Preliminary to the Department Head's evaluation, each faculty member will complete an Annual Report and a self-evaluation to be submitted to the Department Head together with whatever supporting material the faculty member considers appropriate. The Department Head will evaluate each faculty member using the FAR evaluation form, which also provides an opportunity for self-evaluation by the faculty member. The Department Head will confer with each faculty member in the department and discuss the evaluation as it pertains to that individual. The faculty member will initial and date the FAR Evaluation form at the conclusion of the conference with the Department Head.
A review of the faculty member by the Dean, or his/her designee, shall follow the College's Evaluation Appeals Procedure, provided that the faculty member appeals within five (5) working days of the spring conference and that the faculty member forwards a written statement to the Dean in which all concerns in question are documented. The grounds for appeal are limited.
I. Teaching Activity -- The Department Head may consider, but he/she is not limited to, the
following factors in evaluating a faculty member's performance in the area of instruction:
II. Scholarly Activity -- The Department Head may consider, but he/she is not limited to, the
following factors in evaluating a faculty member's performance in the area of scholarly
III. Service -- The Department Head may consider, but he/she is not limited to, the following
factors in evaluating a faculty member's performance in the area of service:
The above guidelines are just that: guides to evaluation of faculty performance. They cannot be rigidly applied in all situations. The guidelines must be interpreted to fit the circumstances of individual faculty in the various disciplines.
A rating of "plus" (+) in a given category indicates an exceptional performance and makes the recipient eligible to compete for a college-level merit increase in that category. Faculty may apply for college-level merit consideration only in the area(s) where performance has been rated as plus (+). (95-100)
The "check" rating indicates a level of performance which is meritorious within the department and qualifies the faculty member for a departmental-level merit increase. (85-94)
A rating of "A" (A) indicates an acceptable level of performance and qualifies the recipient for any mandatory salary increase for all University faculty meeting minimum expectations. (75-84)
A negative rating (-) indicates that the faculty member has not performed at a high enough level in an area to qualify for a merit increase in salary. A negative rating in teaching disqualifies an individual from consideration for both college- and departmental-level merit increases.
When funds are available for the College of Arts and Sciences that permit variable salary increases based on merit, the Dean will divide the money into two pools. One pool will be for college-level merit increases and the other for departmental-level merit increases. UNLESS ADJUSTED AUTOMATICALLY BY THE PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ALL SALARY INCREASES AT J.S.U. ARE BASED UPON MERIT/PERFORMANCE. College-level increases (which may vary in amount) will be awarded those applicants judged by the C.A.S. Personnel Committee to have performed at a level placing them among the most meritorious of the entire faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences.
Departmental-level increases will be awarded to all faculty whose Faculty Annual Reviews indicate that they have performed at a meritorious level within the department, as determined by the Department Head. Recognizing the importance the University places upon good teaching, a high priority will be placed on teaching accomplishments.
NOTE: MERIT DISTRIBUTION DECISIONS ARE NOT APPEALABLE.