Criteria, Performance Expectations & School Procedures Relating to President's Faculty Excellence Awards & Merit Criteria | Kent State University

Criteria, Performance Expectations & School Procedures Relating to President's Faculty Excellence Awards & Merit Criteria

  1. President's Faculty Excellence Awards

    1. General Principles

      1. When provided for in the CBA, the University will establish an additional salary pool for the purpose of recognizing exceptional performance by a Faculty member which leads to the achievement of national or international recognition.

      2. All Faculty members are eligible for consideration for these awards. For an initial award, all of the Faculty member’s accomplishments while at the University shall be considered. Normally, Faculty members are eligible to receive an award under this Section once in any three-year period; however, an additional award in the same three-year period or in any subsequent award period would be based on additional achievements since the last award. If a Faculty member earned national or international recognition before joining the University, she/he may be considered; however, the Faculty member’s record since being hired at the University must justify an award. Similarly, a Faculty member’s past achievements that have been previously recognized by any special salary increase(s), will not be considered for an award under this Section.

      3. Awards will be granted to Faculty members based on exceptional performance leading to the achievement of national or international recognition. National or international recognition may be demonstrated in research, teaching, and/or service. Faculty members in all disciplines will be considered and the measures of national or international recognition will be appropriate to the discipline.

      4. The President will award the total amount available in the designated pool during the time period specified in the Agreement. The number of awards per year, the amount of individual awards, and the total amount awarded in each year of the Agreement will be in the sole discretion of the President of the University and the President’s decision is final.

    2. Procedures

      1. During each award period, the Provost shall request nominations, which may come from department Chairs/Directors, Deans, Faculty advisory body, or individual Faculty members. Those who are nominating colleagues (or self) for this award should provide a discipline-specific context so that reviewers of the nominations understand how to assess the achievement of “national or international recognition.” A standard form for nominations will be distributed by the Provost’s office and nominations will be collected by the unit administrator for each academic unit on this form.

      2. At regional campuses, in Colleges without Departments or Schools, or in the University Libraries the Dean will consult with the appropriate Faculty advisory body and make a       recommendation to the Provost. This recommendation will include all nomination forms submitted, and a summary listing the names and academic units of all Faculty members nominated, whether or not the College or the Campus recommended an award, and the amount recommended (if any).

      3. In Colleges with Departments or Schools, the Chair/Director will consult with the FAC and make a recommendation to the Dean. This recommendation will include all nomination forms submitted, and a summary listing the names and academic units of all Faculty members nominated, whether or not the Department/School recommended an award, and the amount recommended (if any). The Dean will then consult with the CAC regarding the nominations and recommendations from the Department/School level before making a recommendation to the Provost which will include all materials provided to the Dean by the Department or School in addition to the Dean’s recommendation.

      4. The Provost shall make a final recommendation of the awardees which is subject to the approval of the President. President’s Faculty Excellence Awards will be distributed at the beginning of the next academic year, and will become part of the Faculty member’s base annual contract salary. The awards will be added to the Faculty member’s salary after all other applicable salary increments have been entered.

    3. Procedures

      1. The Provost shall distribute the Kent Campus pool on a per capita basis to the academic units of the Kent Campus. The Provost shall distribute the Regional Campuses pool on a per capita basis to each of the regional campuses within the Division of Regional Campuses.

      2. Eighty percent (80%) of the allocation shall be distributed on a per capita basis to each college, college without departments or schools, University Libraries or regional campus and shall be for the purpose of establishing merit awards at the academic unit or regional campus level. For colleges with departments or schools on the Kent campus, the Dean shall distribute the 80% pool on a per capita basis to the academic units in the College.

      3. Twenty percent (20%) of the allocation shall be reserved for use in the sole discretion of the College or regional campus Dean to supplement awards or to make additional merit awards in the College, regional campus or University Libraries.

      4. At each academic unit and regional campus, preliminary assessment of materials submitted for evaluation will be made by an ad hoc Faculty body composed of the Faculty advisory body identified for that purpose according to the criteria in the academic unit/campus section of the Faculty Handbook and any other Faculty applying for an award who wish to participate in the evaluation. The ad hoc Faculty body will make an advisory recommendation to the academic unit or regional campus administrator concerning the allocation of merit awards in each of the three (3) categories of research/creative activity, teaching, and/or service.

