COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

TOWSON UNIVERSITY
Framework and Process for Awarding Merit for Lecturers
Background
In the Fall Semester of 2015, Dean Laurie Mullen formed a Task Force on Merit, comprised of
representatives of the six Departments in the College of Education, both tenured and tenure-track
as well as lecturers from the same departments, and directed them to develop a comprehensive
process to determine the awarding of Merit to tenured and tenure-track faculty and lecturers. At
the first meeting of the Task Force, it was decided that the members would work together at the
start of the process, since there are commonalities in the roles and responsibilities of
tenured/tenure-track faculty and lecturers, particularly in the area of teaching. However, in
recognition of the substantively different responsibilities of the two groups in the areas of
scholarship and service, the lecturer representatives would work independently on these items.
Based on the work of the Task Force, on May 10, 2016, the committee shared with Dean Mullen
two proposed documents, one for tenure/tenure-track faculty and a second for lecturers.
Philosophical Base
The determination of meritorious performance is a complex, high stakes process, one that has
frequently failed to receive the careful consideration it both requires and deserves, not only
within the College of Education and the University, but even the University System itselfand
beyond.
Ernest Boyer, in his Scholarship Reconsidered (1990), suggested that faculty contribute to the
University in a more nuanced way than is possible to evaluate with a singular focus on traditional
research outputs. He suggests that a better approach would be to evaluate faculty on a variety of
scholarship types, which he designates as scholarship of discovery, scholarship of integration,
scholarship of application, and scholarship of teachingeach of which type exists within the
College of Education at Towson.
All too frequently, merit has been defined in practice at the two extremes: too broadly, so that
everything seemingly constituted meritorious performance and therefore everyone qualified for
merit; and, at the opposite extreme, too narrowly, so that the only criterion for merit was
traditional research of discovery (in Boyers terms), with scant attention to the other elements
of teaching and service.
In this proposed Framework, the Task Force will first identify broad concepts of criteria in each
of the three areas, Teaching, Scholarship, and Service, which we believe are consistent with
Boyers model. Then, in the Process for Determining Merit, we will identify specific standards
that lend themselves to a process for discriminating fairly and conclusively between simply

May 27, 2016

good performance and performance that is truly meritorious and deserves to be recognized as
such.
Framework for Merit
The basic Framework for Merit acknowledges that the difference between the high quality
performance required of all faculty and staff in the College of Education and performance that is
deserving of the designation of meritorious, is a difficult distinction to make. However, while
high quality performance is an expectation of anyone employed by the College, regardless of
title, rank, or role, meritorious performance is that which consistently exceeds expectations and
generally is acknowledged to be such by most, if not all, observers.
The Task Force on Merit proposes the following broad criteria serve as a baseline to begin to
distinguish between generally expected levels of performance and meritorious performance.
1. Teaching
Teaching is the primary mission of Towson University and the primary responsibility of each
faculty member. Faculty members are expected to model exemplary teaching practices and
should be rated as excellent in this area.
Exemplary teaching practice includes:
Training and mentoring students for teaching in a way that fully embraces the College of
Educations vision of excellence
Training and mentoring students for disciplinary and interdisciplinary research and/or
praxis
Primary responsibility for teaching a variety of not only disciplinary, but where possible,
interdisciplinary courses and evidence of integrating innovative pedagogy that is welladapted to multicultural and interdisciplinary learning
Advising and mentoring students to assist them in achieving their professional goals.
As described in Appendix 3 of the Towson University Policy on Appointment Rank and Tenure
of Faculty, teaching performance will be evaluated from the following evidence submitted by
the candidate:
Peer evaluations

Student course evaluations

Self-evaluation

Course materials

Academic advising is another component of excellence in the overall category of teaching.

May 27, 2016

While the process of advising differs between undergraduate and graduate programs all
advisors are expected to:

assist students in the development of meaningful educational plans that are compatible
with their professional goals

provide assistance in refining goals and objectives, understanding available choices, and
assessing the consequences of alternative courses of action;

