TTU Home Human Sciences Home Faculty Performance Appraisal Faculty Evaluation and Awards

Faculty Evaluation

Faculty Evaluation and Awards

Merit Pay Considerations


January 2010


Specify the mechanism by which faculty salary increases based on merit are determined.


This Operating Policy will be reviewed by the Faculty Council and Executive Associate Dean by May 1 of odd numbered years. Substantial changes will be approved by a majority of voting COHS faculty members.


All salary increases for faculty shall be on a merit basis unless otherwise mandated by the legislature and shall be based on quality teaching, scholarly activity, and other contributory activities, including university and community service. Application of these criteria will be guided by each faculty member’s letter of initial appointment. The procedure for merit salary increases is set forth in the prevailing instructions from the Office of the Provost for budget preparation.

Merit is assigned at the department level and approved by the Dean. It is the responsibility of the department chairperson or school director to recommend salary rates and merit increases. It is expected that there will be a range of award levels, with higher achieving faculty members receiving a higher merit award and lower performing faculty members receiving a lesser award or no award.

Each faculty member is required to provide an annual report on his/her work to the department chairperson or school director and departmental peer committee (if appropriate to departmental policy) for use in consideration of a merit increase (OP 32.08). Consideration for merit will be based on each faculty member’s annual faculty review for the previous three years. New faculty with less than three years will be reviewed on the basis of their time at Texas Tech.

Faculty members who hold administrative appointments will be evaluated both as a faculty member and as an administrator, prorated by the percentage of administrative appointment held. Evaluation for the faculty portion will be completed according to department processes. Evaluation for the administrative portion will be completed by the person to whom the faculty member reports administratively. The resulting merit from the two evaluations will be combined.

In an attempt to provide continuity across all areas of the college, a basic framework of merit guidelines, which apply to all COHS faculty members, is provided below. Departments may have unique needs that can be addressed in addition to the basic criteria provided. All merit criteria must fit within the university guidelines and should be developed through faculty participation and made available to faculty members. Department merit policies can be viewed at the following sites:

Basic Merit Criteria

A. Teaching
Teaching effectiveness should be based on factors to include:

  1. Teaching evaluation by students in each organized course taught in the fall and spring semesters.
  2. Teaching evaluations by the Teaching Effectiveness Committee. This evaluation is generally voluntary and must be requested by a faculty member. Evaluation is required for pre-tenure faculty and full time instructors in their 2nd, 4th, and 5th years. For faculty members contemplating promotion, this evaluation should be conducted the year before the promotion application. Evaluation by the Teaching Effectiveness Committee is recommended periodically for all faculty members.
  3. Maintenance of current, relevant, and innovative courses as reflected through course syllabi, academic rigor, and innovative teaching methodologies and evaluation techniques (e.g., grade distribution, measurable learning outcomes requiring higher order thinking [application, analysis, synthesis] and skill levels, honors courses, writing intensive courses, domestic and international study courses/tours, case studies, collaborative courses, team projects, service learning projects/courses, research projects, web-based courses, and distance education). All course syllabi must contain expected learning outcomes and the methods by which those outcomes are assessed.
  4. Academic workload (OP 32.18).
  5. Chairing or serving as a member of thesis or dissertation committees and directing independent studies.
  6. Recognition of awards for teaching, awards received by students under the supervision of faculty, and TTU Teaching Academy membership.

B. Scholarship
Scholarship productivity should be measured by the scope, depth, relevance, and overall contribution of the individual’s program. The candidate may provide evidence of scholarly activities in a variety of mechanisms appropriate to the discipline and based on the initial appointment letter. Scholarship may take the form of traditional research or creative activities. Evaluation of scholarship performance should be based on such factors as:

  1. Grant proposals submitted to agencies and sponsors.
  2. Sponsored project funding – total amounts obtained, number of grants, duration of grants.
  3. Multidisciplinary research partnerships and productivity.
  4. Development efforts to secure research funding.
  5. Quality and number of publications in refereed journals (publications shall be weighted in keeping with the scale recommend by the university).
  6. Other publications such as books, book chapters, and technical reports.
  7. Citations of research in academic publications, industry/trade publications, and popular press.
  8. Relevance of research to faculty member’s academic discipline as well as the college and departmental teaching, research, and service missions.
  9. Patents and product development.
  10. Quality and number of presentations at international, national, state, and regional professional meetings – refereed, invited, and keynote address.
  11. Research efforts including letters of intent and competitive inside grants.

