Criteria, performance expectations, and Department procedures relating to Faculty Excellence Awards | Department of Geography Handbook | Kent State University

Criteria, performance expectations, and Department procedures relating to Faculty Excellence Awards

  1. Overview

    Merit Awards are established and awarded pursuant to the applicable CBA.   Procedures and timelines for determining Faculty Excellence Awards for any given year shall be conducted in accordance with guidelines issued by the Office of the Provost.

    Merit awards are intended to reward exemplary professional performance, that is, what is done beyond what is expected as part of one’s workload obligations.  This bar will vary from one faculty member to the next, dependent upon differences in his/her workload assignments.  Thus, a faculty member who receives greater workload equivalency for research activities has a higher bar for meritorious work than someone whose workload equivalency is less.

    Faculty must use the standard departmental form, to be provided by the Chair, and provide all requisite supporting documentation, in order to be eligible for consideration.  The period of time from which merit awards will be determined will be announced in advance, and faculty may only count activity that occurred while he/she was part of the bargaining unit.

    For the sake of transparency, merit awards will be apportioned using the formula detailed below.  The departmental pool of funds will be allocated by direct proportion to the total score earned in each of the three categories of scholarship, teaching, and service, as outlined below.  These three categories of scholarship, teaching, and service are divided into subcategories in order to organize the presentation of information by faculty and to facilitate the evaluation by the FAC and Chair. The subcategories and their weighting factor (in parentheses) follow:

     

    Scholarship (55% of total award)

    1.    Publications (4)

    2.    Grants (3)

    3.    Professional contributions (1)

    4.    Presentations (1)

    5.    Other (variable)

     

    Teaching (25% of total award)

    6.    Instruction and awards (3)

    7.    Theses, dissertations & other individual supervision (2)

    8.    Other (variable)

     

    Service (20% of total award)

    9.    Department, College, and University service (3)

    10.  External service (2)

    11. Other (variable)

     

    The information to be provided in each subcategory is described in the following pages.  Each faculty member's activity in each subcategory will be evaluated by the FAC and Chair and will be rated according to the following five-point scale:

    0:    No activity in the subcategory

    1:    Activity that is commensurate with what is expected, given his/her workload

    2:    Some activity of meritorious quality

    3:    Very good activity of clearly meritorious quality, above average

    4:    Considerable activity of highly meritorious quality

    These ratings will be multiplied by a weighting factor (indicated in parentheses above) and summed within each major category in order to determine each faculty's rating in that category.  The FAC then will discuss their ratings in order to determine a final combined rank ordering in each major category.

  2. Scholarship Activity Evaluation Metrics

    1. Publications

      To have achieved meritorious work in publications, the faculty member must show a substantial number of publications in high quality outlets. The following works will be considered:

      • Refereed journal article
      • Books (authored): scholarly, monograph
      • Books (edited)
      • Book chapter
      • Edited special issue or conference proceedings
      • Other: book review, refereed communication, technical report, encyclopedia entry

      Greater emphasis is placed on first-, corresponding-, and/or sole-authored publications, as well as highly visible publications in well-regarded outlets, such as reputable presses or journals with a high impact factor and broad readership.  

      Each work will be considered only once.  Each faculty member may choose whether to have a work considered when it is "in press" or when it appears in print.  It is the faculty member's responsibility to provide written verification that "in press" works have been accepted in final form by the editor or publisher.  New and recent faculty should indicate explicitly what aspects of the research in each publication were performed at Kent in any cases where there might be uncertainty.

      The contribution to each publication should be justified.  For each publication with multiple authors, the faculty must indicate what percentage of the total workload he/she contributed to:

      • The idea conceptualization and design;
      • The work performed, both data collection and analysis;
      • The supervision of the work; and

      The writing of the publication.

    2. Grants/Contracts

      Meritorious activity in this subcategory is shown by receipt of external grants and/or contracts in which the faculty member is PI or co-I. For each grant/contract, the faculty must provide the following information:

      • Faculty role (e.g., P.I., Co-P.I., Senior Personnel)
      • Agency
      • Title
      • Amount (overall and percentage associated with the faculty member)
      • Duration
      • Contribution to Department (e.g., GAs, equipment/ supplies, overhead)

       The scope of the award (as evidenced via the information provided in the bullet points above) substantially influences how meritorious it is. Grant/contract work is generally acknowledged for a merit period in which the award is initiated only. A supplemental award on an existing award can be counted as a new and separate award.

