1
MERIT PAY RUBRIC (Effective January 2011)
Department of Educational Studies
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF MERIT PAY DOCUMENT
This document constitutes the Department of Educational Studies (DES) faculty's recommendations to the Department Chair and to the
Dean of the School of Education regarding the criteria and conditions for the distribution of merit pay to DES faculty. To qualify for merit
pay a faculty member must, under this recommendation, be evaluated as either "satisfactory" or as "excellent." The criteria and conditions
for each of these two categories are set forth below. This document was created in the spirit of guiding faculty members toward promotion
and tenure, but receiving consistent merit pay based on these criteria does not guarantee promotion or tenure. Faculty member should
see the department governance documents for specific promotion and tenure criteria.
IPFW SD 88-25, Section C.1., defines excellence in teaching as follows:
“A candidate who excels in teaching is one who guides and inspires students and stimulates their intellectual interest and enthusiasm; one who displays a
spirit of scholarly inquiry which leads him/her to develop and strengthen course content in light of developments of the field, as well as to improve
methods of presenting material.”
TEACHING
Multiple Measures
Teaching
Performance:
Student Evaluation
Data
SATISFACTORY
EXCELLENCE
One additional measure of teaching effectiveness is
documented along with course evaluations.
All quantitative and qualitative data from student
evaluations are included for merit pay consideration.
Generally adequate course evaluations (3.0-3.9
range) are indicated on nearly all items of the student
evaluations. Occasional lower scores and negative
student anecdotal comments do not indicate a
pattern or a serious problem.
Use of two or more measures of teaching effectiveness
are documented along with course evaluations.
All quantitative and qualitative data from student
evaluations are included for merit pay consideration.
Outstanding course evaluations (4.0-5.0 range) are
indicated on nearly all items of the student evaluations.
Quantitative Indicators
 Student reviews that are considered satisfactory per
department standards of (3.0-3.9); type of course must
also be taken into account
 A graph or table of the faculty member’s average
course evaluation scores, over time, indicates that the
numerical ratings are consistent or improving
Quantitative Indicators
 Student reviews that are evaluated as excellent per
department standards (4.0-5.0); type of course must also be
taken into account
 A graph or table of the faculty member’s average course
evaluation scores, over time, indicates that the numerical
ratings are consistent or improving
2
Teaching
Performance:
Student Advising
Curriculum
Contributions:
Continuous
Improvement and
Teaching Methods
and Approaches
Qualitative Indicators:
 comments are substantive and reflect learning by
students, and that may be
o consistent or show improvement over time
o reflecting impact on students
Qualitative Indicators
 comments are substantive and reflect learning beyond the
text material, and may
o reflect instructor’s ability to create a positive learning
environment
o be consistent over time, or improve over time
o be consistent with the faculty member’s teaching
goals
Faculty who are assigned advisees fulfill their
responsibilities to advise students.
Documentation of student advisement activities that
exceed commonly accepted expectations for faculty may
be included.
Indicators of any of the following:
-- Report number of students on advising list
Indicators of any of the following:
 Contributions indicate a leadership role in improving advising
at department/school/campus level or beyond
 Report number of students on advising list
There is a plan to respond to measures of teaching
effectiveness.
There is a plan to respond to multiple measures of
teaching effectiveness, to keep current in the field, and to
try or refine new teaching strategies and learning
activities.
Two or more of the following indicators:
 evidence of continuing review and reflection on
teaching practice in light of student or peer feedback
 evidence of continuing review and reflection on
teaching practice in light of developments in the field
 methods used consistently are favorably received by
students or favorably reviewed by peers
 new methods developed or applied and favorably
received by students or favorably reviewed by peers
 new methods are successfully used by colleagues on
campus
 use of technology is aligned with learning goals
 active learning techniques are appropriate to course,
level, discipline, and linked to learning outcomes
 service learning or other experiential activity is
Two or more of the following indicators:
 evidence that changes in responses to student or peer
feedback are successful
 evidence of successful incorporation of new research, etc.
into courses taught
 methods used consistently and evidence that methods are
effective
 new methods developed or applied and evidence of
effectiveness of new methods are successfully used by peers
beyond IPFW
 integration of technology and evidence that use of technology
is effective in achieving goals
 activity learning technique meets criteria for “satisfactory” and
has been assessed for impact on learning
 service learning activity meets criteria for “satisfactory” and
3
appropriate to course, relevant to service agency or
other environment, and linked to learning outcomes in a
meaningful and informative way
has been assessed for impact on learning
Other
Other evidence for teaching effectiveness may be included.
For examples see IPFW OAA Memorandum 03-2.
Other evidence for teaching effectiveness may be included. For
examples see IPFW OAA Memorandum 03-2.
RESEARCH OR
SCHOLARSHIP
There is evidence that an articulated research
agenda is supported by research in progress.
There is evidence that the research agenda is guiding
research productivity.
Indicator
Indicator
- A self-report that describes the emerging research
- A self-report that describes the research agenda including
agenda and how the faculty member’s productivity
supports it.
continuity and connections between projects and how the
faculty member’s productivity supports it.
