Skip to Content
Texas State University

APPS 5.04.01 Merit/Performance Policy

Department of Accounting 

McCoy College of Business Administration 

Texas State University 

APPS 5: Personnel Evaluation, Reappointment, Merit and Promotion Decisions 

APPS 5.04.01 Merit/Performance Policy 

Faculty are evaluated in three categories for merit and annual performance: teaching, scholarship, and service/professional activities. Ratings of between zero and three are assigned to each category for each faculty member. When rating an individual in each category, the Chair will rely on information provided by the faculty member in his/her Faculty Activity Report, the faculty member’s Self Evaluation Report, and any other documentation (such as peer reviews, etc.) available. Although some degree of subjectivity is necessary in any performance evaluation, the Chair will first use objective guidelines to the extent that they are available and applicable to rate each faculty member. 

The Department Chair and the Dean will confer on faculty performance evaluations in the spring semester. The evaluation is then discussed between the Chair and the individual faculty member as part of the feedback process. In absence of information to the contrary, weights assigned to each evaluation category for tenured and tenure-track faculty are 40% teaching, 40% scholarship, and 20% service; weights for nontenure line faculty are 40% teaching, 20% professional activities, and 40% service. However, in the year prior to the evaluation and feedback process, different weights may be assigned after discussion and agreement between the faculty member and the Chair; if they cannot agree, the faculty member may petition the Dean for approval. Opportunity to reset weights will be given to each qualifying faculty member in early spring at least nine months prior to the next evaluation; however, weights must be in conformity with those included in CBAPPS 5.01 Faculty Evaluation. 

Teaching 

Teaching performance will be ascertained by a subjective assessment of the extent to which the faculty member demonstrates most of the following traits: 

  • knowledge of course material; 
  • intellectual rigor suitable for the course and its academic level; 
  • student challenge illustrated by course syllabus and exam/assignment content, 
  • classroom enthusiasm and motivation; 
  • trying appropriate new classroom pedagogy and technology; 
  • ability to relate to students of varying abilities; 
  • sharing successful techniques with other faculty; 
  • teaching and/or developing new courses; 
  • punctuality and preparedness in class attendance; 
  • timeliness in returning student assignments and examinations; and 
  • availability for discussion with students outside of class. 

Available evaluations of both numerical rankings and written comments by peers and students will be reviewed and compared to other faculty members teaching the same courses and to the departmental results. Class size and grade-point average will be taken into consideration when reviewing student evaluations. In addition, honors or recognitions received for, and self-development activities focused on, teaching effectiveness will be considered. 

The following discussion describes four specific ratings; numerical ratings can be scaled anywhere between zero and three. 

Rating of 3 points: A 3-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who 

  1. is seen as possessing to a high degree all or almost all of the above-mentioned traits and 
  2. has been evaluated by peers and/or students as “significantly above average” or “above average” in teaching performance. 

A faculty member with this rating should be seen as a teaching role model for other faculty. 

Rating 2 points: A 2-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who 

  1. is seen as possessing to a satisfactory degree all or almost all of the above-mentioned traits and 
  2. has been evaluated by peers and/or students as “average” in teaching performance. 

A faculty member with this rating meets expected norms but could benefit from actions such as additional preparation time relative to the class materials, better classroom organization, better student communications, and a wider variety of pedagogical methods. 

Rating of 1 point: A 1-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who 

  1. is seen as needing considerable improvement relative to all or almost all of the above-mentioned traits and 
  2. has been evaluated by peers and/or students as “below average.” 

This faculty member is likely viewed by peers as demonstrating a lack of intellectual depth of understanding relative to the course material and/or motivation/interest/enthusiasm in teaching the course. Student evaluations for a faculty member with this rating would likely indicate the following complaints: does not use class time wisely; shows little enthusiasm for the subject matter or classroom interaction; is late in returning examinations and assignments; is not available outside of class to students; habitually misses or is late for class; and/or is ill-prepared. A faculty member with this rating is “below expectations” and needs to be given specific directions for improvement and may need to be assigned as a mentee to a faculty member who is receiving ratings of 1. 

Rating of 0 points: A 0-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who 

  1. is seen as exhibiting none or almost none of the above-mentioned traits, 
  2. has been evaluated by peers and/or students as “below average,” and 
  3. has consistently rejected or ignored previous suggestions for improvement. 