      5. Following receipt and consideration of these advisory recommendations from the ad hoc Faculty body, the academic unit or campus administrator will make a preliminary determination of merit awards, and will notify all Faculty of the preliminary determinations for all Faculty members in the academic unit or campus. A Faculty member will have the right to request reconsideration of the preliminary determination. This request will be considered by the ad hoc Faculty body, which will make an advisory recommendation on the merits of the request to the academic unit or campus administrator. The academic unit or campus administrator makes the final determination on the allocation of the merit awards at this level.

      6.  The final determination of a department Chair or school director shall be transmitted to the appropriate Dean, along with a justification for the awards based on the criteria for merit awards as established in the academic unit/campus section of the Faculty Handbook. The final determination of a regional campus Dean, along with a justification for the awards based on the criteria for merit awards as established in the academic unit/campus section of the Faculty Handbook, shall be transmitted to the Provost or his/her designee. The final determination of the Dean of an academic unit without departments or schools shall be transmitted directly to the Provost, along with a justification for the awards based on the criteria for merit awards as established in the academic unit/campus section of the Faculty Handbook.

      7. While there is no guarantee that all who are eligible and apply for a merit award will receive one, no limit shall be imposed on the number or percent of eligible Faculty who may receive an award in each academic unit or regional campus. In some cases, two or more Faculty members may have equally meritorious performance in a given category; however, in no case should all eligible Faculty members in an academic unit or campus receive identical merit awards in any of the three (3) categories of research/creative activity, teaching, and service. Instead, differences in award amounts shall reflect differences in Faculty performance in each of the three (3) categories.

      8. Upon receipt of final determinations from department Chairs/school directors in Colleges with departments and schools or from the ad hoc Faculty body in Colleges without departments or school, University Libraries, or regional campuses, the Deans of Colleges with departments and schools, Deans of Colleges without departments or schools, the Dean of University Libraries and the Regional Campus Deans, shall distribute his/her discretionary pool and distribute the final merit awards

      9. 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, following consultation with the Association. The Association shall be provided at least five (5) days to review and comment upon the proposed guidelines. Criteria, performance expectations, and academic unit/campus procedures for assessing meritorious performance shall be included in academic unit/campus sections of the Faculty Handbook and communicated to the Faculty in advance of the submission of materials for review.

      10. Merit awards will become part of the continuing bargaining unit member’s base annual contract salary at the beginning of the employment contract for the academic year after the award is given. The award will be added to the bargaining unit member’s salary after all other salary increments, including any necessary adjustments to meet minimum salary levels (floors), have been entered.

  2. Merit Awards

    1. General Principles

      1. When provided for in the CBA, the University will establish an additional salary pool for the purpose of recognizing documented meritorious Faculty performance. The parties agree that the purpose of merit awards is to both reward meritorious performance during the period reviewed and motivate future meritorious performance.

      Three (3) broadly-defined categories of documented meritorious Faculty performance, consistent with the mission of the academic unit/campus and the evaluative criteria and relative weighting defined in the academic unit/campus section of the Faculty Handbook, are to be recognized through merit awards: (1) documented meritorious performance in research and/or creative activities; (2) documented meritorious performance in teaching; and (3) documented meritorious service to the unit/campus, college, University, and/or academic profession.

      2. When merit awards are available, pools for this purpose shall be established separately for the Kent campus (the “Kent Campus pool”) and for the Division of Regional Campuses (the “Regional Campus pool”). In each year, the Kent Campus pool shall be equal to the designated percentage of the previous academic year’s base annual contract salaries of Faculty members eligible for consideration for a merit award under Section D below. In each year, the Regional Campuses pool shall be equal in per capita amount for eligible Faculty members from the Division of Regional Campuses to the per capita amount calculated for eligible Faculty members from the Kent Campus by the application of the above formula.

      3. Each academic unit on the Kent Campus and each Regional Campus will determine what percentage of the merit award pool shall be used to support awards in each of the three (3) categories identified in Section 4.A. of this section. However, no academic unit or Regional Campus shall allocate less than 20% of the merit award pool to support any of the three (3) categories. This determination shall be made by each academic unit and campus prior to the review of materials submitted by Faculty members applying for merit awards and shall be included in the academic unit/campus section of the Faculty Handbook.

      4. To be eligible for consideration for a merit award, an individual must be a current member of the bargaining unit and have been a member of the bargaining unit for the majority (more than 50%) of the period established as the review period for the awards. Only documented meritorious performance that took place while the individual was a member of the bargaining unit may be considered when allocating merit awards. In the case of long term projects, some portion of the work, including its final phase, may have been undertaken while the Faculty member was not a member of the bargaining unit. In such cases, only the portion of the work that was undertaken while the Faculty member was a member of the bargaining unit may be considered when allocating merit awards.

