Merit Review Procedures
In the fall, the Chair and Chair's Assistant (CA) convene for a planning session. Included in the planning session are:
- Assigning peer review teaching pairs and setting a due date for faculty to turn in their peer teaching evaluations (mid-March) and merit materials to the CA (mid-April).
- Setting a Merit Review Committee meeting dates; confirm availability of Merit Review Committee members to attend.
- CA should book two, three-hour sessions to ensure the Merit Review Committee can complete their reviews of faculty. For meeting procedures, see Merit Review Meetings section below.
- CA consults with Chair regarding potential CAB and Faculty Meeting dates that can be used for merit review meetings.
- Make sure all faculty are available for both dates: Assistant Professors are unaware of CAB dates and don’t normally have them flagged on their calendars so they need to be notified if they will need to be present to review any senior lecturers.
- CA reserves Sieg conference room, a laptop, and a projector.
- One month before the merit review meetings: the CA assembles a merit review binder with faculty materials as they come in. The CA should make the binder available to the Chair of the Merit Review Committee for the merit review meetings.
- Early in fall quarter, the CA consults with the department Chair and emails the peer teaching review schedule to the faculty.
- Early in winter quarter, the CA consults with the department Chair and emails the merit review schedule and policies (http://www.hcde.washington.edu/myhcde/faculty/policies/peer-merit) to HCDE faculty. The email includes details what merit materials need to be turned in (both electronic and hard copy) to the AC by mid-April:
- Ongoing merit CV.
- Qualitative statement.
- Signed peer teaching evaluation (if applicable).
- Monthly, CA emails the merit materials due date (mid-April) (reminding faculty of any missing peer evaluations).
- These items should stay on faculty meeting agenda reminder list.
- After the faculty turn in their merit materials to the CA: the CA makes PDFs (including peer evaluations and Chapter 24 workload agreements), compiles individual files, and places them into a Catalyst dropbox for review by the committee members senior in rank to the those being reviewed at least two weeks before each merit review meeting. The CA emails a link to the Catalyst dropbox to faculty senior in rank to those being reviewed..
Faculty should use the COE merit CV template that is available at: http://www.engr.washington.edu/mycoe/faculty/facpromotion.html. Faculty should be reminded to include the following in their merit CVs:
- Light grey highlights to show activities from April 1, 20XX, to April 1, 20XX, on CVs.
- Bold all items in CVs that are forthcoming, e.g., in press, submitted, not yet awarded, not yet received, and distinguish that from what is already out. The COE CV template states:
- Final reports on grants should be entered in the section entitled: Abstracts, letters, non-refereed papers, and technical reports (grouped by type).
- Promotion & Tenure cases reviewed for faculty at other schools may be listed names of the faculty member reviewed should not be included.
- HCDE committee roles: make note of those roles in CVs under section 11.0 Service.
- List the number of citations for published papers. The COE Merit Review Committee advises: "Please give the number of citations for some or all of your papers; indicate the source of the citation counts."
- Indicate graduate student co-authors with superscript.
- Faculty may want to list NSF, article, and conference paper reviews.
- MS and PhD student committees chaired or served on should include dates students graduated and separate "chaired committee" from "served on committee."
- List PhD co-chairs.
- Paperwork must be on file with the Graduate School officially appointing faculty as a "chair" of a committee.
- Past MS committees: label and separate thesis from non-thesis students.
- The first two or three-hour session of merit meetings should include reviews of Senior Lecturers, and Assistant Professors and Associate Professor who may be going up for promotion. The meeting proceeds as follows:
- Associate Professors going up for promotion are reviewed first only by Full Professors.
- Next, Assistant, Associate, and Full Professors review Senior Lecturers.
- Then, Assistant Professors leave the meeting and Associate and Full Professors review Assistant Professors.
- The second two-hour session of meetings (attended by Full Professors only) should include:
- Review of Associate Professors and Full Professors (Full Professors being reviewed should temporarily leave the meeting).
Follow-up to Merit Review Meetings
The Merit Review Committee drafts it merit recommendations for the department Chair.
- The departmental Chair must notify COE HR Administrator before June 15 that the department has completed the merit reviews and whether all faculty have been found at least meritorious.
- The email could say something like:
- We have completed all merit reviews and all faculty were found to be meritorious. (or not, depending on the situation).
- Once the COE HR Administrator receives confirmations from all departments within the COE, they will write a report for the Dean of the COE, which will then be sent to the Provost's office.
- The CA will work with the Chair to draft merit letters to all faculty, starting with the text provided from the merit review committee, which the Chair may adapt, as the review committee is advisory to the Chair. The CA will help the department Chair schedule merit review meetings with some or all faculty in late June or early July to review these letters.
- To prepare for the next cycle of merit review, the CA will help schedule Chapter 24 meetings in late summer or early fall between the Chair and relevant faculty (annually for senior lecturers and assistant professors, every two years for associate professors, and every three years for full professors). The CA will maintain a calendar of who is due to renew their Chapter 24 workload documents and notify faculty in about scheduling these meetings.