MINUTES OF THE FACULTY EVALUATION AND COMPENSATION
AD HOC COMMITTEE
MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 13, 2004
Present: John Singley, Don Van Horn, Michael Cornfeld, Sandra Marra, Elaine Baker, Caroline Perkins, Janet Dooley, Lawrence Shao, Shirley Lumpkin, Corley Dennison, Kay Wildman, Uday Tate, Ruth Ann Murphy.
ORDER OF BUSINESS:
The meeting was called to order by the chair and the minutes of the last meeting read and approved.
The Merit subcommittee reported on their recent subcommittee meeting and brought forth a resolution that that committee had passed, namely an evaluation rating schedule. The schedule as proposed by the Merit subcommittee was based on a numerical rating scale, with the number one (1) being low and the number four (4) being high. This resolution resulted in a motion to accept this rating scale by the FE&C Committee as a whole. The motion was seconded and passed.
The Merit Subcommittee also proposed labels for each of the four (4) numerical ratings. This was followed by a general discussion of the labels to be applied to each of the rating numbers. It was finally agreed that the terms applied would be as follows:
· 4 = Exemplar
· 3 = Professionally Acceptable
· 2 = Needs Improvement
· 1 = Unacceptable
These labels were moved to be acceptable to the committee and the motion passed.
Further discussion led to fine tuning the numerical value to represent the following schedule:
· 1.00 – 1.50 = Unacceptable
· 1.51 - 2.50 = Needs Improvement
· 2.51 - 3.50 = Professional Acceptable
· 3.51 - 4.00 = Exemplar
The committee further recognized that these scales could effect future promotion and tenure conderations.
A discussion then followed about the distribution of merit monies i.e. should it be University wide or restricted to the College levels. No firm resolution was reached by the committee. Discussion is to be continued after further study by the Merit Subcommittee.
THE NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 20, 2004, VENUE YET TO BE DETERMINED.
John Singley, Committee Secretary