Faculty Governance

Bylaws for the Department of English

University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri

Revised: October 26, 1976 | May 1987 | April 25, 1991 | February 2, 2006 | December 4, 2007
Amended: May 5, 1992 | April 20, 1993 | December 14, 1993 | October 30, 2001 | March 11, 2014 | April 26, 2016

The voting membership of the department shall consist of: all persons on regular appointment holding the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor; all persons on non-regular appointment holding the rank of Assistant Teaching Professor, Associate Teaching Professor, and Teaching Professor; and others elected by those on regular appointment.

Article II -- POWERS
The voting membership of the department shall have the power to determine all matters affecting requirements, academic standards, curriculum, and personnel of the Department of English. This power may be delegated to and administered by such officers and committees as specified in articles V and VI of these bylaws. Only members on regular appointment and those elected by members on regular appointment may vote on matters specific to tenure or to tenured/tenure-track faculty, including but not limited to hiring decisions regarding tenured and tenure-track faculty as well as policies regarding tenure, evaluation of tenure-track and tenured faculty, Assistant Professor leave, Assistant Professor mentoring, or annual review guidelines for tenure-track and tenured faculty.

The faculty of the Department of English shall meet together at least once each fall semester and at least once each winter semester. The agenda for each of these meetings shall be announced in advance and shall include reports of the Standing Committees, herein detailed below, and any other such items as the Chair or other members of the faculty care to introduce. No vote may be taken on items not on the agenda. Additional meetings may be called upon written request of at least four members of the faculty. Such requests shall be made to the Chair, who will then convene the meeting within a week of the date that the request is received when classes are in session, and within a month of the date of the request when classes are not in session. Attendance at department meetings is a normal and expected duty of all members on regular appointment. The minutes of meetings will record members present, members absent, and members excused.

Department meetings shall proceed as determined by the Chair. Voting procedures shall be bound by Robert's Rules of Order except for decisions on promotion, tenure, and hiring, which shall require a yes vote of two-thirds or more of those voting in order to pass. Action may be taken at meetings only with the presence of a quorum, which shall consist of more than one-half of the members on regular appointment not on leave. Members on leave may attend and vote or may vote in season by phone, mail, or electronic mail in matters of promotion, tenure, or election of the chair.

Article V -- OFFICERS

  1. The administrative officers of the Department of English shall be as follows: Chair of the Department, Associate Chair, Director of Graduate Studies, Director of Graduate Admissions, Director of Undergraduate Studies, Director of Composition, and Director of Creative Writing.
  2. The Chair shall be chosen through an election conducted by an election committee of three members on regular appointment, one from each professorial rank. The committee shall be appointed in January of the last year of the incumbent Chair's term and the election shall be completed in March. Each member of the department shall have one vote. Members of the department on leave shall be sent ballots, and reasonable time allowed for the exercise of their vote. For procedures, see Appendix A below.
  3. The Associate Chair and the Directors of Graduate Studies, Graduate Admissions, Undergraduate Studies, Composition, and Creative Writing shall be appointed by the Chair of the Department with the consent of the Personnel Committee.


