College-wide Navigational Links | Go to Local Content
Main Content |

Intranet: Departments: Agricultural & Applied Economics

Promotion and Tenure Guidelines and Criteria

Department Approved April 29, 2015

CAES Dean Approved August 21, 2015

Provost Approved August 31, 2015

General

This document is intended to guide candidates and evaluators of those candidates toward successful outcomes of the promotion and tenure process in the UGA Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AAE). Specific criteria for promotion and tenure within AAE are outlined in this document. The starting point for understanding this process, the rules of operation, and the basic guidelines, criteria and documentation required for all candidates are given in the current version of the UGA Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure (hereafter called Guidelines or UGA Guidelines). This document is meant to be in addition to information provided in UGA Guidelines, to clarify and make more specific what is expected of candidates in AAE to successfully be promoted and/or tenured.

In all matters related to promotion and tenure, AAE will carefully adhere to the UGA Guidelines. The standards, criteria, and processes presented in this document are intended to supplement and/or extend the UGA Guidelines. All faculty members are expected to be familiar with both this PTU document and the UGA Guidelines. If an inconsistency or discrepancy is found in this document or if this PTU document does not address a certain issue, the UGA Guidelines will supersede this document. Any revisions and updates to this document and discipline-specific criteria must be accepted by the faculty within the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, and must be reviewed and approved by the dean of the College and the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost. New faculty members must be provided with the PTU document and University Guidelines. In addition, any changes or updates to the PTU document must be approved by the faculty, dean and the Provost. All revisions and approval dates must be listed in the PTU document.

Process

The process followed by the department in evaluating candidates for promotion and tenure is as follows. Each year in January, any eligible faculty member who wants to be considered for promotion and/or tenure in the upcoming cycle shall contact and discuss his/her intent with the Department Head. Assistant professors in their sixth or later year shall automatically be considered for promotion and tenure unless they specifically request not to be considered. Candidates will then prepare and provide a complete vita to the department head by the end of March. Eligible department faculty members shall hold a Apreliminary consideration@ meeting in April or May to discuss the qualifications of all candidates according to these departmental guidelines and the University guidelines for promotion and tenure. After discussion, the eligible faculty shall vote by secret ballot in favor or against the candidate moving forward to construction of the full dossier. The department head shall convey the vote total to each candidate as soon as practical. This preliminary consideration vote is not binding and candidates can choose to proceed no matter what the vote is. Candidates who move forward for formal consideration shall cooperate with the department head to secure external evaluations and to complete the promotion/tenure dossier. In August or September (depending on university schedules and deadlines), all eligible faculty shall meet again in order to discuss the qualifications of all candidates according to these departmental guidelines and the University guidelines for promotion and tenure. After discussion, the eligible faculty shall vote by secret ballot in favor or against the candidate being awarded promotion and/or tenure as appropriate. This shall be the official vote, recorded as part of the promotion and tenure dossier. The department head shall reveal his/her vote at the time of the vote tally and report the vote total to each candidate as soon as practical, which is required to be within three working days. Under the principal of flow, the promotion/tenure process then continues according to the University guidelines unless the candidate indicates he/she does not wish to be considered further.

Annual evaluations and third year review will follow the UGA Guidelines Sections VI.B and VI.C, respectively. Prior to meeting with the department head for the annual performance evaluation, the faculty member is required to submit a detailed report of activities for the previous year. Failure to provide a report to the department head will result in an unsatisfactory evaluation. The evaluation is based on a quantitative assessment of several key metrics related to the number of classes taught; the course evaluations by the students; the number of undergraduate advisees; a composite index that accounts for the quantity, quality, and co-authorship of refereed journal article publications; presentations at major professional conferences; the funding and mentorship/direction of graduate students; the amount of external grants and contract resources secured; major extension/public service outputs and activities; and citizenship and professional service. The faculty member's performance is assessed relative to individual targets based on the departmental averages weighted by her/his appointment split.

General Expectations

Certain expectations apply to all candidates regardless of appointment. All candidates should be evaluated against their job assignments, as documented by the department head. Evaluation relative to job assignment includes consideration of the percentage of time assigned to each of the three missions (teaching, research, and service), and the particular job responsibilities assigned (specific courses, research areas, extension responsibilities, etc.). Every faculty member is expected to participate in Departmental, College, University activities and/or committees as well as provide appropriate service to the University, professional groups, and society at large. All faculty members are expected to secure external funding as a tool which fosters excellence in their scholarly programs. Success in securing funding should be followed by demonstrated success of the funded program. AAE feels that both competitive and noncompetitive grants are important achievements. Competitive funding can be a sign of high quality research ideas, while non-competitive funding can signal a strong reputation in that area. In all three missions (teaching, research, and service), advancing a scholarly program in the candidate's areas of responsibility is the central achievement to be evaluated.

