Reward Guidelines

Index: / Values / Scholarship / Annual Review / Performance Standard / Teaching / Research / Service / TIU / References

COLLEGE OF FOOD, AGRICULTURAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY

Faculty Reward System Guidelines for
Annual Performance Review, Promotion, and Tenure

(Addendum to College and Departmental Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure Documents)

The College adopts the following value statements and definition of scholarly performance as the basis for its faculty reward, evaluation, promotion, and tenure processes and decisions.  This applies to annual reviews of performance as well as decisions related to tenure and promotion in rank.

What We Value

As a college, we value (no order implied):GO BACK TO INDEX

Scholarly Performance

We are committed to valuing and rewarding excellence in performance of assigned responsibilities.  Important in identifying the role of every faculty member is the presence of appropriate evidence of scholarly productivity.  The amount and nature of this scholarly productivity will vary according to the nature of the specific appointment.  For every appointment sufficient scholarly productivity must be present.

We value a wide spectrum of types of scholarship. The faculty activities of teaching, research and/or creative work, outreach, and service are vital university functions and provide a framework around which faculty build their programs, based on their individual faculty appointments. Teaching, research and/or creative work, outreach, and service are not considered to be acts of scholarship, in and of themselves.  We will reward excellent performance of these activities with salary increases.  For tenure and promotion in rank, we require sufficient evidence of superior scholarship. GO BACK TO INDEX

This College values and will recognize an individual’s contribution to interdisciplinary and team-based scholarship, based on the unique insights brought from his/her scholarly work.  Candidates must document the nature and extent of their individual contributions in the context of the total team so that colleagues can accurately value their contribution to the outcome of the group.

Faculty efforts become a vehicle for demonstrating scholarship when: (1) they create something that did not exist before; (2) they are validated by peers and by external sources, and (3) they exemplify one or more of the forms of discovery, integration, transformation, or application  (Weiser, 1995).

 Assessment of scholarship emphasizes the importance of validation to ensure cogency and the importance of communication to broader audiences to ensure that results of scholarship will be accessible and useful to others.  

The following list represents the varying types of scholarship we value (adapted from Boyer, 1994; Kolb, 1980 – no order implied).GO BACK TO INDEX

The Role of the Annual Review of Faculty in Articulating Expectations and Evaluating Performance

 Annual Statement of Responsibilities and Expectations

 An annual set of faculty responsibilities and expectations, developed and agreed upon by the individual faculty member and the Department Chair/School Director, will be the basis for the annual evaluation of a faculty member’s performance.  These responsibilities and expectations shall also set the context against which promotion and tenure decisions will be made.

 The statement outlining faculty responsibilities and expectations, developed annually by the faculty member and the department chair/school director, will serve to update and amend the position description created at the time of initial appointment.  GO BACK TO INDEX

This statement of responsibilities and expectations will be made available within the department so that all faculty are aware of the agreed-upon responsibilities, and that eligible faculty will have the necessary information available to them when making promotion and tenure decisions.  The eligible faculty must judge performance against the original position description and the sequence of annual responsibilities and expectations statements.  

The annual responsibilities and expectations statements will serve as an understanding between the individual faculty member, his/her department, and the College.

Evaluation of Performance

The annual statement of responsibilities and expectations will serve as the basis for evaluation in annual performance reviews as well as in promotion and tenure decisions.  (Note that all faculty are to be annually reviewed for performance of the agreed upon duties.)

During the annual review process each faculty member will be responsible for reporting:

·         Progress made toward goals established the previous year;

·         Contributions they have made to the mission of the department/unit and to the vision and priority areas of the College, and

·         Indicators of quality as well as quantity of accomplishments.

Each department will modify its annual faculty reporting form to provide for the inclusion of this information into the report.GO BACK TO INDEX

The initial position description and all subsequent annual statements of responsibilities and expectations will be incorporated into each faculty member’s promotion and tenure dossier.

 The Annual Performance Review

 The annual performance review between each faculty member and the department chair should provide the opportunity for documentation and discussion of accomplishments over the past 12 months as well as responsibilities, expectations, and objectives for the coming year. 

Documentation of past accomplishments should focus (whenever possible) on BOTH what has been accomplished and the impact of a faculty member’s efforts.  This is true for individual accomplishment and for accomplishments made as a contributing member of a team.

The annual performance review process will provide the opportunity for clarification of expectations and accomplishments.  GO BACK TO INDEX

At What Level of Performance Should Activity Be Rewarded? – Performance Standards

Acceptable work is required of all; exceptional work will be rewarded.  All faculty are expected to demonstrate continued intellectual engagement.  Foundational to this

distinction is that criteria will be established which define minimum standards of performance in every area of faculty responsibility.  Below are criteria adopted by the College against which to measure performance in teaching, research, and service. 