  1. The principal legislative and review functions of the faculty shall be executed through the system of Standing Committees. There shall be seven standing committees of the department: Graduate Studies Committee, Undergraduate Studies Committee, Composition Committee, Creative Writing Committee, Curriculum Committee, Salary Advisory Committee, and Personnel Committee.
  2. The Graduate Studies Committee shall be chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies and appointed by the Chair of the Department. The membership shall be large enough to represent the diversity of the department and to carry out the duties of the committee. Voting members shall include two graduate students selected by the English Graduate Students Association. Student members of the Committee may attend all meetings of the Committee except those concerned with personnel matters. This committee shall be responsible for admissions to the graduate program in coordination with the Director of Graduate Admissions, the awarding of fellowships for graduate study, review of graduate curriculum, and the conduct of such examinations as it deems necessary for graduate students of the department. It shall coordinate the graduate curriculum with the Undergraduate Studies Committee and Composition Committee and submit changes to the graduate curriculum to the Graduate School.
  3. The Undergraduate Studies Committee shall be chaired by the Director of Undergraduate Studies and shall be appointed by the Chair of the Department. The membership shall be large enough to represent the diversity of the department and to carry out the duties of the committee. Voting members shall include representatives of the various groups on the teaching staff (e.g., regular and non-regular faculty and graduate students) and at least one undergraduate student. The Undergraduate Studies Committee shall be responsible for the review of undergraduate curriculum, the advising of undergraduate students, and the supervision of the department's Honors Program. It shall coordinate the undergraduate curriculum with the Graduate Studies Committee and Composition Committee and submit changes in the undergraduate curriculum to the College of Arts and Sciences. It shall also review and print the degree requirements of the department.
  4. The Composition Committee shall be chaired by the Director of Composition and shall be appointed by the Chair of the Department. It shall include representatives of all groups who teach undergraduate composition courses: regular faculty, teaching assistants, and non-regular faculty. It shall also include one or more undergraduate representatives. The Composition Committee shall be responsible for the undergraduate composition curriculum at both the upper- and lower-division levels, the training and evaluation of teaching assistants and non-regular faculty in composition, the judging of contests in composition, and the administration of awards for excellence in the teaching of composition. It shall submit changes in the undergraduate composition curriculum to the College of Arts and Sciences via the Undergraduate Studies Committee.
  5. The Creative Writing Committee shall be chaired by the Director of Creative Writing and appointed by the Chair of the Department. Voting members shall include faculty members in creative writing and at least one graduate student, who will be selected from among Creative Writing doctoral students by the English Graduate Students Association. The Creative Writing Committee shall be responsible for the supervision of the Creative Writing Program.
  6. The Curriculum Committee shall be appointed and chaired by the Chair of the Department and include the Associate Chair, Director of Creative Writing, Director of Composition, and Directors of Graduate and Undergraduate Studies. It shall approve the schedule of classes and the appointment of Graduate Teaching Assistants and non-regular faculty.
  7. The Personnel Committee shall consist of all tenured Associate Professors and Professors. It shall make recommendations on all matters related to promotion and tenure. It shall be chaired by the Chair of the Department. The committee will function in two groups: 
    1. The Committee as a whole shall review the teaching, research, and service of those holding the rank of assistant professor and make recommendations concerning promotion and tenure.
    2. The Chair and those members of the Committee holding the rank of professor shall review the teaching, research, and service of those holding the ranks of professor or of associate professor and make recommendations concerning promotion and tenure. When considering and making these recommendations, this group shall meet separately.
  8. The Salary Advisory Committee shall consist of four faculty members appointed on a rotational basis from the tenured faculty; the chair of this committee will be chosen by lot (see Appendix B below). The Chair of the Department will attend all meetings of the Salary Advisory Committee.
  • A quorum is not required for action by a standing committee, but any four members of the department may call for a review of a committee action by the department, except for actions of the Personnel Committee.
  • Except for the Personnel Committee and the Salary Advisory Committee, standing committees shall publish minutes of their meetings and distribute them to the department in a timely fashion. The Personnel Committee and the Salary Advisory Committee shall record minutes kept by the Chair.

Ad hoc committees may be established by the Chair or by a vote of the department for a term of one year.

The Chair will appoint members of the department to serve as representatives for those functions or relations of the department for which standing or ad hoc committees are unnecessary, such as library liaison, computer concerns, awards, lectures, etc. Representatives will serve at the Chair's discretion and will report to the Chair.

In an emergency the Chair may act without the advice and consent of the department. The Chair is obliged to confer as widely as possible with department members in such an emergency.

These bylaws may be amended by two-thirds vote of department members who are on regular appointment or who have been elected to have the same voting rights as members on regular appointment.

