rank of Instructor have an increased service component, as outlined
in their contracts, which exceeds the service expectations of faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor. This
increased service, to be completed cumulatively between years two through five, could be documented in
the form of the following:
Fall 202-Spring 2026:
a) one (1) labor-intensive/high stakes/leadership project
OR
b) two (2) smaller/more participatory projects
OR
c) or some other combination agreed upon by the faculty member and the FRST Program.
Fall 2026 and on:
a) one (1) labor-intensive/high stakes/leadership project and one (1) smaller/more participatory project
OR
b) three (3) smaller/more participatory projects
OR
c) or some other combination agreed upon by the faculty member and the FRST Program.
A list of these projects can be found in the Introduction to the Summary Table.
6.3.1 The faculty role includes contributions to the achievement of the University’s mission through
effective participation in governance activities, including leadership roles at the Program, School, or
University-wide levels. These contributions may require the capacity to work collaboratively with
other members of the University community, including activities related to alumni and the University
Foundation.
Elaboration: This is especially true for FRST program faculty, given our involvement with many
university-wide programs, such as The Writing Minor, QUAD, and first-year seminars. This service often
involves leadership or active participation in these areas. Also, several members of the FRST faculty
participate as associated faculty in other programs at the University. Accordingly, we value evidence of
significant and effective University service in such roles.
6.3.2 Faculty may also contribute in broader arenas such as state, regional, national or international
organizations and disciplinary/professional associations.. In addition, faculty may contribute to the
University’s public mission, including its commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging,
through service to our community, region, state or country. Per the Carnegie definition, community
engagement and service-learning that enriches scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhances
curriculum, teaching and service-learning; prepares educated, engaged citizens; strengthens democratic
values and civic responsibility; addresses critical societal issues; contributes to the public good enriches
scholarship. Community engagement and service-learning is particularly valued at Stockton.
6.3.3 The University expects faculty in their first five years of service to serve the University and
community at levels commensurate with their rank. Faculty who are tenured, have multi-year contracts,
and/or are of senior rank would be expected to have more substantial records in this area, as demonstrated
by achievements in leadership on campus, in the community, to their disciplines, and to professional 

organizations.
6.3.4 Evaluation of achievements in this area focuses on the significance of participation, the impact of
service, the scope of responsibilities, the effectiveness of participation, and contributions to the functioning,
administration, and development of the University and other entities. Clear goals, adequate preparation and
appropriate methods of providing service, significant results of the service, and reflection on the
contribution and its use to improve the quality of future service are all aspects of documenting achievement
in campus or community service. Sustained service is expected to meet the minimum requirement of this
responsibility. Compensated service is generally not sufficient to meet the minimum requirements.
However, expectations for how it can be used to demonstrate excellence may be conveyed in School and
Program standards.
6.3.5 Evidence of effectiveness in University or community service may include such items as:
6.3.5.1 One or more instances when one has used one’s professional skills or knowledge for the
benefit of the University, or of a non-University group or individual.
6.3.5.2 Contributions to professional organizations that are focused on service or professional
responsibility as opposed to scholarship, research, or artistic/creative work. For example, an
officer ship or service on a professional board may be more appropriately listed here, whereas
editing a special issue of a journal may be more appropriately listed under the section on
scholarship.
6.3.5.3 General civic or community activities to which one has contributed one’s professional skills
or a significant amount of time, talent, energy, and involvement beyond that which might be
expected by the usual citizen or member.

8.00 DEFINITION OF SCHOOL AND PROGRAM STANDARDS
The University standards outlined above are applicable to all faculty as specified, but their application requires
that they be interpreted in light of disciplines represented in each academic School and Program. Each School
and Program will develop standards interpreting the University standards within the context of its own
disciplinary and interdisciplinary traditions. Thus, Program definitions should be consistent with both School
and University standards and School standards will be consistent with the University standard. Prior to their
application, each standard will be approved through the process outlined in the local agreement “Procedure for

the Evaluation of Faculty and Library Faculty.”

8.1 A School is a unit of the University headed by an academic Dean or other academic officer with line
responsibility over faculty. For purposes of this definition, the Library shall be considered a School. Any new
School created by the University that meets this definition shall automatically be covered.
8.2 Programs are academic units of the University usually linked to their own academic degrees (majors) at the
graduate or undergraduate level. First Year Studies and other academic units to which full-time or part-time
faculty lines have been assigned are also Programs for the purpose of this policy.

