DEPARTMENT OF ROMANCE LANGUAGES & LITERATURES

MERIT PAY PLAN

This document sets forth procedures and guidelines by which recommendations for merit salary increases will be made in the Department of Romance Languages & Literatures. Awards of merit increments are designed to recognize outstanding overall performance in the department in teaching, research, publication, and service. “Outstanding” signifies superior performance in relation to departmental norms and averages. This document will orient both the considerations of the Chair and of the elected Merit Pay Committee (MPC), which will assist the Chair in an advisory capacity in this process.

To the degree possible, judgments should be made on the basis of assigned duties, as specified in the semester faculty assignment form.

PROCEDURE

General

Barring administrative stipulations to the contrary, merit pay deliberations will consider all the annual activity reports (AAR) since the last time faculty were eligible for merit pay, or for the previous three years, whichever is less. The three-year limit may be waived to ensure consideration of a major accomplishment never considered for a merit increase.

When general merit money is allocated or anticipated, the Chair will consider the AAR of each faculty person for the applicable year(s), as well as additional documentation submitted by individual faculty. After evaluating this material according to the guidelines set forth herein, and taking into account the advice and rankings of the MPC, the Chair will recommend merit increases. Individuals may request a conference with the Chair at any point in this procedure.

Merit Pay Committee

Each eligible faculty member will submit the following to the Chair, who will make it available to the MPC:

1) a CV containing items from the pertinent year(s) only;
2) documentation of teaching, advising, or other instructional activities; of service, and of historical situation, if applicable.

The MPC will score and rank all submissions according to guidelines, and present the Chair with an annotated version of these rankings. Consultation and discussion may follow. The Chair and MPC should agree on methods of division or distribution of amounts or increments of merit money, when practicable.

A faculty member may consult those sections of the annotated rankings and Chair’s recommendation that pertain to him/her. Once recommendations are made, individuals may appeal to the Chair and/or request an audience with the MPC to request reconsideration. If changes are deemed advisable too late for a change to be effected that year, the case will be given priority in the next merit period.

Guidelines

The chair and the MPC will score and rank individuals in four categories for a possible total of 100 points. Criteria are listed in order of descending importance. Within the categories, the committee will maintain consistency in scoring methods. For the benefit of future committees, each year’s methods should be recorded.

Point distributions for faculty will normally adhere to the following formula:

30 for teaching
20 advising/other instructional activities
40 for research and publication
10 for service

Exceptions

Exceptions to the application of this formula (“normal point distribution”) may occur in the following circumstances:

(i) where a faculty member, with the approval of the chair has been relieved of a regularly assigned teaching duty resulting in a higher proportion of research than would normally occur, that is, where the proportion of research exceeds the departmental average assigned to research by more than 20%, and the Merit Pay Committee, in its discretion, decides that the normal point distribution would not fairly reflect the member’s contribution to the Department,

(ii) where a faculty member, with the approval of the chair has been relieved of a regularly assigned research duty resulting in a higher proportion of teaching than would normally occur, that is, where the proportion of teaching exceeds the departmental average assigned to teaching by more than 20%, and the Merit Pay Committee, in its discretion, decides that the normal point distribution would not fairly reflect the member’s contribution to the Department,

(iii) where a faculty member, with the approval of the chair has been assigned an anomalous distribution of annual activities, that is, where the proportion of a particular area exceeds the departmental average assignment by more than 20%, and the Merit Pay Committee, in its discretion, decides that the normal point distribution would not fairly reflect the member’s contribution to the Department, College, or University.

Where such exceptions have occurred, the Merit Pay Committee will revise the normal point distribution in accordance with Appendix “A” to the Merit Pay Plan.

Additionally, certain achievements in research require several years of dedicated work and achievement, e.g., the publication of a sole-authored book, or the winning of a major fellowship or outside grant. Since these represent the cumulative achievement that a faculty member has realized during several years of assigned duties in research, it is agreed that in any given year that merit pay is available for distribution, faculty members who have attained one of these achievements will be awarded merit pay at the highest level available that year.

CRITERIA FOR MERIT POINTS

Category 1: Teaching (up to 30 points)

1. College, University or other award for excellence in teaching
2. Distinguished teaching as determined by student evaluation scores above department norm.
3a. Extra teaching load: student credit hours significantly above the departmental mean; teaching a large class (over 35); an extra section; a class requiring at least 6000 words of corrected writing; independent studies (4905, 6905); honors theses, etc.; voluntary increase of contact hours
3b. Direction of graduate theses and dissertations
4. Coordination: Outstanding direction/coordination of language programs (as shown by overall high evaluations, TA teaching awards, innovation in curricula or programs, portfolio)
5. Presentation of portfolio of syllabi, and/or self-evaluations (1 pg.) about the contexts and successes of teaching performance; new course or curriculum development; teaching-improvement initiatives; other instructional activities
6. Positive peer evaluations forwarded by departmental or affiliated groups/committees, or individuals