APPENDIX A (Amended 12/14/93)

  1. The election committee shall be named by the Chair to conduct the nomination and the election, to determine the outcome of the voting, and to report the results in writing to the Dean of the College of Arts and Science. The committee shall conduct the voting on both the nominating and the election ballots in such a way as to insure secrecy of individual votes and to guarantee one vote per voting member. The committee shall not discuss the voting with members of the department or with others, either during the election or afterward.
  2. The nominating ballot shall consist of the names of all Professors and Associate Professors. From the names listed, each voting member shall nominate not more than three. The committee shall give written notice of nomination with indication of the number of nominating votes received to all members who receive votes and shall allow a reasonable time for an affirmative response from those who wish to remain candidates.
  3. Willingness to remain a candidate shall be signified by submitting to the election committee a statement of objectives and priorities as Chair. The election committee shall establish reasonable deadlines for the submission of such statements, which are not to exceed 500 words each, and shall arrange for their prompt distribution to all voting members of the faculty, to representatives of the graduate students and the staff, and to the Dean.
  4. One week after all the statements have been distributed, the committee shall present to the department an election ballot containing the names of all candidates. Each voting member shall select one name. The committee shall communicate to the department the total votes received by each candidate. If no candidate receives a majority, the committee shall present another election ballot, deleting the name of the candidate with the fewest votes of those who receive fewer than four votes. In the case that tie votes do not permit reduction of the ballot in the manner, the committee shall conduct a supplementary run-off election to reduce the ballot. The committee shall repeat this voting procedure until one candidate receives a majority.
  5. In the event that the first ballot contains only one name, the ballot shall call for a yes/no vote. The single candidate must receive a majority of yes votes for a valid election. If the candidate does not receive a majority, a new election shall be called.
  6. The committee shall communicate the election results to the Dean and nominate the majority candidate for appointment as Chair.
  7. Members of the faculty and staff and representatives of the graduate school shall be offered the opportunity to discuss the election with the Dean, who shall allow at least two weeks for such individual conferences before recommending the new Chair for appointment by the Chancellor. The Chair so appointed shall serve a term of 3 years. After a performance review by the department, the term may be renewed for up to an additional three years.


  1. Each fall the department Chair shall choose four tenured faculty members to serve on the Salary Advisory Committee. The committee shall be selected by lot from a list of the tenured faculty who have not served on the committee during the previous four years, who are not on leave the spring semester, and whose salaries are determined within the department, with this proviso: the committee shall include at least one representative from each tenured rank, associate professor and professor.
  2. The four members of the committee each year shall draw straws to determine who shall chair the committee.
  3. Under exceptional circumstances, faculty members may petition to the department Chair for a one-year deferral of service on the committee.
  4. Guidelines and general policies of the department in evaluating teaching, research, and service shall be determined by the department. For these guidelines and policies, see Appendix C (Departmental Annual Review Policy and Procedure).
  5. Following the completion of its duties in the winter semester, the Salary Advisory Committee will report on its deliberations to the department.
  6. In the case of faculty whose appointments specify a balance of responsibilities different from the standard 40-40-20 (teaching, research, and service), the Chair has the discretion to adjust expectations for salary rankings to a degree consistent with the terms of the individual appointment, if the individual faculty member requests such an adjustment.

Department Listserv Policy

  1. All tenured and tenure-track faculty members are required to be members of the ENG-L list since official communications are made through the list.
  2. All members of the department—staff, graduate students, regular and nonregular faculty—are encouraged but not required to join ENGLMU-L. Use this listserv to announce awards, publicize local events, and other matters which are important but not essential to the business of the department.
  3. Although general discussion about types of positions needed are appropriate for both listservs, personnel issues, including discussion of individual job candidates, should not be discussed on either listserv.
  4. Avoid forwarding "Calls for Papers" to the entire list. If you think the call is appropriate for individual members of the department, please send it directly to them.
  5. Include an appropriate subject line with all messages so that members of the department can evaluate the message's importance or relevance.
  6. Unless there are unusual circumstances, please do not ask staff members to post messages to the listservs for you. All faculty should be able to post their own messages.

