The Faculty Mentoring and Enhancement Review Committee (FMERC) Charge
The FMERC conducts performance evaluations of faculty members voluntarily seeking peer feedback or a change in career focus, and reviews faculty members receiving overall evaluations of unsatisfactory in two successive years.
According to SLA bylaws, the Faculty Mentoring and Enhancement Review Committee shall:
- help faculty anticipate and plan for promotion and career advancement
- provide individualized guidance, counsel, and performance evaluation to help faculty develop a fulfilling career or a change in work focus
- conduct required enhancement reviews of faculty members receiving evaluations of less than satisfactory (below 1 on the SLA Faculty Annual Review Form) in one or more areas of faculty work (teaching, research, or service) twice in any four-year period.
Standing Rules
When performing required enhancement reviews:
- The Committee shall conduct a thorough evaluation of the faculty member and shall specify at the end of their review whether the faculty professional productivity is rated within one of the following categories:
- some strengths, no deficiencies,
- some strengths, some deficiencies (but deficiencies are not substantial or chronic), and
- substantial chronic deficiencies.
- If substantial chronic deficiencies are found, the Committee and the faculty member shall work together to create a development plan. The plan becomes final once the faculty member, the Dean, and the department chair have signed the document. The plan should:
- identify specific strengths that should be enhanced;
- identify the specific deficiencies to be addressed;
- define specific goals or outcomes that are needed to remedy the deficiencies;
- outline the specific activities and programs that should be completed to achieve these goals and outcomes;
- set appropriate timelines for the completion of these activities;
- indicate appropriate benchmarks to be used in monitoring progress;
- indicate the criteria for annual progress reviews; and
- identify the source of any funding or institutional support, such as assigned time or new research equipment, based on discussions with the Dean, the Associate Dean for Research and/or the School’s Grant Specialist.