Faculty members in two programs in the college, Interior Design and Apparel Design and Manufacturing, may be involved in creative work as all or part of their scholarship activity. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to document the quality of his/her creative work through appropriate documentation and validation by peers and by the department chairperson. Creative activities may include:

  1. Innovative techniques, creative designs, artistic performances, unique methodologies, originality of design, case studies, etc.
  2. Juried exhibits and competitions. (official documentation required)
  3. Patents, juried memberships in professional organizations, and other forms of scholarship will also be considered.

C. Service and Community Engagement
Faculty members are expected to make professional contributions through service to the department, college, university, the discipline at large, and the community. Evaluation of service and community engagement activities should be based on factors such as:

  1. Membership on and/or chairing departmental, college, and university committees.
  2. Activity in professional societies and organizations such as offices held, responsibility for program planning, committees, etc.
  3. Professional development activities such as seminars/workshops, internships/practica, extended learning courses, post graduate courses, study abroad experiences.
  4. Invited seminars, talks, review panels, workshops, reports, etc.
  5. Advising student organizations.
  6. Direction of accredited or approved programs or coordinating academic-related activities.
  7. Attendance and participation at international, national, state, regional, and local meetings of various groups related to the discipline.
  8. Leadership in short courses and workshops for public and private groups.
  9. Community service and public relations activities.
  10. Fundraising activities.
  11. Recognition awards for service.
  12. Participation in subordinate activities associated with the operation of the department, college, and university.

While faculty performance should generally cross the three areas of teaching, scholarship, and service, merit considerations may allow flexibility to reward significant achievement in one main area. Such performance for teaching, for example, should usually represent university or national recognition in the form of teaching awards, etc. In this way, merit guidelines retain more flexibility than the guidelines for promotion and tenure.


Faculty members who have worked at Texas Tech for at least four and a half months and have not received a pay increase in the last four and a half months are eligible for merit-based salary increases.

  1. Faculty members submit an annual report in the specified format for the previous calendar year along with course syllabi for all courses taught during that calendar year by the designated time, no later than January 20.
  2. The department chairperson will evaluate each faculty member based on basic college criteria and any previously agreed on departmental criteria. As one part of the evaluation, the chairperson will verify the inclusion in the course syllabi of the expected student learning outcomes and the methods used to assess those outcomes (as required by OP 32.06, Faculty Responsibility and specified in OP 32.32, Performance Evaluation of Faculty).
  3. If appropriate to departmental policy, a peer evaluation group conducts a similar evaluation.
  4. Based on the chairperson’s evaluation and peer committee evaluation for the previous three years (OP 32.08), faculty members are assigned a ranking for merit purposes.
  5. When the merit pool is identified by the Texas Tech Board of Regents, the department chairperson then assigns a dollar amount to each faculty member based on the above referenced ranking. Those figures are submitted to the Dean for approval.
  6. At the designated time, merit awards are added to faculty salaries through the university salary system.
  7. Once the Board of Regents meets to give approval to the final budget, and the budget office verifies the budget, the chairperson will notify, in writing, each faculty member of their merit increase. A template of the notification letter is available.
  8. Merit increases are effective in September (October paycheck) each year.

See the timeline detailing the merit process for more information.


OP 32.08 Faculty Salary Increases

COHS Teaching Effectiveness Committee process

OP 32.06 Faculty Responsibility

OP 32.18 Academic Workload Calculation

OP 32.32 Performance Evaluation of Faculty

Timeline for merit process

Journal Evaluation Scale

Merit Notification Letter

Community, Family, and Addiction Services Merit Policy

Department of Design Merit Policy

Human Development and Family Studies Merit Policy

Nutrition, Hospitality, and Retailing Merit Policy

Approved by COHS faculty on January 25, 2010