Departmental Annual Review Policy and Procedures

There are three kinds of faculty review: 

I. Annual Review (required of all faculty members)
II. Post-Tenure Review (every five years after tenure/promotion for tenured faculty)
III. Salary Review (for tenured and tenure-track faculty only)


I. Annual Review

Every year, all faculty submit an updated CV to the Chair. Through myVITA, they record their research, teaching, and service activities from the previous calendar year and then fill out a "Self Evaluation" in each category. The deadline is February 28 for tenured and tenure-track faculty, and March 15 for non-tenure-track faculty.

Non-tenure-track faculty will be evaluated by the Chair and, when appropriate, the Director of Composition. Assistant Professors will be evaluated by the Chair and the Personnel Committee. Tenured faculty will be evaluated by the Chair and the Full Professors. All discussions are advisory to the Chair. The Chair will respond to each faculty member with a report that reflects the evaluations of these evaluative bodies. Once this has been done, there will be a face-to-face meeting to discuss the faculty member's self-evaluation and the Chair's response. After that, the faculty member will log into the myVITA "MU Faculty Annual Review Confirmation" and make any further comments and submit an electronic signature.

Each faculty member will be assigned a "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory" rating for the applicable categories of research, teaching, and service as well as for overall performance. The basis for an "unsatisfactory" rating is the current "no merit" definition used by the Salary Advisory Committee. For ranked NTT faculty, only the first point under "Teaching" ("Generally negative student/peer evaluations") will be used.

If a faculty member receives an evaluation of unsatisfactory in any category (research, teaching, or service), there must be a face-to-face discussion of the evaluation between the faculty member and the Chair to create a plan for achieving satisfactory evaluations. 

One unsatisfactory evaluation in either teaching or research (or any major area of assignment) will result in an overall unsatisfactory evaluation. If the evaluating body has significant concerns about only one category, but determines that overall the faculty member has met the department standards, then it may assign an "overall satisfactory with warning." In both cases the Chair will create an improvement plan to address the concern. The improvement plan will specify both the standards that the faculty member will achieve and the support that the department and/or other units will provide to the faculty member. If the faculty member disputes an overall unsatisfactory evaluation, the Dean will review the evaluation and decide whether to affirm the evaluation or return it to the department Chair for revision. In the succeeding annual performance review, failure to meet the standards set out in the plan will result in an overall unsatisfactory evaluation.

Failure to submit materials for evaluation will result in an overall unsatisfactory evaluation.

For further details, see CRR 310.015 B.1.a-c.


II. Post-Tenure Review 

At five-year intervals tenured faculty members will be informed that they are up for post-tenure review, at which point the Chair will consult the five previous annual reviews. The first five-year post-tenure review will be conducted five years after the tenure decision or the last formal review of the faculty member for promotion to Associate Professor or Professor. Faculty hired with tenure will be reviewed five years after they are hired. Based on the five-year report, the Chair will evaluate the faculty member's performance as satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Satisfactory overall performance evaluations for each year will automatically be deemed sufficient for a satisfactory post-tenure review. The five-year evaluation process will be complete with a satisfactory evaluation. If an unsatisfactory overall performance review occurs in one or more years over the five-year period, trends in the faculty member's performance will be considered in the final determination of the five-year post-tenure review. If the post-tenure review is deemed unsatisfactory by the Chair, then the Chair will send the five-year report to the Personnel Committee, which will perform its own full review and provide an independent assessment of the faculty member's performance. At every level of review, the faculty member will be provided with a copy of any written report that is part of these proceedings and will have the right to appeal. For further details, see CRR 310.015 B.1.d-h.


