Revised 5/15/2010

{View Current Guidelines}

In the interest of best serving our students’ and other constituencies’ needs, it is common practice to:

1. Hire instructional specialists, and,
2. Modify the workload of tenure track faculty to provide an appropriate mix of teaching, research and service responsibilities relative to career stage and unique capabilities.

The consequence of this practice is that the assigned workload for teaching, research and service will vary from faculty member to faculty member.

Thus, it is imperative that any system of allocating performance based salary increases take into account the school's overall objectives and the unique contributions of individual faculty. The following protocol for determining and allocating performance based salary increases is designed to support that objective.

Overall, the approach is based upon a comparative evaluation of performance across peers within an area of responsibility and a weighting of each area of contribution in the determination of the total increase.

The steps are as follows:

(1)   Divide the total performance pool into three categories – teaching, research, and service. Percentages for each category will be determined by averaging the respective faculty workload percentages.

(2)   Within each category, conduct an evaluation of faculty as follows:

a.  Teaching and Advising

1. Course Preparations: Count the number of different course preparations. Add 1 equivalent course preparation for each honor’s thesis supervised. Locate each faculty member in Table 1 and award the appropriate category points.
2. Student Credit Hours Generated: Calculate the number of SCH generated by each faculty member and compare to the median SCH of all faculty members. Locate each faculty member in Table 1 based on his/her percentile score and award the appropriate category points.
3. Course Evaluations: Calculate the median evaluation score for all faculty members on a select set of student course evaluation questions. Locate each faculty member in Table 1 based on his/her percentile score and award the appropriate category points. Only those course sections that receive >=50 percent response rate will be used to compute the average evaluation score. Example: a faculty member teaches 5 course sections with >=50 percent response rate in 4 of the 5. The evaluation score equals total evaluation score for 4 course sections divided by 5.
4. Calculate a composite teaching score by weighting each individual’s category scores 40% course preparation, 30% SCH, and 30% course evaluation.

   Table 1

   Category	Course Preps Equivalents 40% weight	SCH and Course Evaluation Percentiles 30% weight for SCH and 30% for Evals
   1	1 to 1.5	50-59
   2	>1.5 to 2.5	60-69
   3	>2.5 to 3.5	70-79
   4	>3.5 to 4.5	80-89
   5	>4.5	>89

5. Multiply the number of points awarded by the workload percentage.
6. Rank the faculty from n to 1 based on the weighted teaching points earned in item iv.
7. vii. Sum the total number of ranking points generated across all faculty and divide the number of points into the funds available for teaching merit to determine a dollar value per teaching point.
8. Determine each faculty members’ teaching performance amount by multiplying the number of individual faculty member’s teaching points by the value per teaching point.

b.   For research

1. For the research active faculty, determine the research contribution of each research-responsible faculty member, using the intellectual contributions measurement structure. As specific weights have yet to be established by the faculty for each aspect of intellectual contribution, the following values will be assigned in a consistent fashion.
   1. Each Tier I publication (either at a stage of accepted for publication or appearing in print) will receive 20 points.
   2. Each Tier II publication (either at a stage of accepted for publication or appearing in print) will receive 10 point.
   3. Each funded research project will receive 5-10 points contingent upon significance.
   4. Each paper appearing in or accepted for publication in a meeting proceedings will receive 2-5 points.
   5. Chapters in books, articles in non Tier I or Tier II journals will receive 1-8 point.
   6. Each presentation will receive 2 point per presentation.
2. Multiply the number of points awarded by the workload percentage.
3. Faculty members with research responsibility are expected to have an active program of research. At a minimum, it is expected that the faculty member will have draft versions of papers or teaching tools that maybe submitted for publication. Absent evidence of this work, a faculty member with research responsibilities will receive a 0 score for research contribution and will be ineligible for receiving an allocation from the portion of the performance pool allocated to research achievement.
4. Rank the faculty from n to 1 based on the weighted points earned in item ii.
5. Sum the total number of ranking points generated across all faculty and divide the number of points into the funds available for research merit to determine a dollar value per research point.
6. Determine each faculty members’ research performance amount by multiplying the number of individual faculty member’s research points by the value per research point

c.   For service

1. For faculty with service responsibilities, determine the service contribution of each service-responsible faculty member, using the categories and point values in Appendix A. Items in Appendix A are not all inclusive. Each faculty member may provide documentation of other activities that should receive points in accordance with the 7 listed service categories.
2. Determine the individual service points by multiplying the service contribution score by the service workload weight.
3. Rank the faculty from n to 1 based on the weighted points earned in item ii.
4. Sum the total number of service ranking points generated across all faculty and divide the number of points into the funds available for service merit to determine a dollar value per service point.
5. Determine each faculty members’ service performance amount by multiplying the number of individual faculty member’s service points by the value per research point.

(3)   Determine individual faculty member total performance dollars by summing across the three categories – teaching, research, and service for each individual faculty member.

Appendix A

Service Categories

Examples include: Participating in admitted student visit days, meeting with board of advisors over dinner, or participating in a journal’s annual editorial board meeting

Examples include: Larger role in Honor’s Day (e.g., active in choosing award winners, writing a bio, attending the Honor’s Day event, and presenting one or more awards), presenting a research paper at the BSAD brown bag research series, serving on an expert panel discussion for a University-wide event, or reviewing a paper submission for a scholarly conference.

Examples include: Organizing a speaker to come to campus, taking a student club on a road trip, or reviewing a more complex and time-consuming paper submitted to a journal.

Examples include: Advising a school or university club.

Examples include: Serving on ad hoc or standing committees at the School or University level, or serving on a committee or board of a professional association.

Examples include: Serving on a particularly demanding ad hoc or standing committee, or serving as a committee chair in a manner that requires more time than for regular committee members.

Examples include: Serving on the Faculty Senate Professional Standards Committee. Faculty members who believe they deserve more than 5 points for this category of service activity will need to provide sufficient justification and evidence for the request.

1. One Time Service Event – Minor: 1 point
2. One Time Service Event – Moderate: 2 points
3. One Time Service Event – Major: 3 points
4. Ongoing Service Activity – Minor: 2 points
5. Ongoing Service Activity – Moderate: 3 points
6. Ongoing Service Activity – Major: 4 points
7. Ongoing Service Activity – Extraordinary: 5 or more points