Criteria, Performance Expectations and Department/School Procedures Relating to Merit Awards | The Fashion School Handbook | Kent State University

Criteria, Performance Expectations and Department/School Procedures Relating to Merit Awards

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

As determined by the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the University establishes additional salary increment pools in specified years to recognize documented Merit in achievement, performance, and contribution.  Three broadly-defined areas of demonstrated Merit, consistent with the mission of the School are recognized:  (1) documented meritorious performance in research and/or creative activities; (2) documented meritorious performance in teaching; and (3) documented meritorious service (CBA 2015, XII.4.A, p. 59).

The Fashion School determined that following percentage of the merit award pool shall be used to support awards in each of three (3) categories; 50% for Research, 30% for Teaching, and 20% for Service.  If any the category has no qualified candidate(s), the available funding of that category is to be distributed between the other categories in the categories’ pre-assigned ratio.

When the Dean notifies the Director of the amount of money allocated to the School from the College Of The Arts salary increment pool, the Director will divide the amount into the designated categories as specified in the Collective Bargaining Agreement in effect at the time, reserving 10% for appeals.  If there are no appeals, the reserved amount will be divided in weighted percentage to the applicants.  Appeals are limited to a maximum of the 10% reserved.

In years when the Merit Awards are available, the FAC will establish, in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Office of the Provost, the departmental application process, evaluative criteria, and method for distribution of the awards approximately one month prior to the university deadlines. 

  1. Minimum Levels of Performance

    To be eligible for a Merit Award within the Fashion School, a faculty member must exceed the minimum threshold performance levels in the area under which the application is being considered.  The following represents the School’s understanding of threshold performance.  A minimum average score of "3" must be achieved in each category in order to receive funding in one of three categories.

    All Tenure Track faculty are required to review and score submitted materials for Merit Awards.  For all three categories, the following scale must be used: (use integers only – no decimals)

    a score of 5 (excellent)

    a score of 4 (very good)

    a score of 3 (average)

    a score of 2 (fair)

    a score of 1 (poor )

    a score of 0 (no/inadequate activity or no documentation submitted)

    1. Research and/or Creative Activity

      All faculty members in the School are expected to produce records of scholarship that reflect their disciplinary foci and the attributes of an individual faculty member’s scholarly activity may vary across sub-disciplines.  Indicators of a faculty member’s scholarship record include both quality and quantity of exhibitions and/or published work.   In addition to scholarly publications, creative scholarship, and funded research, other scholarly activities including but not limited to presenting at refereed professional meetings, presenting papers before learned societies, etc. should be considered.

      Scholarship Rating

      Research or Creative Scholarship is defined by:

      Typical Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment

      Excellent (5)

      Record

      with emerging national/international recognition

       

      Demonstrated significant record of peer-reviewed publications and/or exhibitions.  Presentations at professional meetings with rigorous peer review criteria.  Invitations to give presentations/lectures/exhibitions.  Review of works featured in national/international journals.  Recognition by professional organizations at regional/national/international level.  Recognition of scholarly impact by peers in the profession.

      Very Good

       (4)

      Defined emphasis and emerging national recognition

      Demonstrated consistent record of peer-reviewed publications and/or exhibitions.  Presentations at professional meetings with peer review criteria. 

      Average (3)

      Developing focus and active engagement

      Some Publications and/or exhibitions.  Some Presentations at professional meetings/seminars. 

      Fair

      (2)

      Unfocused direction and limited engagement

      Occasional publications/exhibitions or meeting presentations.

      Poor

       (1)

      Undefined research program or creative practice

      Few or no publications, presentations, exhibitions, or professional recognition.

    2. Teaching

      The mission of the Fashion School is “To inspire students to become creative and resourceful fashion leader.” Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching can include development and revision of courses, peer evaluations of teaching performance, student feedback, and other relevant documentation. 

      Scholarship Rating

      Definition

      Typical Activities Corresponding to the Assessment

      Excellent

      (5)

      Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional development and maintains high achievement on course evaluation and peer reviews

      Actively participates in curricular development/revisions.

      Demonstrates evidences excellent student evaluations and peer review. Demonstrates instructional creativity and effort. Establishes excellent record of graduate and/or undergraduate students in research and/or creative scholarship.  Receives recognition of educational impact by peers in the institution and profession.

      Very Good

      (4)

      Innovative teacher; maintains very good course evaluations and peer reviews

      Develops/revises curriculum, establishes good student evaluations and peer review. Demonstrate good record of fostering graduate and/or undergraduate students in research and/or creative scholarship.

      Average

      (3)

      Effective teacher; maintains good course evaluations and peer reviews

      Develops/revises curriculum, establishes mixed (moderate to good) student evaluations and peer review.

      Develops moderate level of fostering graduate and undergraduate research projects and/or creative activity.

      Fair

      (2)

      Substandard teacher; meets minimal expectations; below average course evaluations and peer reviews

      Establishes below-average student evaluations and peer review; has limited supervision of student research, limited participation in curriculum development and/or revision.

      Poor

      (1)

      Substandard, ineffective teacher; unacceptable course evaluations and peer reviews

      Establishes below-average student and peer perceptions, Receives as a pattern of complaints Have not engaged in curriculum development or research supervision

    3. Service

      The merits of University and Professional service should be evaluated as to (1) whether or not the candidate chaired the committee listed and (2) the importance of the service to the mission of the unit served.  Less tangible components of service include active participation in School events such as faculty and graduate student recruitment, seminars, meetings and seminars, etc.

      Service

      Typical Activities Corresponding to the Assessment

       

      Excellent

      (5)

      Plays significant role (including some leadership) in the division, school, college, university and national/international professional organizations, as evidenced by collegial engagement with committee work and related functions including public outreach.

      Very Good

      (4)

      Plays role (including some leadership) in the division, school, college, university and national/international professional organizations, as evidenced by collegial engagement with committee work and related functions including public outreach.

      Average

      (3)

      Has some participation in the division, school, college, university, and national/international professional organizations, as evidenced by collegial engagement with committee work and related functions including minimal public outreach.

      Fair

      (2)

      Has little participation in the division, school, college, university, and national/international professional organizations, as evidenced by collegial engagement with committee work and related functions including minimal public outreach.

      Poor

      (1)

      Does not engage in division, school, college, university committee work or functions, or does not participate in a collegial manner

  2. Materials need to be submitted for review

    Research and/or Creative Activity

    • The completed chart for listing research/creative activities
    • An outline of related activities in a table format.
    • An optional narrative, not to exceed 3 typed pages, single--spaced, on 8 1/2” x 11” paper, with one-inch margins, in 12 point font.

    Teaching

    • The completed chart (template document attached) for listing teaching activities
    • A summary of all the SSI ratings on numbers 6 - 17 of the SSI instruments. The summary will list the summed rating of 6 - 17 for each class taught. Applicants must determine the median of all the ratings for all the courses and present it in tabular form.
    • A copy of the standard University Student Survey of Instruction (SSI) for each course taught during the review period.
    • An optional narrative, not to exceed 3 typed pages, single--spaced, on 8 1/2” x 11” paper, with one-inch margins, in 12 point font.

     Service

    • The completed chart for listing service activities
    • A table listing all service activities sorted by School, College, and University level categories.
    • An optional narrative, not to exceed 3 typed pages, single--spaced, on 8 1/2” x 11” paper, with one-inch margins, in 12 point font.

    Applicants may submit additional supporting materials as reference for any of the category.

  3. Distribution of Awards

    The Director will follow the guidelines for distributing Merit Awards as outlined in the CBA and any procedural guidelines as published by the Office of the Provost.