Split appointments are the norm in AAE with faculty time split between two of the three areas of research, teaching and service. When evaluating candidates for promotion and tenure using the above guidelines, a faculty member's assigned time in each area must be given due consideration as should the appointment mix. Whenever a candidate has even a small appointment in research, teaching or extension, the candidate must demonstrate an active Research, Extension (Service) or Teaching program and not simply a budgetary appointment of convenience.

Contributions to Teaching

The Standard (refer to UGA Guidelines Section III.A unless otherwise stated)

Effectiveness in teaching is reflected by motivating students to become proficient in their understanding and application of economics and related areas covered in AAE courses. Such effectiveness will be determined through the development of a teaching portfolio consisting of the sources listed in the University's appointment, promotion, and tenure guidelines. Within these guidelines, AAE strongly encourages documentation in Categories 3 (Effectiveness

shown by student evaluation and accomplishments), 4 (Effectiveness shown by peer evaluation of expertise in instruction), and 9 (Successful integration of teaching and research or teaching and service in ways that benefit students) for demonstrating a minimum level of excellence and teaching scholarship.

Documentation (refer to UGA Guidelines Section III.A unless otherwise stated)

To document effectiveness shown by student evaluation and accomplishments, a candidate is expected to show accomplishments particularly in items 3a (student teaching evaluations) and 3g (effective direction of graduate study) from the UGA Guidelines. For demonstrating effectiveness shown by peer evaluation of expertise in instruction, a candidate should include documentation along the lines of item 4a (peer evaluations) and may augment this with honors or special recognitions for teaching accomplishments. Course reviews by the department head with input from the undergraduate coordinator, graduate coordinator, or qualified senior faculty reviewers appointed by the head, as well as information developed from interviews with students, may also be used for documenting effectiveness. To show successful integration of teaching and research or teaching and service in ways that benefit students (category 9 - integration of teaching and research or service), a candidate should document the development of a scholarly program which funnels current research discoveries and real-world applications into the classroom, including service activities.

Promotion to Associate and Full Professor: No difference in standards is deemed necessary for different ranks of promotion.

Tenure: All of the above with additional documentation addressing the University's "continuing and long-range need for what the candidate for tenure may be expected to do" and likeliness that the candidate will continue to be an active and productive scholar over the long period time that tenure supposes (UGA Guidelines Section X).

Contributions to Research

The Standard

For the purposes of promotion and tenure, UGA Guidelines Section I specific that “a faculty member must demonstrate excellence in the faculty member's area(s) of assignment.” With respect to contributions to research, the Guidelines (Section III.B) specify that research activities must demonstrate “high quality” that distinguishes between “routine” and “outstanding” as judged by the candidate's peers at The University of Georgia and elsewhere. The Guidelines state that the principal standard should be “quality rather than quantity.”

Quality and scholarship are paramount. Consistent with these Guidelines, AAE candidates for promotion and tenure with a research appointment must be engaged in high quality research that contributes to an overall excellent level of performance in the candidate's area(s) of assignment. Depending on the quality mix, candidates are expected to publish about 1.5-2 journal articles per year, with multiple being in the very top journals of our discipline (lesser numbers might be acceptable in cases of exceptional quality). For the case of candidates with terminal (PhD) degrees in Agricultural, Resource, Environmental or General Economics, the top journals are those rated as A1, A2 or A3 in Appendix A. While many of the journals rated A- or lower are certainly competitive and prestigious, and thus valued for tenure and promotion, they are not generally considered as the very top journals of our discipline. The quality of journals which are not on that list can be documented by methods such as inclusion of the journal in the social science citation index, journal impact factors, or citations of the candidate's published papers. Although research activities should always be of high quality, the relative weight placed on measurable research outputs (e.g., refereed journal articles) when evaluating a candidate's overall level of performance should be commensurate with the candidate's assigned percentage of time in research.

Documentation (refer to UGA Guidelines Section III.B unless otherwise stated)

The UGA Guidelines (Section III.B) specify legitimate categories (or sources) of research evidence. AAE candidates for promotion and tenure should consult this list and include documentation of all relevant categories in the dossier. AAE candidates should place their primary emphasis on documentation of evidence for Category 1 (“Research and/or scholarly publications”). Other categories considered important include Category 5 (“Funded projects, grants, commissions and contracts), Category 6 (“Presentation of research papers before technical and professional meetings”), as well as the number of graduate students directed and funded. The candidate should have multiple journal articles. An equitable percentage of journal articles published should have the candidates the sole or senior author. At least one of those articles should be published in a top (A3 or higher) journal (e.g., about half of two-author papers, one-third of three-author papers, etc.). Sole means only one author and senior means that the individual is formally recognized by all co-authors as the lead and most important contributor to the research project. Papers published with the candidate's graduate students are traditionally counted as senior authored papers when the graduate student's name is placed first. Similarly, at least some grant funding should include the candidate as PI or co-PI.