9.00 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR TENURE IN ACADEMIC RANK
9.1 Tenure in academic rank in New Jersey public colleges and universities is governed by N.J.S.A. 18A:60-16,
which provides:
9.1.1 “Faculty members at a State college shall be under tenure in their academic rank, but not in any
administrative position, during good behavior, efficiency and satisfactory professional performance, as
evidenced by formal evaluation and shall not be dismissed or reduced in compensation except for
inefficiency, unsatisfactory professional performance, incapacity or other just cause and then only in the
manner prescribed by subarticle B of article 2 of chapter 6 of Title 18A of the New Jersey Statutes, after
employment in such college or by such Board of Trustees for: 

(1) 6 consecutive calendar years; or
(2) 6 consecutive academic years, together with employment at the beginning of the next academic
year; or
(3) the equivalent of more than 6 academic years within a period of any 7 consecutive academic
years."
9.2 Tenure by Exceptional Action Notwithstanding the above, a Board of Trustees, upon the recommendation of
the President of the University, may, as an exceptional action and upon a 2/3 roll call vote, grant tenure to an
individual serving as an academic administrator eligible for faculty rank after employment in such State college
for two (2) consecutive academic years.
9.3 University Perspectives on Tenure Tenure, as established by New Jersey law, is viewed by the University as
a specific condition of employment, which is afforded to those members of the academic community who
qualify for it, and is a means of making the teaching profession attractive to persons of exceptional ability.
While academic tenure is one important protection for academic freedom, it is not a shield for mediocrity,
incompetence, or academic irresponsibility. Notwithstanding the granting of tenure, a member of the faculty is
expected to attain and maintain that standard of excellence that led the University to award tenure in the first
place.
9.4 The following guidelines established by the Board of Trustees are used by the University to consider
appointments that confer tenure:
9.4.1 Tenure should be awarded only to individuals whose performance during their probationary period
gives clear evidence of the ability and willingness to make a significant and continuing contribution to the
growth and development of the institution.
9.4.2 Tenure should be awarded after presentation of positive evidence of excellence in the achievement of
University, School, and Program standards.
9.4.3 Tenure should be awarded to those who can affirmatively demonstrate the ability to fulfill professional
responsibilities, as members of the faculty and employees of the University, and not solely because negative
evidence to the contrary is not presented.
9.4.4 Assistant Professors normally receive promotion to the rank of Associate Professor concurrent with
their reappointment with tenure, unless there are unusual circumstances in the individual tenure/promotion
situation. Such unusual circumstances would include those noted in 5.1 above. 9.4.5 The University
reserves the right not to tenure a faculty member under certain circumstances, including: 9.4.5.1 fiscal
exigency as determined by the Board of Trustees;
9.4.5.2 the determination by the University that long-term patterns of enrollment and degrees granted within
the candidate’s primary program or the future of the program do not warrant the conferral of additional
tenure appointments; and/or
9.4.5.3 other institutional considerations as determined by the Board of Trustees upon recommendation of
the President.

10.00 EXPECTATIONS FOR RANK
The general criteria for faculty expectations have been outlined above. In addition, the University has specific
expectations for each rank or level. The expectations for each specific rank or level are used to evaluate
performance within that rank or level and when judging readiness for promotion or advancement to the next
higher rank or level. Generally, only performance since the last promotion will be considered in the new
evaluation. 