    2. School Criteria

      Three (3) broadly-defined categories of (1) documented meritorious performance in research and/or creative activities; (2) documented meritorious performance in teaching; and (3) documented meritorious service to the unit/campus, college, University, and/or academic profession. Each member of the FAC evaluates each faculty member who has applied for merit and assigns a point value rating based on the following criteria. The available merit pool dollar amount is divided by the aggregate number of points assigned in order to determine the monetary value of each point.

      The following represents the School’s understanding of threshold-level performance:

      1. Research and Creative Activity (40%)

        That scholarly/creative competence to discharge on-load and assigned activities and efforts to manifest a scholarly/creative presence beyond the University, can be established.

        Research/Creative Activity

        Scholarship/Creative

        Activity 

        Definition

        Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

        Excellent

        High Merit (3)

        Nationally/Internationally recognized research and/or body of creative activity

        Demonstrated record of publications1, grants2, and/or performances3, exhibitions and installations, invitations to give presentations, development/advancement work research-related service to federal/state organizations, awards, recognition from artistic and/or scientific societies4

        Very Good

        Medium Merit (2)

        Emerging nationally

        recognized research program, and/or body of creative activity

        Demonstrated record of publications and ”seed” grants, and/or performances, exhibitions, installations and presentations at well-recognized meetings or venues with rigorous review criteria.

        Good

        Low Merit (1)

        Active research and/or body of creative activity

        Some peer-reviewed

        publications or ”seed” grants, some performances, exhibitions, installations or presentations at meetings/seminars

        Weak

        No Merit (0)

        Limited research and/or body of creative activity

        Occasional publications, performances, exhibitions, installations or

        meeting presentations

         

        1Publications include: plays, scripts, scores, papers in peer-reviewed journals of recognized quality journals books, and book chapters. Evaluation of publication record will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field as well as quantity. Papers of exceptional length, impact and quality are given particular consideration. 

        2“Grants” refers to extramural funding where the role of the faculty member in securing the funding is clearly demonstrated and which are of sufficient magnitude to support research at a level and duration appropriate for the discipline, including, as appropriate funds for supplies, materials and personnel (graduate students, research technicians and/or post-doctoral associates).  - “Seed Grants” are extramural grants that are not of sufficient magnitude to fully support doctoral students or are intramural grants.  "Seed Grants" should be designed to lead to successful applications for “Grants.” Grantsmanship should be commensurate with the field of research with the recognition that the dollar amount of awards varies among fields.

        3Performance refers to public creative activity subject to critical review. Evaluation of performance creative activity record will include an assessment of quality as well as quantity.

        4Recognitions from scientific, artistic and scholarly societies include, for example, election to office, editorial board membership, editorship, etc. Service to federal/state institutions includes service on federal proposal panels, site visits, and other research related activities.

      2. Teaching (40%)

        That there is a relationship between the subject described and the subject taught; class time is used thoroughly and effectively; there is a syllabus; course goals and assignments are specified; course counseling is available; out-of-class requirements are guided and supervised. creative project advising

        Teaching

        Teaching/University Assessment

        Examples of Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

        Excellent Teaching

         

        High Merit (3)

        Develop/revise courses, develop research projects for students (undergraduate and/or graduate), excellent student and peer

        perceptions, instructional creativity, actively participate in

        curricular revisions

        Peer reviewed teaching awards at the University, regional or national level.

        Exceeds Obligations

        Very Good Teacher

        Medium Merit (2)

        Develop/revise courses, good student and peer perceptions, work with graduate and/or undergraduate students in research and/or creative activity.

        Meets Obligations/Good teacher.

        Low Merit (1)

        Meets obligations well.  Good student and peer perceptions

        No Merit (0)

        Fair Teacher.

      3. Service (20%)

        Kent State service responsibilities--committee assignments, curricular advising, thesis advising, , production advising, registration and special duties, etc.--are discharged as assigned and as required by reasonable deadlines.

        Service

        Service Assessment

        Examples of Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

        Excellent Service

         

        High Merit (3)

        Significant role in School, Campus

        College and/ or University as evidenced by productive service on committees, active participation in significant events, effectively chairing committees, specific administrative assignments, and meaningful public outreach.

         

        Exceeds Service Obligations

        Medium Merit (2)

        Consistent level of active participation and leadership in School and University activities.

        Meets Service Obligations

        Low Merit (1)

        Occasionally take on significant leadership roles. Active participant.

        Does Not Meet obligations

        No Merit (0)

        Meets the minimal School obligations or does not participate in School activities