Promotion to Associate Professor: A starting point for promotion to associate professor is evidence of progress to correct any negative reviews found in the Third-Year Review. As indicated in the UGA Guidelines (Section IV), candidates must demonstrate “clear and convincing evidence of emerging stature as regional or national authorities unless their work assignments are specifically at the local level”. AAE considers refereed publications to be the most important and widely-accepted indicator of this emerging status as a regional or national authority. For guidance with respect to journal quality, Appendix A provides a relative ranking of journals developed and approved by the AAE faculty. Publications will also be evaluated on content, contribution, and the quality and appropriateness of the journals (or other outlets) relative to the candidate's appointment and/or field of study. The quality and appropriateness of journals should be documented by the candidate and the external evaluators. Although publication emphasis should always be on quality and contributions to a focused scholarly program, candidates with higher research appointments are expected to demonstrate higher levels of refereed journal article output commensurate with the assigned time in research. Selected and invited presentations at regional and national professional meetings and conferences, the number of graduate students directed and funded, and both competitive and non-competitive extramural funding are also important indicators of emerging status as a regional and national authority or scholar.

Promotion to Professor: As indicated in the UGA Guidelines (Section IV), candidates must demonstrate “clear and convincing evidence of high levels of attainment in the criteria appropriate to their work assignments and the missions of their units. Unless the candidates' assignments are specifically regional, they should demonstrate national or international recognition in their fields and the likelihood of maintaining that stature.” The AAE Department considers national-level refereed journal articles to be the most important and widely-accepted indicator of a national or international reputation as a scholar in their field. For guidance with respect to journal quality, Appendix A provides a relative ranking of journals developed and approved by the AAE faculty. The quality and appropriateness of journals should also be documented by the candidate and the external evaluators. For promotion to Professor, books and book chapters (especially invited chapters) may also be important indicators of national and international scholarly status. Selected and especially invited presentations at national and international professional meetings and conferences, the number of graduate (especially PhD) students directed and funded, and both competitive and non-competitive extramural funding are also important indicators of national and international scholarly status. By this stage of a career, documentation of impact is highly desirable. Possible ways to document impact include: citation indices, evidence of others adopting research results, or other means of estimating or relating impact.

Tenure: All of the above with additional documentation should address the University's “continuing and long-range need for what the candidate for tenure may be expected to do” and likeliness that the candidate will continue to be an active and productive scholar over the long period time that tenure supposes (Section X).

Contributions to Service (Extension)

The Standard

The UGA Guidelines (Section III.C) state that "Service to society refers to the function of applying academic expertise to the direct benefit of external audiences in support of unit and University missions." Such service is further defined as "a direct application of knowledge to, and a substantive link with, significant human needs and societal problems, issues, and concerns.”

Documentation

The UGA Guidelines (Section III.C) lists activities which are evidence of an effective service program. Consistent with the Guidelines and more specifically candidates for promotion and tenure with an Extension appointment in the AAE should especially demonstrate the following:

Program Development: Evidence of recognizing clientele needs within the state of Georgia and leadership in developing educational programs, information, and applied research to address those needs.

Visibility and Impact: Evidence of visibility and impact may include but is not limited to meetings conducted, workshops and short-courses developed, technical assistance and consultation, publications, newsletters, web-based communications, slide presentations, computerized decision aids, popular press articles, mass media, and in-service training provided for county Extension agents and other professionals.

Applied Research: Development of a published applied research program that supports the Extension education program and meets the needs of Georgia clientele. Outlets for applied research may include but are not limited to Extension and Departmental bulletins, research reports, abstracts, conference proceedings, refereed journal articles or other peer reviewed publications, professional papers, and papers given at industry conferences.

Grants and Contracts: Ability to attract grant funds to develop and support extension education programming and applied research.

Performance should be commensurate with the candidate's area of responsibility and appointment.

Promotion to Associate and Full Professor: The Guidelines (Section IV) state the criteria for promotion to Associate Professor as "clear and convincing evidence of emerging stature as a regional or national authority unless their work assignment is specifically at the local or state level." AAE also recognizes that some Extension faculty have commodity-specific duties. Therefore, what is considered "regional" and "national" should be in consideration of the commodity, if applicable.

The Guidelines (Section IV) state the criteria for promotion to Professor as "clear and convincing evidence of high levels of attainment in the criteria appropriate to their work assignments and mission of their units. Unless the candidate's assignment is specifically regional, he/she should demonstrate national or international recognition in their fields and the likelihood of maintaining that stature." For promotion to Full Professor, evidence of performance since promotion to Associate Professor should demonstrate clear evidence of national recognition (an increased record of accomplishment recognized on a national scale) and clear evidence of excellence in his/her area of responsibility.

