We expect that faculty will produce an average of 2 publications per year, at least 80% of which are published in high quality refereed scholarly journals. Each article should note two indicators of excellence (e.g., ISI ranking, acceptance rates, citations, awards, and other rankings such as the h-index or SCI). Articles published in ranked (i.e., Clarivate Analytics, formerly known as Thomson-Reuters / ISI) journals are particularly valued, with the expectation that approximately half of the minimum expected journal publications should be published in ranked journals.

Candidates should demonstrate scholarly independence. Solo authored work clearly establishes research independence, as does first-authored work on collaborative publications and collaborative publication with students. Though it is common for faculty to continue to work with their doctoral advisors, a pattern of publication in which the candidate is routinely junior author on teams that include former advisors and mentors does not adequately contribute to a scholarly identity and thus is not sufficient for promotion and tenure.

We expect faculty to publish in communication journals but also value publication in high-quality interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary journals.

Faculty may also partially meet the research expectation through the publication of an original scholarly book published by a University Press or other quality academic publisher. Publication of a scholarly book will fulfil 20% of the minimum publication expectation.

The above guidelines establish a minimum expectation of 10 publications for promotion and tenure based on a five-year calculation (2 pubs. X 5 yrs. = 10 publications). Though we prioritize the publication of peer-reviewed journal articles, we also reward other scholarly endeavors and will count research output such as book chapters, grant applications, and research software development as contributing to the minimum research expectation. We expect an 80% “rule of thumb” distribution between journal articles/scholarly books and other research output. This 80%/20% rule is such that a minimum of 8 journal articles (or 6 journal articles and one scholarly book) can combine with other forms of research output (i.e., grant applications, research software development, book chapters). Approximately 4 of the minimum expected 8 journal publications should be published in ranked journals.

Faculty may partially meet the minimum research expectation through external grant activity. A grant proposal submitted to a federal agency will constitute an important research contribution. Such a submission can replace a journal article in the fulfilment of the minimum research expectation. Up to 20% of the minimum research expectation can be met through competitive grant seeking. Although federal grants are preferred, significant foundation grants will also be considered. As with scholarship, leadership is a key criterion.

The development and publication of academic research software can also constitute an important scholarly contribution. Candidates who develop and publish academic software can have this output count toward achieving their minimum research expectation. A piece of software will be evaluated similarly to journal articles in terms of leadership and evidence of distinction (e.g., broader adoption, citation). Software development can count toward the fulfillment of no more than 10% of the minimum research expectation. Software should be demonstrably relevant to the candidate’s scholarly identity.

We also recognize that faculty will occasionally author chapters in books and other edited volumes. These publications can be important opportunities for scholars to showcase their expertise and share the results of their research. Thus, we will count scholarly publications in edited volumes (e.g., edited books, proceedings, encyclopedias) as equivalent to half (50%) of a single journal article. Such scholarly output can account for no more than 20% of the minimum research expectation (e.g., four book chapters can substitute for two journal articles).

Although the entire record is evaluated, emphasis is placed on original work published while at the University of Missouri. Research published the year of the initial tenure-track appointment at MU will count toward the minimum research requirement.

If a faculty member hired in a new tenure-track appointment wishes to count work completed prior to this appointment, be it at a previous institution or as part of a non-tenure track (i.e., post-doctoral, teaching, or clinical) appointment at the University of Missouri, that arrangement must be documented within the offer letter through the process of granting work and/or time toward the probationary period. If there is no such arrangement in the offer letter, then the focus of consideration will remain on work completed at MU.

It is particularly important for annual reviews (and the third year review) to make clear to probationary faculty how well they are meeting department expectations for research and publication, and to make specific recommendations to remedy weaknesses.

Satisfying the minimum requirements does not constitute a strong case for successful promotion and tenure, nor does it constitute sufficient productivity for an early promotion and tenure review.

In the case of recommendations for promotion and/or tenure before the sixth year (CRR 320.035), the College of Arts and Science defines ‘truly exceptional’ as having significantly exceeded the expectations for promotion and/or tenure. Achieving the expectations for promotion and/or tenure sooner than expected is not sufficient evidence of a ‘truly exceptional’ case.

A truly exceptional case may be established if a candidate publishes 200% of the minimum research expectation, or exceeds the research expectation while receiving a significant federal grant. When evaluating truly exceptional cases for early promotion and/or tenure emphasis will be placed on the quality and leadership of a candidate’s research output.

Revised Policy Approved by Faculty 12/4/2019