Faculty Handbook 2012 - 2013

a) Salary increases are based upon recommendations that result from regularly scheduled personnel reviews conducted by the President's Advisory Board or, in the cases of tenured faculty, upon Interim Salary Reviews conducted between regularly scheduled Tenured Reviews, or upon the results of Special Review. Based upon the recommendation, and in consultation with the President, the Provost makes the final decision on salary increases.

b) The criteria upon which faculty are evaluated for merit increases are the Performance Criteria for Contract Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion.

c) Faculty are determined through this review process to be "meeting expectations," "exceeding expectations," or "not meeting expectations" in each of the three areas of teaching, research, and other contributions to the College. Each category receives equal weighting. A percentage increase to the base salary is attached each year to each of these rankings, based upon the size of the salary pool. The same merit rating may not necessarily result in the same percentage increase during the years in which the merit rating applies: if the pool is larger, the percentage increase may be larger; if the pool is smaller, the percentage increase may be smaller. The merit rating holds until the next review, unless the faculty member requests a Special Review (see below). This is accomplished through the following schedule.

a) Non-tenured, tenure-track faculty are assumed to be meeting expectations during their first three year contract and, thus, receive the percentage increase appropriate for that ranking during the second and third years of their initial four-year contract.

b) The third-year review results in both a contract reappointment decision and a recommendation for merit-based salary increases, if any, which will then hold for years four, five, and six of the probationary period.

c) The tenure decision in the sixth year results in a salary recommendation that holds until the Interim Salary Review.

d) Faculty whose initial appointment acknowledges years of service at another institution will be evaluated for merit increases on their review schedule rather than upon actual years of service at Denison. Thus, a faculty member whose initial appointment acknowledges one year or prior service would be evaluated for a merit increase as part of the "third-year review" in their second year at Denison.

e) Non-tenure-track faculty will receive the percentage increase associated with meeting expectations. They will be reviewed for merit increases when they are reviewed as part of the normal review process for non-tenure-track faculty. The merit ranking that results from that review holds until the next such review.

a) Tenured faculty are reviewed for merit increases as part of the regularly scheduled tenured faculty review. This merit ranking holds until the Interim Salary Review.

b) Tenured faculty also receive an Interim Salary Review normally in the fourth year between tenured faculty reviews. These reviews are based upon a salary report that consists of information for all of the elements of the tenured faculty review dossier (except for the departmental evaluation) since the last tenured faculty review. These reports are read by the Salary Review Team, composed of two recent members of Advisory who are selected by the Provost.

c) These team members will review materials submitted by the faculty member under review and vote on whether the faculty member is meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations in each of three individual categories (teaching, scholarship/creative expression, service).

d) The Salary Review team members will make recommendations to the Provost who makes the final decision regarding salary increases on the basis of recommendations from the Salary Review team.

e) If a member of the Salary Review team is also a member of the same department as a colleague under review, the team member will recuse him/herself from the review process; the Provost will ask another former member of Advisory, who is not in the department of the person under review, to serve as the second team member in this case.

f) The Provost is a non-voting member of the Salary Review team except in the event of a tie vote. If there is a ‘split decision’ by the two members of the review team, the Provost will vote and this vote will be the final decision regarding meeting, exceeding, or not meeting expectations with regard to the individual criterion on which there is a split decision.

g) The salary review evaluation will conclude with a letter from the Provost to the faculty member recording the results of the review. A conference between the faculty member and the Provost will be scheduled at the faculty member’s request. This salary decision holds until the next tenured faculty review. (See Special Reviews below).

Full-time Teaching Faculty in Physical Education are evaluated for merit increases as part of their regularly scheduled reviews for contract renewal.

In any year, any full-time member of the teaching faculty, tenured or non-tenured, may initiate a Special Review. This review will be based upon a salary report containing all of the information an individual would normally submit for a contract renewal or tenured faculty review. It will be read by the Provost and two recent members of Advisory. The salary decision will hold for that individual until the next regularly scheduled review.