10.1 Teaching/Clinical/Other Specialists (Non-Tenure-Track Position III):
10.1.1 Have a minimum of a master’s degree or its equivalent in a field appropriate for the appointment,
and
10.1.2 Demonstrate a record of teaching toward excellence (in both Program and General Studies courses,
as assigned) and/or excellence in non-teaching responsibilities as assigned; consistent with the program
standards.
10.1.3 Document the capacity to contribute effectively through the use of professional skills in service to
the program, school, University, discipline, and community, as applicable.
10.2 Teaching/Clinical/Other Specialists (Non-Tenure-Track Position II and I):
10.2.1 In addition to 10.1.1, must also have attained a prominent role in their profession (e.g. CPA,
Hospital Administrator, elected official, broadcast journalist, uniformed services leader) as specified
in School and/or Program standards.
10.2.2 Document consistent excellence in teaching (in both Program and General Studies courses,
as assigned) and/or consistent excellence in non-teaching responsibilities as assigned, and
10.2.3 Document progressively important service roles and demonstrate a capacity for leadership, as
identified in their individual contracts.
10.3 Teaching/Clinical/Other Specialists (Non-Tenure-Track Position I):
10.3.1 Must have earned a terminal degree in their field,
10.3.2 In addition to 10.2.2, must also document distinction in teaching (in both Program and General
Studies courses, as assigned) and pedagogical leadership; and/or distinction in non-teaching
responsibilities and leadership as assigned
10.3.3 Document significant and sustained service roles and demonstrate leadership, as identified in
their individual contracts.
10.4 Tenure-eligible Instructors:
10.4.1 Must have earned a minimum of a master’s degree or equivalent from an accredited institution in
a field appropriate for the initial appointment. There are two types of situations where individuals hold
the rank of Instructor:
10.4.1.1 Those hired in tenure-track Instructor lines because of their teaching excellence and from whom
we do not expect scholarship or creative activity. These individuals are expected to provide evidence for
excellence in teaching (in both Program and General Studies courses), and/or excellence in non-teaching
responsibilities as assigned and service as specified in their contracts.
10.4.1.2 Those hired as Instructors because they do not yet hold the terminal degree in their field. These
individuals are expected to:
10.4.1.2.1 Actively pursue an accredited terminal degree, and 

10.4.1.2.2 Provide evidence in meeting the University and Program’s standards for excellence in
teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and service commensurate with rank of Assistant
Professor.
10.4.1.2.3 Only those hired with expectations specified in their contract of earning a terminal degree
will automatically receive rank adjustment to Assistant Professor upon documented completion of
the terminal degree provided that evaluations to that point are satisfactory.
10.5 Assistant Professors:
10.5.1. Must have a terminal degree or its equivalent from an accredited institution in a field appropriate for
the appointment, and
10.5.2 Demonstrate a record of continuous improvement in teaching (in both Program and General Studies
courses) toward excellence,
10.5.3 Demonstrate a growing record of scope and/or significance of scholarly and creative activity beyond
that presented to secure rank, and
10.5.4 Demonstrate the capacity to contribute effectively in the use of professional skills in service to the
University, discipline, and community.
10.6 Associate Professors:
10.6.1 Must achieve and maintain consistent excellence in teaching (in both Program and General Studies
courses) and demonstrate capability in pedagogical leadership, such as the ability to demonstrate
pedagogical innovations to others within or outside their program;
10.6.2 Demonstrate a record of scholarly/creative activity that is recognized by others within their discipline
or area of specialization; and
10.6.3 Document progressively important service roles and demonstrate a capacity for leadership.
10.7 Professors:
10.7.1 Must achieve a consistent record of excellence in teaching (in both Program and General Studies
courses), including curricular contributions, pedagogical leadership, and/or in activities that support the
achievement of teaching excellence throughout the University;
10.7.2 Must achieve and continue to demonstrate a record of scholarly/creative activities that are nationally
and/or internationally recognized as outstanding and significant; and
10.7.3 Must be stewards of service; they must play and continue to play a major role in significant
University initiatives, major public initiatives, or hold key positions in their professional organizations.
Professors must demonstrate that their service is recognized as outstanding in quality, effectiveness, and
scope.
12.0 DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR
12.1 Internal Appointments
12.1.1 The title of Distinguished Professor is reserved for individuals who have exceeded all standards for
Professor and have received university-wide and/or frequent recognition for their exceptional sustained