III. Salary Review

  1. Organization.
    Early in the spring semester, the department chair will convene the Salary Advisory Committee (SAC) and apprise the members 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 salary 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 to the Salary Advisory Committee an updated CV prepared according to the specifications outlined in "Evaluation of Teaching, Research, and Service" below, so that the record of activities for the previous five calendar years upon which a cumulative judgment will be made is readily identifiable to the SAC. The SAC may elect not to evaluate faculty who fail to provide the requested materials prepared according to departmental guidelines. Faculty are strongly encouraged but not required to submit a brief narrative statement (less than 1000 words) that clarifies the significance of activities listed on the CV for members of the SAC, who represent a diversity of fields. This statement should speak to accomplishments within the five-year evaluation period. In addition to the materials prepared by each faculty member, teaching evaluations for the five-year period will be provided to the SAC by the department. Submitting SAC materials is optional, but failure to turn them in will automatically exclude the faculty member from a merit raise.
  3. Evaluation of Faculty.
    In ranking individual faculty performance, the Salary Advisory Committee will operate according to the guidelines in the explanatory appendix for the evaluation of teaching, research, and service (see Appendix #1). A cumulative judgment will be based on accomplishments within the previous five calendar years, with equal weight given to each of those five years. The Salary Advisory Committee considers a faculty member’s record as of the end of the previous calendar year so that work in progress and forthcoming publications are not evaluated. The committee’s retrospective evaluation assesses the record of performance and, thus, differs from review by the Personnel Committee, which additionally evaluates progress towards tenure or promotion. The SAC will make a cumulative judgment that will rank each faculty member, for each area of performance, in one of the four merit categories: Superior (3 shares), High (2 shares), Merit (1 share), No Merit (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. 

  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: Additional merit raises will be based on the rankings determined by the Salary Advisory Committee (described above under "3. Evaluation of Faculty"). After receiving these rankings from the Salary Advisory Committee, the Chair will add twice the number of total shares for teaching to twice the number of total shares for research to the number of total shares for service. This combined sum will be called the Adjusted Share Total. (Doubling the totals for teaching and research ensures that teaching and research are each treated as twice that of service, corresponding to the 40-40-20 ratio.) The amount of money allocated to the Additional Merit Raise portion will then be divided by the Adjusted Share Total to determine the dollar value of one share.
    4. Each qualifying faculty member will receive an additional merit raise according to the following ratios. One share for service will be worth the dollar value of one share. One share for teaching will be worth the dollar value of two shares. Similarly, one share for research will be worth the dollar value of two shares.
  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. 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.

Department of English
University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri

Revised: April 2001 | December 4, 2007 | February 28, 2013 | May 13, 2014 | March 6, 2018

Evaluation of Teaching, Research, and Service

The department chair and the Salary Advisory Committee (SAC) will assess the teaching performance of each member of the department, taking into account the categories and subcategories listed below. 
In evaluating teaching performance, the Chair and SAC should recognize that there are many different teaching styles, that no one criterion is likely to produce uniformly reliable evidence of teaching quality, and that informed professional judgment should thus be based on a significant variety of data. 

Classroom Teaching.
All members of the department will solicit student evaluations for each class. It is essential that these evaluations be conducted in a uniform way. The evaluation forms should be handed out and completed in class during the last week of the semester. A member of the class should be delegated to collect the evaluations and deliver them to the department office. The department will provide the SAC with copies of the evaluations from the previous five calendar years and a summary of the evaluation scores over this period. The SAC will consider the numerical ratings together with the written comments from students. Several factors are weighed in this consideration of each faculty member’s teaching performance: Do students take the course to fill a requirement or as an elective? Is the course upper or lower division? Is it writing-intensive? Even subtler criteria need consideration. It is clear that a small class of devoted majors or graduate students will usually produce better evaluations than thirty sophomores in a service course. Yet good teaching in small classes should be recognized.

Individual Instruction.
In addition to the normal activity of advising students at various levels, the work to be considered here includes some formal teaching duties. Doctoral and master's committees, for example, may involve being a director, a second reader, or an outside reader. Again a person may be a member of an Advisory or Comprehensive Committee or the chair of such a committee. Similarly, a faculty member may serve as the director of an undergraduate Honor's Thesis or as a mentor in the Arts and Science Undergraduate Research Mentor Program.

Contributions to the Curriculum and Other Functions.
This category involves responsiveness to special departmental needs and goals. Contributions include preparing new courses, teaching a variety of courses, teaching writing-intensive courses, helping to teach service and/or departmentally required courses, mentoring graduate teachers, instructing large numbers of students beyond the call of normal duty, covering classes for colleagues, developing departmental teaching aids, presenting academic talks for local students, and the like.