A faculty member who receives a 0-point rating exhibits teaching performance that is unacceptable. If this faculty member shows little or no improvement over time, he/she should not be eligible for performance/merit adjustments. 

Scholarship 

A wide variety of intellectual contributions exist but they can typically be divided into two classifications: peer-reviewed journal articles and other intellectual contributions. These classifications are defined for purposes of the Department of Accounting as follows: 

Peer-reviewed journal article (PRJ): an intellectual contribution that has been published (in either “hard” or electronic form) in a journal on the McCoy College of Business Journal List. Publications in journals listed on the McCoy College list of rated journals must be peer-reviewed research articles as opposed to book reviews, comments, rebuttals, etc. PRJ activity is included only in the year which it becomes published (i.e., the earlier of when it is in print or available on line) and when the journal is on college’s/department’s journal list. Publication quality will be assessed based on the highest journal rating from the journal quality lists from the date of manuscript submission to the date the article is published. Faculty members planning to submit a manuscript to a journal not on the college/department journal list are encouraged to petition to have the journal added to the list through the process set out in the Department of Accounting’s PPSs. 

Other intellectual contributions (OICs): all other scholarly work that complements the college’s mission other than PRJs. For purposes of this PPS, an OIC will only be considered for performance evaluation if it is an “acceptable OIC,” as described below. If multiple presentations are made based on the same paper, only one will be considered in performance and merit decisions. 

OICs for all Department of Accounting faculty include the following items: 

  • Published article in a journal not included in the McCoy College’s journal ranking list; 
  • Published textbook or textbook chapter; 
  • Published instructional materials (solutions manual, study guide, design and implementation of new curricula or courses etc.); 
  • Published case with instructional materials; 
  • Published book reviews; 
  • Peer-reviewed presentations at regional or national conferences at which papers undergo rigorous peer-review (If multiple presentations are made based on the same paper, only one will be considered in performance and merit decisions.); 
  • Research monographs; 
  • Chapters in scholarly books; 
  • Widely used instructional software; 
  • Non-peer-reviewed journal articles; 
  • Technical reports submitted to grant funding agencies; and 
  • Invited paper presentations to external parties. 

Additional acceptable OIC for nontenure line-track faculty: 

  • Poster presentations at regional or national meetings 

PRJs and OICs can be discipline-based contributions, contributions to practice, or learning/pedagogical contributions. 

Only intellectual contributions over the prior three (3) years should be included in a faculty member’s performance evaluation. Scholarly publications that result from consulting and professional development activities as well as internal or external grant activities are encouraged. To arrive at a performance evaluation score for intellectual contributions, PRJs and OICs will be assigned points as shown below: 

PRJ in a McCoy College Journal Rated A+ : Points 1.50 

PRJ in a McCoy College Journal Rated A : Points 1.25 

PRJ in a McCoy College Journal Rated B : Points .75 

PRJ in a McCoy College Journal Rated C : Points .25 

OIC .25 

The score for intellectual contributions is the total points earned over the previous three years. However, the maximum total points for the three-year evaluation period is 3.0 and the maximum contribution from C-rated PRJs and OICs combined in any single year is 0.5. 

For example, one C-rated peer-reviewed journal publication and two OIC in year 1, one A-rated peer-reviewed publication in year 2, and one B-rated peer-reviewed journal publication in year 3, would yield a score of 2.50 for the year 3 intellectual contribution performance evaluation, as shown below: 

Year Points
1

0.50 (C and OIC capped at 0.50 per year) 

2 1.25
3 0.75
Total 2.50

 

Service/Professional Activities 

Service and professional activities are an integral part of faculty responsibilities and essential for all full-time department faculty members. Service may be performed at the department, college, university, professional, and/or community level. The following activities are considered job requirements in addition to service: (1) attendance and participation at scheduled departmental and college faculty meetings and (2) attendance at one university graduation ceremony each year. Full-time faculty members (unless specifically exempted) are also expected to serve on committees (department, college, and/or university) as needed. 