Indicators of regional and national recognition in the context of Extension (Service) may include:

  • Invited presentations at meetings or conferences of industry and commodity organizations
  • Papers or abstracts published in conference proceedings
  • Participation and leadership in regional and national Extension program development including conferences, meetings, symposia, and educational materials
  • Participation and leadership in applied research
  • Invited articles and citations in popular press and industry outlets
  • Publication in peer reviewed journals including those of other disciplines or other peer reviewed publications
  • Invited presentations before professional societies
  • Awards and special recognitions for Extension (Service) programs and contributions
  • Grant funding with an increased trend as the PI on projects.

Tenure: Tenure is based on "the University's continuing and long-range need for what the candidate for tenure may be expected to do" and "whether or not candidates are likely to continue to be active and productive scholars over the extended period of time that tenure supposes" (Guidelines, Section X. D).

Appendix A

Relative Journal Quality Rankings

Common Disciplinary and Field Journals Rank
American Economic Review A1
Econometrica A1
European Economic Review A1
International Economic Review A1
Journal of Economic Theory A1
Journal of Financial Economics A1
Journal of Marketing A1
Journal of Political Economy A1
Journal of the American Statistical Assoc. A1
The Economic Journal A1
The Journal of Finance A1
The Quarterly Journal of Economics A1
The Review of Economic Studies A1
American Economic Journal: Applied Econ. A2
American Economic Journal: Economic Pol. A2
American Economic Journal: Macro. A2
American Economic Journal: Micro. A2
Experimental Economics A2
Games and Economic Behavior A2
Journal of Development Economics A2
Journal of Econometrics A2
Journal of Economic Geography A2
Journal of Economic Literature A2
Journal of Economic Perspectives A2
Journal of Health Economics A2
Journal of International Economics A2
Journal of Labor Economics A2
Journal of Law and Economics A2
Journal of Management A2
RAND Journal of Economics A2
The Journal of Law and Economics A2
The Review of Economics and Statistics A2
American Journal of Agricultural Economics A3
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management A3
Annals of Statistics A3
Biometrics A3
Biometrika A3
Decision Sciences A3
Econometric Theory A3
Econometric Reviews A3
Economic Theory A3
Health Economics A3
Journal of Applied Econometrics A3
Journal of Business and Economic Stat. A3
Journal of Economic Behavior and Org. A3
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control A3
Journal of Economic Growth A3
Journal of Human Resources A3
Journal of Marketing Research A3
Journal of Monetary Economics A3
Journal of Money, Credit and Banking A3
Journal of Productivity Analysis A3
Journal of Public Economics A3
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty A3
Journal of the European Economic Assoc. A3
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A3
Journal of Urban Economics A3
Management Science A3
Marketing Science A3
Oxford Economic Papers A3
Quantitative Economics A3
Review of Economic Dynamics A3
Review of Finance A3
The Journal of Economic History A3
Theoretical Economics A3
Agricultural Economics A-
Ecological Economics A-
Economic Development and Cultural Change A-
Economics Letters A-
Energy Economics A-
Environment and Planning A-
Environmental and Resource Economics A-
European Review of Agricultural Economics A-
Food Policy A-
Journal of Consumer Research A-
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization A-
Journal of Empirical Finance A-
Journal of Regional Science A-
Journal of the Assoc. of Environ. & Res. Economists A-
Land Economics A-
Land Use Policy A-
Regional Science and Urban Economics A-
Resource and Energy Economics A-
Spatial Economic Analysis A-
AJAE Invited Paper B+
Applied Economics B+
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Res. Economics B+
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics B+
Energy Policy B+
Environment and Development Economics B+
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics B+
Journal of Agricultural Economics B+
Journal of Futures Markets B+
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy B+
Agribusiness: An International Journal B
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review B
Agricultural Finance Review B
Growth and Change B
International Rev. of Environ. & Res. Econ. B
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics B
Journal of Environmental Management B
Marine Resource Economics B
Review of Environmental Economics & Policy B
Water Resources Research B
AgBio Forum C+
Choices C+
International Food and Agribusiness Management Rev. C+
Journal of Agribusiness C+
Journal of Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization C+
Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Market. C+
Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development C+
Journal of Farm Managers & Rural Appraisers C+
Journal of Food Distribution Research C+
Review of Regional Studies C+
Water Resources Bulletin C+
Guidelines for Assessing Non-Disciplinary Journals Rank
Thomas Reuters ISI Indexed*
Impact Factor > 8 A2
Impact Factor > 5 A-
Impact Factor > 2 B+
Impact Factor < 2 B
Other Index Services
Any or No Impact Factor C

*Certain non-disciplinary journals will be A2 ranked when they are recognized as being world class in particular fields, e.g. Science, Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, American Journal of Comparative Law.

top