General Overview of Expectations

All candidates for tenure and promotion must demonstrate clear excellence in teaching (degree granting or outreach), research and/or creative works, and service.  The nature and extent of the contribution will be commensurate with assigned responsibilities, the amount of time allocated for each activity, and the extent to which they have resources available to support their assigned duties.  Hence, the nature and scope of teaching and research output may vary.  GO BACK TO INDEX

Teaching

Excellence requires demonstrated high-level accomplishment for most of the following measures of teaching (both credit generating and outreach instruction):GO BACK TO INDEX

·         Mastery of the subject matter

·         Continuous growth in subject matter knowledge

·         Ability to organize and communicate class material with logic, conviction, and enthusiasm

·         Objectivity

·         Contributions to curricula or program development

·         Creativity in course or program development, methods of presentation and incorporation of new materials and ideas

·         Capacity to enhance students’ awareness of the relationship between subjects studied, important problems, and other field of knowledge

·         Advising undergraduates, graduate students, and Extension clientele

·         Directing graduate and undergraduate research programs

 Outputs of teaching effort that will be highly valued include:

·         Students who exit courses or other educational experiences with a high level of competence, as validated by job or advanced study placement or growth in their own life

·         Instructional products developed that are adopted by peers

·         Pedagogical innovation adopted by peers

·         Students who are able to sufficiently perform at a high level of proficiency in subsequent courses and experiences

·         Exiting students who are sufficiently enlightened to make life altering decisions and commitments

·         Curriculum that is accepted by peers and validated by employers and graduate and professional schools.

·         Prestigious awards received

In addition to the above, the following dimensions of teaching performance are expected of Extension teachers:

·         An understanding of the needs for knowledge by outreach students/clients/users

·         The ability to communicate effectively with outreach students

·         The ability to anticipate the “teachable moment” regarding the needs of outreach students and to respond with appropriate educational activities

Performance in Extension teaching is also evaluated in terms of:

·         The development and delivery of outreach educational programs which have a clear set of goals determined through needs assessments and active participation with the target audience

·         Changed practices, policies or behavior from outreach education

·         The extent to which it enables capacity building for individuals, communities, and institutions

·         The development of teaching materials and curriculum

·         Extension publications and peer reviewed presentations

·         Ability to contribute to team and interdisciplinary efforts

Research and/or Creative Works

Excellence is indicated by the validation of candidates’ work by their peers.  Typical sources of such validation include:GO BACK TO INDEX

·         Publication in peer-reviewed journals

·         Acceptance of peer reviewed papers and presentations

·         Publication of scholarly books

·         Publication of peer-reviewed Extension publications

·         Awarding of peer-reviewed grants

·         Invited presentations

·         Patents awarded

·         Prestigious awards received

·         Other forms of demonstrated scholarly excellence that are less traditional. Examples include, but are not limited to:

·         computer assisted learning material or computer software that has been judged to be of high quality and has been adopted by others

·         development of products which break new intellectual ground and enjoy substantial adoption

·         new efforts in distance education which are used by peer institutions, etc.

Additional measures to be used to indicate excellence are:

·         Relevance of research or scholarly work to the field

·         The cutting edge nature of the research or scholarly work in the case of the scholarship of discovery

·         Impact measures (who needs and who uses results)

·         Productivity and/or efficiency of research and creative works

·         Level of risk taking (e.g., new direction from dissertation research or prior fields of accomplishment)

It is incumbent on the candidate and his/her tenure-initiating unit to document the minimum quality indicators of such contributions.

Service

All faculty members are expected to contribute actively to the governance of their TIU, the College, and the University.  Service activities include:GO BACK TO INDEX

·         Serving on committees in response to assignments by the Chair, Dean, Provost, or President, and as a result of faculty election;

·         Serving in supportive administrative roles, such as program director or Extension county chair, when asked,

·         Serving the profession through such activities as service as an officer on the board of a professional organization or journal (including editor roles), and/or participation in organizing a symposium;

·         Representing the University in service to the non-academic community;

·         Serving in special roles in the community by Extension or other personnel such as with commodity groups, community development groups, youth support groups, etc.

When a candidate shows special ability in service, it should be part of the consideration during tenure review, but such special ability will not relieve the candidate of demonstrating excellence in the scholarship of teaching and research.

 Tenure-Initiating Unit Guidelines

Each tenure-initiating unit will clearly outline minimal scholarly expectations on which to base annual faculty assessments and decisions regarding tenure and advancement in rank.

Depending on the position description and the time as well as resources made available to the individual, the amount and character of the outcomes will differ.  Expectations detailed in the faculty position description will serve to clearly outline minimum thresholds. 

How are These Procedures to be used in Annual Review and Promotion and Tenure Decisions? 

It is critical to note that reward in terms of annual increase is not synonymous with reward in terms of promotion and tenure. GO BACK TO INDEX

Within the parameter of these recommendations, those individuals and/or groups charged with evaluating faculty performance (either for annual increases or for promotion and tenure decisions) are to:

(1)      be clear regarding expectations agreed upon by the candidate and chair as a basis for appraisal;

(2)      examine the record of accomplishments to ascertain:

(a)   whether the person has completed the agreed-upon assignment, and

(b)    the level of quantity and quality of the accomplishments.  For performance in teaching (credit bearing and Extension) quality must be demonstrated by student or client evaluation as well as peer reviews.  The record of scholarship must adequately describe “the creative intellectual work” that has been completed, how it has been validated by peers and how it has been communicated.

Using the new definition of scholarship articulated earlier in this document, evaluators have more flexible parameters.  There will be no single measure (viz. number and quality of referred journal articles).  Rather, evaluators will assess evidence of discovery, integration, transformation, and application (as earlier defined). 

REFERENCES:

Approved by the OSU Office of Academic Affairs February 8, 2000GO BACK TO INDEX