achievement in teaching and nationally/internationally recognized achievement in either
scholarship/creative activity or service.
12.1.2 Candidates must submit evidence of significant accomplishments that have been achieved since the
last promotion or range adjustment, when documenting their consistently excellent performance.
12.1.3 Unless exceptional circumstances apply, candidates for the title of Distinguished Professor must
have held the rank of Professor for ten years.
12.2 External Appointments Individuals who are not members of the University faculty may be appointed
to the University at the rank of Distinguished Professor provided that they meet the criteria for Professor
and Distinguished Professor as indicated above.
12.3 Remuneration Upon recommendation by the President to the Board of Trustees, the Board will
determine the appropriate salary adjustment upon conferral of the title and may grant other privileges
commensurate with the candidate’s qualifications and professional needs.
12.4 Continuing Expectations In addition to continuing to meet the expectations of faculty at the rank of
Professor, each recipient will be expected to engage actively in University service that has significant
impact (reviewed in consultation with the Dean and/or Provost).
13.0 CRITERIA FOR RANGE ADJUSTMENT
In accordance with the Master Agreement, full-time tenured faculty and library faculty members who meet or
exceed the merit-based criteria established by the University are eligible to be considered for and may apply for a
range adjustment within rank. As established by the University, the following criteria must be met:
13.1 The applicant is currently not eligible for promotion due to insufficient progress in meeting the criteria
required for promotion to the next rank.
13.2 Has not previously received a range adjustment within rank;
13.3 Presently exhibits, and has consistently demonstrated over the entire time since their last promotion:
13.3.1 Fulfillment of all expectations for faculty and library faculty responsibilities as specified in
2.0 of this Policy;
13.3.2 Exceptional teaching; and
13.3.3 Exceptional performance that is demonstrable of impact in either scholarship/creative
activity or service.
A Note about Faculty Plans
FRST Faculty members are expected to develop their faculty plans in a way that addresses program,
school, and institutional standards. They should consult with program members and other faculty
members for guidance as they develop their plans.
Introduction to the Summary Table
The following table summarizes the minimum requirements in teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and
service activity for tenure and promotion in the FRST program. Satisfying the minimum standards in each
of the three areas is considered to be a necessary, but not sufficient condition for reappointment, tenure,
or promotion. We expect candidates to exceed the minimum requirements significantly in at least one of
the three areas. These minimum requirements are an elaboration of, not a replacement for the University
and School standards. The program’s minimum requirements for scholarly activity as listed in the table 

refer to work that is peer reviewed, refereed, invited, or other work of demonstrable quality and impact.
In addition to the requirements listed in the table, promotion to full professor requires a consistent record
over time, indicating excellence in all areas of performance as well as an informed understanding of the
institution’s history and mission.
Consistent with the University standards, in the FRST program we recognize that faculty
members may choose diverse paths in working towards excellence in teaching, scholarly and creative
activity, and service. Therefore, although these program standards offer specific guidance to individuals
seeking tenure and/or promotion, we understand the need for some degree of flexibility in their
application. That is we recognize that exceptions may exist. In these cases, it is the faculty member's
responsibility to present a compelling argument that his or her accomplishments are equivalent to those
that meet the standards.
Anyone hired at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor will be evaluated in accordance
with the Expectations for Rank given in 10.3 or 10.4 respectively, of the Faculty Evaluation Policy
during pre-tenure reviews.
Faculty members pursuing tenure at the rank of Instructor have an increased service component
beyond membership on an average of one university-wide committee per year, in years two to five, and two
program level activities pre-tenure. Faculty members pursuing tenure at the rank of Instructor might
undertake labor-intensive/high stakes/leadership projects from this partial list:
● Assuming a supervisory role, managing tutors, internships, and/or independent studies
● Facilitating the FRST TA/Peer Mentor Program
● Overseeing the development and implementation of the high school dual-credit
developmental math program (or other FRST program)
● Writing a five-year review or completing an external accreditation process
● Playing a significant leadership role in a new program/university-wide initiative,
assessment, curriculum development, with the CTLD, or special project implementation
● Other significant labor-intensive/high stakes/leadership role as defined by faculty member
Faculty members pursuing tenure at the rank of Instructor might undertake smaller/more
participatory projects from this partial list:
● Higher precepting (50% higher than the median of precepting load of other faculty in the
program)
● Providing mentorship and professional development for new adjunct/TT faculty in FRST
● Representing Stockton University at local, regional, and national conferences and
organizations and fundraising events; through community partnerships; or through
publication or other scholarly activity
● Serving on a hiring committee
● Playing a more participatory role in a new program/university-wide initiative, assessment,
curriculum development, Teaching Circle, or special project implementation
● Other smaller/more participatory role as defined by faculty member

 

Summary of Faculty Evaluation, Tenure-Track Positions with pandemic-era totals
for fall 2020-Spring 2026 in brackets

 

 

Summary of Faculty Evaluation, Non Tenure-Track Position

Examples of program service:
● Providing mentorship and professional development for new adjunct or NTTP faculty
● Serving on a hiring committee
● Playing a more participatory role in a new program/university-wide initiative, assessment,
curriculum development, Teaching Circle, or special project implementation
● Other smaller/more participatory role as defined by faculty member.