Other forms of advising may include guidance of students in the learning process within ones
class- teaching responsibilities, advising groups in academic honor societies, and serving on a
graduate research committee. Because advising procedures differ across programs, evaluation
of advising also differs; therefore, each department and or program is responsible for addressing
how advising is evaluated.
2. Scholarship
University scholarship is scholarship that fulfills the mission of the University, in particular,
the unit with which the faculty member is affiliated and utilizes the academic or professional
expertise of the faculty member (UniSCOPE, 2000, p. 2). Given Towsons distinguished
history in the preparation of classroom teachers and education specialists (Towson University
Mission), we define and articulate scholarship relative to the universitys mission, and
specifically as scholarship pertains to the unique roles and responsibilities of College of
Education faculty.
Utilizing UniSCOPE (2000) as a guiding framework scholarship can be defined as
the thoughtful discovery, transmission, and application of knowledge informed
by current openness to new information debate, and criticism. For scholarly activity to
be recognized, utilized, and rewarded, it must be shared with others in appropriate
ways. (p. 2)
Articulated within Appendix 3 the Towson University Policy on Appointment, Rank, and
Tenure of Faculty (ART Policy) are four forms of scholarship that guide our work at
Towson University.
Table 1: Four Forms of Scholarship (as articulated in Towson University ART Policy)
Forms of Scholarship
Definition
applying knowledge to consequential problems be they internal
Scholarship of Application
or external to the university, including aspects of creative
work in the visual and performing arts
traditional research, knowledge for its own sake, including
Scholarship of Discovery
aspects of creative work in the visual and performing arts

May 27, 2016

applying knowledge in ways that overcome the isolation and

fragmentation of the traditional disciplines;
exploring the dynamic endeavor involving all the analogies,
Scholarship of Teaching
metaphors and images that build bridges between the
teacher's understanding and the student's learning
In light of the mission of Towson University, the scholarship categories that are germane to
the workload of COE faculty and the ones that will take a central role in promotion and
tenure criteria are the categories of application, integration, and teaching. Our goal is for a
representation of scholarship that is more inclusive than that of traditional scholarship of
discovery and openly acknowledging that Scholarship is widely interpreted and takes on
many forms (ART Document, p. 13). In addition, we agree with the following statement in
the ART Policy:
Faculty will be guided by the definitions of scholarship defined above and
further articulated by their department and college on the basis of
disciplinary/interdisciplinary intellectual interests. (ART Document, p. 14.
Emphasis added).
Scholarship of Integration

In the table on page 7, we offer examples of activities and products for each form of
scholarship. This list is not inclusive of all products that faculty may use for the
evaluation of scholarship, and we encourage faculty to add products that they deem
relevant to their work (COE PTRM, 2016).
3. Service
Faculty members are responsible for service to the University (which includes the college and
department), their discipline, and the broader community including collaborations and
partnerships with practitioners in the field. Service may also include civic service that may
or may not be directly related to ones academic expertise, but in ways which advance the
universitys mission (ART Document, p. 14) It is expected that COE faculty demonstrate
their commitment to service as documented by activities such as:
Membership on department, college, and university committees and task forces

Participation in the department, college, and university governance structure

Involvement in the work of practitioners in ones field

Involvement in professional organizations and associations in ones field at the

state, regional, national, or international level

Service to community associations.

Providing support for teachers, parents, and students

Providing leadership through participation in building and maintaining the infrastructure

necessary for the Department, College, and University to accomplish their missions.

May 27, 2016

In summary, the foregoing criteria reflect the broad context within which merit considerations
and promotion/tenure decisions should take place. They represent the requirements and the
context in which weboth faculty and staffwork. They are the standards to which we all are
held. Thus in the process of merit determination, they provide the background in which the
specific criteria of the Merit process that follows are applied and decisions made.
THE MERIT PROCESS FOR LECTURERS
In the preceding section, criteria were presented that form the context in which merit
considerations for College of Education Lecturers take place. These criteria were, by intent,
philosophical in nature and intentionally not quantified. In a sense, they are the criteria by which
all faculty and employees are judged in their daily performance, the standards to which each of
us holds himself or herself.
What follows is the proposed process and specific criteria by which merit determinations will be
made in recognition of performance that is truly above and beyond the already-high
expectations for quality performance on the part of all faculty and staff, performance that is
clearly acknowledged by those who observe it as truly exceptional and meritorious in every
respect.
As outlined in the COE Promotion Tenure and Review Document, there are three (3) categories
of merit as follows:
i. Not Meritorious: Performance fails adequately to meet standards.
ii. Satisfactory (Base Merit): Performance is competent and contributes to
fulfilling the mission of the University, college, and department.
iii. Excellent (Base Merit plus one Performance Merit): Excellence in teaching,
or scholarship, or service and satisfactory performance in other performance
categories.
Determining distinction in performance is a comprehensive judgment that requires a holistic
review of the evidence presented in a candidates packet. It is a responsibility that must not be
taken lightly, nor can it be reduced to a simplistic formula. The process that follows is intended
to assist the good judgment of individuals who understand the complexity of the process, and
recognize that each case is unique and the evidence of distinction may vary with each candidate,
yet the process must be applied with uniformity.
The presentation of the request for Merit consideration is the responsibility of the individual
faculty member, subject to any procedural guidance provided by the individuals Department
Merit Committee. However, such presentation, beyond the individuals AR I and AR II forms
for the applicable period, may not exceed three pages of double-spaced material. The Merit

May 27, 2016

Committees review will apply the specific criteria that follow in arriving at its decision
regarding the granting of merit and at what level of award.