Other types of service activities include: 

  • Periodically attending accounting student organization meetings; 
  • Periodically attending honor society inductions, Awards Day, Bobcat Days, Hooding Ceremonies, and other activities needing departmental representation; 
  • Acting as faculty advisor to a student organization; 
  • Contributing as necessary to all accreditation processes; 
  • Invited presentations to external groups; 
  • Actively engaging in departmental recruitment of new faculty; 
  • Actively engaging with alumni as well as current and potential recruiters and donors; and 
  • Being involved in accounting-discipline related community service activities. 

In addition to service faculty members are responsible for determining activities that will improve their teaching, maintain their currency in the discipline, and enhance scholarship. This may be accomplished by some faculty members largely through research and publishing activities. Other faculty members may improve their teaching and maintain currency in the discipline through substantive professional activities. On their annual Activity Plan, faculty members must list activities to be undertaken, and how these activities will, improve their instructional abilities, currency of knowledge, and scholarship production or provide substantive linkages to the profession. Because the faculty is diverse, different types of endeavors can be considered for professional activity purposes. Faculty are not limited to the professional development workshops and seminars offered on-campus by Texas State University but may include professional meetings, additional post-graduate training, studies in learning theory, and continuing professional education. Examples of professional activities and substantive linkages to practice include, but are not limited to: 

  • Accepting additional teaching responsibilities (overload, more than two preparations in a semester, etc.) when colleagues are ill, on developmental leave, or in circumstances when the department experiences an unforeseen need; 
  • Participating in faculty internships; 
  • Participating in business or professional organizations that result in sharing of expert knowledge; 
  • Participating in presentations at professional events that focus on the practice of business disciplines; 
  • Pro bono consulting to community or professional organizations. 
  • Developing and presenting executive education programs; 
  • Serving on boards of directors of business or professional organizations; 
  • Participating, at an appropriate level of managerial responsibility, in a public, private, or not-for-profit enterprise, or in professional or pro-bono consulting that is material in terms of time and service; 
  • Participating in other activities that place faculty in direct contact with business or professional organizations; 
  • Engaging in significant, documented continuing professional education experiences; 
  • Serving as an officer or on a board or committee for professional, accounting-related organizations (TSCPA, ACFE, IIA, IMA, etc.); 
  • Serving as an officer or on a board or committee for a professional academic organization (AAA, etc.); 
  • Acting as a discussant or reviewer for a paper at an academic conference; 
  • Engaging in active editorships with relevant academic journals or other business publications; and 
  • Serving as a referee for papers submitted to academic journals on the McCoy College of Business journal list. 

Assessment of service involves significant subjectivity by the evaluator so a faculty member needs to personally substantiate the value added, time, and quality of involvement with various service activities. 

The following discussion describes four specific ratings; numerical ratings can be scaled anywhere between zero and three. 

Rating of 3 points: A 3-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who is recognized as outstanding in the quality and quantity of service and professional activities provided to various constituencies. Such a faculty member seeks out opportunities to contribute, volunteers to assist, and excels at meaningfully participating in many of the service and/or professional activities described. This person willingly accepts service assignments as needed by the department, college, or university. Faculty engagement in professional activities should be able to demonstrate the effectiveness of professional activities on teaching currency as well as significant and sustained involvement with the profession. A faculty member will not, however, be given a 3-point rating without providing substantive service within the university community (i.e., department, college, or university). 

Rating of 2 points: A 2-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who is recognized as very good in the quality and quantity of service and/or professional activities provided to various constituencies. Such a faculty member is willing to serve when asked, volunteers for projects occasionally, and regularly contributes to some of the activities listed above. This person accepts service assignments as needed by the department, college, or university. This rating would also apply to a faculty member who is recognized as engaging in adequate quality and quantity of professional activities. 

Rating of 1 point: A 1-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who is recognized as doing a minimal quantity of service or professional activities (maintaining professional certification or licensing, but little more). This rating will be assigned to a faculty member who is recognized as doing a minimal quantity of service or professional activities and rarely, if ever, volunteers for service activities. 

Rating of 0 points: A 0-point rating will be assigned to a faculty member who provides little to no service to any constituency. 

Adopted by Faculty Vote: September 23, 2016 

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT 

This APPS has been approved by the reviewers listed below and represents the Accounting Department policy and procedure from the date of the document until superseded. 

Review Cycle: September 1, E5Y 

Next Review Date: September 1, 2021