Presentation of the Teaching Record
Faculty members should prepare the CVs they submit to the SAC to include the following:

  1. Course numbers, titles and subtitles of all classes taught at MU in the last 5 calendar years (NB: Information about when each course was taught, enrollment numbers, etc. is provided by the department and need not be included on the CV.)
  2. Designation of any classes taught as writing-intensive;
  3. A list of all graduate-student committees indicating
    1. whether the student is at the master’s or PhD level,
    2. the faculty member’s role on the committee (e.g. chair, outside reader),
    3. dates of service, and (d) home department of the student if outside English
  4. A list of all students mentored through other forms of individual instruction indicating of the type of advising (e.g. Honor’s Thesis supervision, independent study courses) and the dates.

The department Chair and the Salary Advisory Committee will assess the research performance of each member of the department. The area of evaluation described here as research encompasses a wide variety of accomplishments that are rigorously evaluated by scholarly or professional peers, including for example publications (in various media), lectures, grants, and editorship of journals.

A sustained record of scholarly or creative accomplishment is valued, but quantity is not the primary criterion used in assessing the merits of research activities. The SAC will consider both the quality of the work and its scholarly impact. The SAC will recognize the diversity of research specialties represented in the department and the corresponding diversity of scholarly contributions. Faculty members are encouraged to provide evidence of scholarly impact and reputation.

Presentation of the Research Record
Faculty members should prepare the CVs they submit to the SAC to include the following:

  1. Full bibliographic citations (including page numbers) for all publications.
  2. Details of grants and other funding including the amount awarded and information about the funding agencies.
  3. Information about awards including the names of sponsoring organizations.
  4. A list of presentations of scholarly and creative work indicating
    1. where and when they took place, and
    2. the circumstances of the presentation (e.g. conference paper, invited lecture, colloquium, public reading).

Faculty members should address questions of scholarly impact and reputation in their narrative statements if they choose to submit one. It is helpful to discuss and document the selectiveness of grants and awards and of the venues in which one has published and presented work. Reviews and citations of one’s work may further speak to a faculty member’s impact and reputation.

The department chair and the Salary Advisory Committee will assess the service performance of each member of the department, taking into account service to the English department, the campus/university system, and the profession at large. As with all three areas of evaluation, the SAC should recognize the various ways that department members serve the different constituents. It is especially important that the SAC consider the amount of effort required and the effects of committee work when evaluating the service component.

A minimum expectation for service is that faculty will attend department meetings and participate in the work of departmental committees upon which they serve. Without this basic commitment to departmental service, service outside the department will be less persuasive to the SAC.

Presentation of the Service Record
Faculty members should prepare the CVs they submit to the SAC to include the following:

  1. A list of all committee service indicating
    1. whether the committee operates at the departmental, college or campus/University level,
    2. the faculty member’s role on the committee (e.g. chair, member), and
    3. dates of service.
  2.  Information about any service to the profession (e.g. manuscript reviewing, leadership positions in scholarly organizations, editorial board membership).
    If a narrative statement is submitted, faculty members should comment on the workload demands and accomplishments of their service.

    Merit Profiles
    The grid below profiles the different categories of merit for teaching, research, and service. The SAC will assign each faculty member one of four merit rankings for each area of performance.





Superior Merit

Outstanding student evaluations (exceptionally strong across various courses and semesters); exceptionally strong contributions to individual instruction; innovative and effective pedagogy; major teaching award; highly responsive to curricular needs of campus and department

Major publication; major national awards; prestigious presentation record (e.g. keynote at major conference 

Major leadership role in the college, campus, or profession and/or superior accomplishments in major department position

High Merit

Consistently strong student evaluations; substantial contributions to individual instruction; responsive to curricular needs of department and campus; teaching award

Substantial publication (for pre-tenured faculty: submitted final version of book manuscript and signed book contract); regular 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


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

Department of English
University of Missouri
Columbia, Missouri

Revised: April 2001  |  February 2013