Category 2: Advising and other instructional activities (OIA) (up to 20 points)

1. A College/University/professional award for advising
2. Excellence in conduct of role as undergraduate coordinator or graduate coordinator (French, Spanish), or as program coordinator (Italian, Portuguese)
3. Director of study abroad program
4. Chairing OIA committees, such as adjunct faculty evaluation, TIP (or similar), graduate awards and placement, curriculum revision, language-learning center, or any other assigned as OIA.
5. Serving as committee member for MA, PhD thesis or non thesis; study abroad advisor;
FLAC coordinator; member of OIA committees (see above)
6. Nomination for a CLAS or other award for advising
7. Pre-professional development activities (workshop, mock interviews, etc.)
8. Organization of lectures, exhibits, other events related to teaching

Category 3: Research and Publication (up to 40 points)

A. Most meritorious

1. A sole-authored book, book-length monograph, major critical edition, or other comparable published project that makes a significant contribution to one’s field.
2. A book prize or other professional award or distinction
3. Receipt of a major outside grant, research grant or fellowship

B. Very meritorious

1. A co-authored book-length monograph or major critical edition
2. A brief monograph or book-length edition or annotated translation
3. Substantial articles in refereed and/or highly selective outlets: journals, edited books or proceedings
4. Editor of collections, anthologies, proceedings
5. Review articles
6. Plenary or keynote address

C. Meritorious

1. Co-editor of collections, anthologies, proceedings, including journals
2. Conference papers and non-published invited lectures; submission of completed book manuscript to publisher
3. UF research grants (outside RLL)
4. Other published items, including reviews and translations, and reprints of articles
5. Submission of major external grant proposal (e.g. Guggenheim, N.E.H., FIPSE, etc.)
6. Public recognition of scholarly achievement, as shown by Humanities Citation Index; nomination for book or other scholarly prize; other printed mentions in a scholarly context; interviews in media, etc.
7. Non-refereed publications; submission of articles to refereed journals
8. Active leadership roles in professional organizations
9. Organization of meetings/symposia/workshops/sessions at local, national or international conferences
10. Active participation in local, national or international meetings, symposia, conferences, workshops (other than giving a prepared paper)
11. Active membership on advisory or editorial boards
12. Assistance to public schools, government, or other state/national agencies or boards
13. Receipt of a departmental research grant

Category 4: Service (up to 10 points)

Merit is recognized in this category for particular efficacy and productivity; mere service on a committee is deemed the norm

1. General organization of a major conference. (To include both the year of planning and the year of occurrence)
2. Formal evaluation of external programs, departments or dossiers (for tenure and/or promotion or hiring)
3. Chairship of a standing or ad-hoc departmental, center, college or university committee
4. Membership on a departmental, center, college or university committee (not OIA committee)
5. Evaluation of book manuscript
6. Evaluation of article(s) (excluding editorial board evaluations)
7. Promotion of student extra-curricular activities (clubs, organizations, events, etc.)
8. Any other activity, not specified here, judged to be worthy by the Merit Pay Committee and/or the Chair

Appendix “A”

Calculation of Revised Point Distribution where Exceptions to Normal Point Distribution have Occurred due to Anomalous Activity Assignments

Where exceptions to the normal point distribution have occurred, the committee shall revise the normal point distribution as follows:

(i) The committee shall first identify the anomalous assignment (e.g. research, teaching) and the percentage of total activity which the department member has dedicated to it.

(ii) Taking into consideration the annual activity of all department members, the committee shall then calculate the average percentage that department members (the “departmental average”) dedicate to the activity in question (the “anomalous activity”.)

(iii) The committee shall then calculate the amount by which the percentage of the anomalous activity exceeds the departmental average.

(iv) The committee members shall then multiply the amount by which the percentage of the anomalous activity exceeds the departmental average by the percentage of points assigned to that activity in the normal point distribution in order to determine the number of points (“anomalous activity points") that should be assigned to the anomalous activity.

(v) The committee shall then add the anomalous activity points to the normal number of points that would be assigned in the normal point distribution, to determine the highest number of points that the member might receive for the activity in question.

Example:

(i) Identify anomalous activity: research
Percentage of total activity dedicated to the anomalous activity: 100%

(ii) Departmental average dedicated to research: 27%

(iii) Amount by which the percentage of the anomalous activity exceeds the departmental average: 73%

(iv) Multiply the amount by which the percentage of the anomalous activity exceeds the departmental average (73) by the percentage of points assigned to that activity in the normal point distribution (.4) in order to determine the number of points that should be assigned to the anomalous activity. (.4 X 73 = 29)

(v) Add that amount to the normal point distribution (40) for a total of 69 possible points for Research.