Research in progress can be documented with
evidence
For excellent research performance, a refereed or
scholarly publication is required, along with another
indicator(s) listed below:
Indicators
 letters of collaboration regarding the research partnership,
 IRB proposals,
 conference papers, posters, round tables, or slides
presented,
 submitted grants, or
 manuscripts under review
Scholarly Publication Indicators
 grant submissions (as PI, co-PI, or author),
 publication of refereed journal article(s),
 book chapter(s),
 book(s),
 refereed conference paper(s) or proceedings, or

work dissemination beyond the university of professionally
produced media developed by the faculty member, such as
training materials, instructional material, videos, or computer
software.
Verifiable information is included for journal or
scholarly publications.
Verifiable information is included for journal or scholarly
publications.
Indicators (as applicable)
 letter acknowledging submission,
 journal’s acceptance rate, where journal is indexed,
and/or journal’s rank,
 type of review of manuscript,
 word limit of journal and actual page number of
manuscript,
 breadth of readership.
Indicators (as applicable)
 letter acknowledging acceptance for publication,
 journal’s acceptance rate, where journal is indexed, and/or
journal’s rank,
 type of review of manuscript,
 word limit of journal and actual page number of manuscript,
 breadth of readership,
 evidence that work has been cited by others.
4
Other
Other evidence for research or scholarship may be included.
For examples see IPFW OAA Memorandum 05-6.
Other evidence for research or scholarship may be included. For
examples see IPFW OAA Memorandum 05-6.
SERVICE
Service to any one of the SOE Standing Committees
and one or more of the following must be
documented: SOE task forces or committees,
university-wide committees, or one’s professional
association(s) (locally, regionally, or nationally) or
the community.
Service to and leadership in one’s program, the SOE,
campus, or professional field that is clearly above and
beyond the satisfactory ranges of participation must be
documented. Outstanding service may include
recognized service to the SOE, the university, or to
professional associations at the local, regional, national,
or international levels.
Based on the following indicators:
 Faculty member participated regularly
 Contributed to the efficient conduct of necessary
business and tasks of committee
 Accepted responsibility at the level to which faculty
member was appointed
Additional indicators are:
 Contributed equitably (in relation to other committee
members and faculty member’s expertise) to the goals
of the committee
 Evaluations document the quality and impact of the
work and value to constituents
 Documents that result reflect positively on the
contributions to the outcome
 Faculty member contributed to the dissemination of
results
 Faculty member participated in improvement efforts
initiated by others.
 Community service/outreach is related to a
University/Community Partnership representing the
university in professional service/consulting for the
community
Based on one or more of the following indicators:
 Assumed a leadership role that positively affected the
outcome, and one or more of the following:
o Helped to solve a problem or develop a plan for a new
initiative, or implement a plan or complete other
essential work consistent with the goals established
o Shaped the planning, drafting and completion of
report/project
o Helped to shape new policy and/or negotiated
satisfactory outcome of a contentious process
o Evaluations document significance of contributions
based on faculty member’s expertise to the work of
group
o Reports or presentations for regional or national
audiences meet relevant standards of peer review
o Presentations or publications are cited as models for
others engaged in related work.
 Colleagues or administration assess faculty member as
excellent per the unit’s standards and identify specific
examples of his/her leadership
 Faculty member’s exemplary performance led to his/her
seeking out and/or being asked to assume increasing levels
of responsibility
 Service accomplishments contribute to the mission of the
5
Professional Service
As well as any of the above indicators, the following may also
apply to professional service
 Occasional invitations to review or perform professional
services reflect competent performance
 Published reviews appear in recognized media
appropriate to the discipline.
 Contribution to an edited volume resulted in an efficient
and timely publication
 Participated and contributed to reports that were
disseminated to agencies or other universities
 Evaluators assess the faculty member’s contributions
as satisfactory per accepted standards
Other
Other evidence for service may be included. For examples
see IPFW OAA Memorandum 04-2.
committee/position and advance it in at least one of three
ways of teaching, research or its service mission.
 Publications or presentations to regional or national
audiences contribute to scholarly discourse beyond the
campus and document candidate’s growth in the respective
area
 Faculty member provided leadership to an existing
partnership, or initiated a new partnership to meet university
and community needs
 Constituents provide documentation of the importance of the
faculty member’s leadership and identify specific examples.
As well as any of the above indicators, the following may also apply
to professional service
 Frequent invitations to review or perform professional
services reflect expertise and high quality contributions
 Published reviews appear in recognized media for high
quality and significance to the discipline.
 Leadership, creativity and expertise in editing a volume
contributed significantly to a high quality volume
 Leadership and expertise contributed to reports that were
disseminated to agencies or other universities
 Evaluators assess the faculty member’s contributions as
excellent per accepted standards
-- Leadership in research such as editorial service on scholarly
journals
Other evidence for service may be included. For examples see
IPFW OAA Memorandum 04-2.
Notes:
1. Merit points are awarded on a 0-2 scale based on .5 increments, where 0.5-1.0 indicates satisfactory performance and 1.5-2.0
indicates excellent performance.
2. Bullets indicated as “dots” are copied and edited from the OAA Memorandum Documents regarding promotion and tenure. The
bullets indicated as “-“ are from the SOE FAC.