Departmental Annual Review Policy and Procedures

Appendix C to the Bylaws

Department of English
University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri

Revised: April 2001 | December 4, 2007

1. Organization.
   Early in December, the department chair will convene the Salary Advisory Committee (SAC) and apprise the members (see Appendix #1) of the department's policy and procedures for evaluating faculty performance in teaching, research, and service. At this time, the SAC will select its chair and make other necessary preparations for the annual review. The department chair will serve as an ex-officio member of the SAC and will meet with it regularly.


2. Documentation.
   By February 28, the faculty will submit the following materials to the Salary Advisory Committee: (1) an updated CV prepared to specification so that the five-year period upon which a cumulative judgment will be made is readily identifiable to the SAC; (2) a copy of an annual report prepared by the Faculty Accomplishment System; (3) full documentation for the preceding year's activity. Though not required, a brief narrative statement that describes the preceding year's work and places it within a five-year cycle of development is strongly encouraged.


3. Evaluation of Faculty.
   In ranking individual faculty performance, the Salary Advisory Committee will be guided by the profile of merit in the grid printed below and by the explanatory appendix for the evaluation of teaching, research, and service (see Appendix #2). A cumulative judgment will be based upon a five-year cycle of performance, including the preceding calendar year. This cumulative judgment will place each faculty member, for each area of performance, in one of the four merit categories: Superior (3 shares), High (2 shares), Merit (1 share), Unacceptable (0 share).

Faculty who have been at MU for fewer than five years will be evaluated over time spent at MU for teaching and service accomplishments, and over the last five years for research.



	Teaching	Research	Service
Superior Merit	Consistently high student/peer evaluations; substantial individual instruction; innovative and effective pedagogy; winner of major teaching award; highly responsive to curricular needs of campus and dept.	Major publication; major national awards; recognized national leader with work widely known and favorably reviewed	Major leadership role in the college, campus, or profession and/or superior accomplishments in major department position
High Merit	Consistently strong student/peer evaluations; responsive to curricular needs of department and campus; frequent individual instruction (undergraduate and/or graduate)	Substantial publication; repeated presentations at national or international conferences*	Significant and regular contributions to departmental, college, or campus committees; appointment as one of the department's directors of studies; significant service to the profession
Merit	Generally positive student/peer evaluations; satisfactory contribution to curricular needs of department and campus	Some publication; occasional conferences; work in progress	Attendance at department meetings; satisfactory contribution to dept., college, or campus committees
No Merit	Generally negative student/peer evaluations; no evidence of individual instruction or advisement; not responsive to curricular needs of the department	Without viable research or creative program	Little or no contribution to department, college, or campus committees
	*For pre-tenured faculty: completion of book manuscript and signing of book contract will also constitute High Merit.



4. Dispersal of Funds.
   1. Discretionary Fund: The chair of the department, with the advice of the Salary Advisory Committee, may use up to 5% of the dean's allocation as a discretionary fund. This money will be used to redress problems of inequity, compression, inversion, or other irregularities in the salary schedule that may warrant departmental attention. Discretionary funds must be apportioned prior to the dispersal of merit money. Any money that is not disbursed for the discretionary fund will be transferred to the merit balance.
   2. Basic Merit Raise: The merit balance will be equally divided between funds for "Basic Merit" raises and funds for "Additional Merit" raises. Money reserved for basic merit will be further subdivided into two equal amounts. One half will be dispersed as a percentage of current faculty salary, and the other half will be dispersed as a fixed-dollar amount determined by dividing this money by the number of ranked professorial faculty members in the department. To qualify for a basic merit raise, the faculty member must receive a total of at least two "shares" in the evaluation of teaching, research, and service. Money not disbursed for basic merit raises will be transferred to the "Additional Merit" pool.
   3. Additional Merit Raise: The money for additional merit raises will be subdivided according to a 40-40-20 formula based, respectively, upon teaching, research, and service. The conversion of these three pools of money into additional merit raises for individual faculty will be keyed to the categories described in the grid. Faculty members will receive three shares for "Superior Merit" two shares for "High Merit," one share for "Merit," and none for an "Unacceptable" performance.
   
   In each evaluated area, shares will be converted into dollars by dividing the total number of merit shares accumulated by the qualifying faculty into the total amount of money allocated to that area. The quotient will be the "share-value" stated as a dollar amount. In each evaluated area, qualifying faculty members will receive an additional merit raise that is computed by multiplying the share(s) received in the evaluated area by the share-value of the area. The total additional merit raise will be the sum of the faculty member's performance in teaching, research, and service.


5. Procedures for Salary Deliberations.
   1. After receiving supporting documentation by February 28, members of the Salary Advisory Committee will individually evaluate faculty members according to the guidelines described elsewhere in this document.
   2. Members of the SAC and the Chair will then discuss their determinations about individual faculty members.
   3. Once all faculty have been reviewed and evaluated, the SAC and the Chair will discuss any apparent inconsistencies and inequities. The SAC will then make final decisions by majority vote as to each faculty members' rating in teaching, research, and service. These results constitute the recommendations to the Chair.
   4. The Chair makes whatever final adjustments seem appropriate in the ratings and then reports them individually to faculty. (If the Chair's final adjustments are substantive, they should be discussed with the SAC.) This report should be made no later than April 15, so that adequate time remains for an appeals process.
   5. Faculty who disagree with their evaluations may appeal informally to the SAC. If the SAC cannot resolve the problem, the faculty member may appeal to the Chair, whose decision is final for that year at the department level.
   6. Once the administration announces the amount of money available for raises within the regular departmental allocation, the Chair will consult with the SAC about the discretionary fund (as described in 4a, above) and make appropriate allocations. The Chair will then distribute funds according to procedures described for Basic Merit and Additional Merit Raises (4b and c). The Chair will distribute any supplementary funds in accordance with special administrative instructions, in consultation with the SAC and in response to the most pressing departmental needs.


6. Amendment Procedures.
   These guidelines may be amended by a majority vote of the department (assuming a quorum) in a meeting or by a mail ballot following the meeting in which the proposed amendment is introduced.

Appendix #1: Selection of the Salary Advisory Committee

Appendix #2: The Evaluation of Teaching, Research, and Service

[ top ]