FACULTY EVALUATION & COMPENSATION

REVIEW AD HOC COMMITTEE (FECRAHC) MINUTES

April 20, 2006, 236 Jenkins Hall

MEMBERS PRESENT: Marty Laubach, Rick McCormick, Wendy Moorhead (Secretary), Larry Schmitz, Loukia Dixon, James Burton (Chair), Larry Stickler, Christina Murphy, David Hatfield,

MEMBERS ABSENT: Chuck Bailey, Wendell Dobbs, Blaker Bolling, MUGC rep,

EX-OFFICIO, NON-VOTING MEMBERS PRESENT: Sarah Denman, Michael McGuffey, and Janet Dooley

EX-OFFICIO, NON-VOTING MEMBERS ABSENT: none

GUESTS: none

The meeting was convened at 12:31p.m. by James Burton, Chair.

1.                  APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

The minutes of the April 4, 2006 meeting were approved as written.

2.                  OLD BUSINESS:

Survey Presentation and Discussion:   Marty Laubach led the discussion of the components and subcomponents of the survey.  The survey is composed of three distinct sections: demographics, attitudes, and recommendations. The survey was returned to the subcommittee for editorial changes made during the discussion. The subcommittee will return the survey to the committee when editorial changes have been completed.   

Process Timeline:  Survey to appear on MyMU in approximately three weeks.

3.                  NEW BUSINESS:

Policy Documentation

Dr. Denman provided to the committee with a copy of the state policy regarding faculty evaluation and compensation [W.Va. Code § 18B-8-3a (2006)]. This policy addresses institutional salary policies, distribution of faculty salary increases, and distribution of non-classified administration salary increases. She also provided the committee with a requested copy of the Higher Education Policy Commission meeting minutes (June 29, 2001) that discussed salary guidelines for faculty, classified employees and non-classified employees. Copies of both may be obtained by contacting the committee’s chair or secretary.

            WVU Faculty Evaluation and Compensation

The Provost contacted her counterpart at WVU to obtain information on the WVU FEC plan (requested by the committee in a previous meeting). To summarize:  WVU plan has 6 markers and every college has its own formula.  She indicated there is a variant in what faculty could select to place within their plan. Within the WVU system, faculty scores may fall at any level (i.e., excellent, good, needs improvement). All of faculty do not receive all “good” or all “excellent” scores. Every faculty member is evaluated every year and with this system there are penalties for faculty with an unsatisfactory rating. 

The meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted:

Wendy Moorhead

 Recording Secretary