    3. Professional Contributions

      Meritorious activity in this category is identified through considerable activity in positions that acknowledge the faculty member as a leading scholar in his/her field:

      • Special awards for scholarly or professional achievement
      • Journal editor, consulting editor, and editorial boards (name of journal and position; number of manuscripts handled)
      • Grant review panels (name of panel and agency; number of applications reviewed)
      • Other scholarly reviews; for each review list the name of the journal, agency, publisher, etc.; indicate how many reviews were performed for each source: journals, grants (non-paneled), book reviews for publisher.

      Supporting relevant documentation, along with self-assessment in terms of level of effort, for each contribution is required.

    4. Presentations

      Meritorious activity in presentations is acknowledged through a substantial presence in the discipline in terms of external visibility.  The following items will be considered:

      • Invited papers at scholarly meetings
      • Papers presented at scholarly meetings
      • Scientific papers presented locally (state, University, etc.)
      • Session moderator
      • Symposium organizer
      • Colloquium at another university

      A greater emphasis is placed upon presentations that were invited, juried at highly selective conferences, and high profile venues.

    5. Other Research/Scholarly Activities Not Considered Above

      Faculty may also submit to have additional forms of scholarship, not identified above, count for Merit Awards.  He/she must describe the activity and argue for a weight commensurate with those for similar tasks in this evaluation section.

  3. Teaching Activity Evaluation Metrics

    1. Instruction and awards

      Meritorious activity in teaching is identified through a consistent demonstration of high-quality dedication to instruction, as is evidenced through the following means:

      Teaching recognition as evidenced by the following:

      • National teaching award
      • University teaching award or finalist
      • Teaching development grant from KSU
      • College teaching award or finalist
      • Student Evaluation of Instruction scores
      • Peer reviews

      Faculty must list courses taught organized by term; the departmental office will provide results from student evaluations.  Faculty may also add documentation of innovations used in the classroom for consideration.

      Teaching enrichment and development activities as evidenced by the following:

      • Attending continuing education workshops
      • Developing new courses
      • Extensive revision of existing courses

      Documentation and justification must be provided for any of these activities, and where relevant, support on how the activity is related to teaching.

    2. Thesis, Dissertation and Other Individual Supervision

      Supervision is considered meritorious with evidence of exceptional mentorship in terms of graduate students being productive and completing their degree in a timely manner.  Students are counted only upon degree completion.  The faculty member should provide a list of students for which he/she served as:

      • thesis or dissertation advisor or co-advisor
      • thesis or dissertation committee member
      • senior honors thesis advisor or co-advisor
      • honors thesis committee member
      • Independent Study Supervision (does not include advisees)

      The number of years to degree completion should also be provided for any graduate students for which the faculty member is advisor or co-advisor.  Student publications and presentations for which the faculty member served as a mentor should also be listed.

    3. Other Research/Scholarly Activities Not Considered Above

      Faculty may also submit to have additional forms of teaching, not identified above, count for Merit Awards.  He/she must describe the activity and argue for a weight commensurate with those for similar tasks in this evaluation section.

  4. Service Activity Evaluation Metrics

    1. Departmental, College, and University Service

      Meritorious activity in service is documented by extensive, high-quality service, in particular where he/she takes on a leadership role

      The following items will be considered:

      • committee chair
      • committee member
      • other (e.g., student organization advisor)

      Supporting relevant documentation, along with self-assessment in terms of level of effort, for each contribution is required.

    2. External Service

      Meritorious activity in service is documented by extensive, high-quality service, in particular where he/she takes on a leadership role or partakes in outreach activities.

      The following items will be considered:

      • office of professional/scientific association
      • membership on outside committees and panels (e.g., site review team)
      • professional development not appropriate to be listed under research/scholarship
      • unpaid consulting for outside organizations (list name of organizations)
      • lectures and presentations to community organizations

      Supporting relevant documentation, along with self-assessment in terms of level of effort, for each contribution is required.