Specific Criteria and Decision Process: Applying the Areas of Distinction

The following tables serve as a framework for determining levels of merit in each of the three
areas:

Teaching
Possesses thorough knowledge of subject matter
Integrates relevant materials to support course content
Stays abreast of current issues and research
Communicates appropriate learning goals
Provides opportunities for students to think critically and creatively and to engage
in problem-solving
Promotes a sense of community; facilitates an open exchange of ideas,
encouraging expression of diverse opinions while maintaining an atmosphere of
integrity, civility and respect
Encourages collaboration and structures classes to support it
Helps students connect learning experiences and provides opportunities for
authentic learning
Demonstrates effective oral and written communication
Helps students learn to use effective communication skills
Integrates technology to enhance teaching and learning
Uses a variety of methods and encourages active student participation
Available and accessible for consultation
Effectively advises and mentors students
Develops and uses appropriate student outcome assessments
Uses assessment data to improve instruction
Other:
Other:
Total
Base Merit = a minimum of 10 of the above indicators
Merit Plus = a minimum of 14 of the above indicators
Evidence for the above can be found in course syllabi, student evaluations, sample
assignments, a written reflection by faculty member, peer observations, etc.

May 27, 2016

May 27, 2016

Scholarship
A. Reading, publishing, or supporting the following criteria:
Membership in professional organizations
Webinars on topics related to coursework
Books
Ongoing research that is recognized by a national or international professional
organization
Articles in peer reviewed journals
Book chapters
Monographs and technical reports
Abstracts for research publications
Articles in non-refereed publications
Book reviews for peer-reviewed journals or periodicals
Curricular materials prepared for or in partnership with other institutions,
organizations, or groups
Written documentation to support work in PDS and other LSS initiatives
Total (A)
B. Grant Activity
Participation in grant proposals or grant work
Total (B)
C. Professional Conferences and Workshops
Attend local, state, regional, national, and international conferences and workshops
Present at local, state, and regional conferences
Lead presentations to other educators within departments, College of
Education, Local School Systems and Professional Development Schools
Total (C)
D. Other related scholarship activities
Creative works or activities, surveys or instrumentations, patents and copyrights
Intervention programs that prevent, ameliorate, or remediate persistent negative
outcomes or optimize positive outcomes for individuals or groups
Documented contributions to public policy at the state, national, or international
levels
Total (D)
Base Merit = A minimum of four (4) points across A-D
Merit Plus = A minimum of five (5) points across A-D

May 27, 2016

Service
A. Service to the department, college, and/or university
Course lead
Participation in recruitment activities (for faculty and/or students)
Mentoring of students
Developing and sponsoring student groups
Honors, awards, and other recognition for service to the department, college, or
university
Peer observations
Guest lectures or presentations in partner schools or departments
Service on department, college, and/or university committees
Total (A)
B. Service to the local, state, national, or international community
Work with local, state, or federal agencies (particularly when such work will translate
beyond the particular setting in which the work is done)
Work in schools or other relevant community settings
Honors, awards, and other recognition for service to candidates profession
Organization of conferences or symposia
Significant roles as a member in committees of professional organizations in
candidates field or discipline
Total (B)
C. Service to state, national, and international professional organizations
Editorial service for peer reviewed journal(s) (e.g. editor, editorial board, reviewer,
special issue editor)
Organization of conferences or symposia
Chair of, or significant roles as a member in, committees of professional organizations
in candidates field or discipline
Honors, awards, and other recognition of service to candidates profession
Involvement in professional organizations in the candidates field or discipline
Membership in professional organizations in candidates field or discipline
Total (C)
D. Leadership in Service
Chair or other leadership role on departmental, college, or university governance
committees
Mentoring of faculty
Total (D)
E. Other Relevant Service Activities (Relevance to be determined by Merit Committee)
Other:
Other:
May 27, 2016

Total (E)

Base Merit = a minimum of three (3) points across A E

Merit Plus = a minimum of four (4) points across A E

May 27, 2016

10

DETERMINATION OF MERIT
Based on the criteria for determination of Merit indicated above, it is the decision of the Merit
Committee that the candidates submission does meet the criteria for the award of Merit at the
level of (check one)
_____No Merit
_____Base Merit
_____Base + Merit
For the Merit Committee:_________________________________
Based on the criteria for determination of Merit indicated above, it is the decision of the Merit
Committee that the candidates submission does not meet the criteria for the award of Merit.
For the Merit Committee: _________________________________

May 27, 2016

11