Review Process for Spring 2019 Awards
Spring 2019 applications were assessed on:
- The strength of proposed RSCA agenda (50%); and
- The record of success during the period January 1, 2014 to March 15, 2019 (50%)
To assess the RSCA agenda, applicants provided: a) a 400-600 word proposal in lay-person language that provides an overview of their RSCA agenda for the next five years; b) a CV; and c) a list of past RSCA support—all the RSCA assigned time awards and the summer salary awards in support of RSCA received during the period January 01, 2014 to March 15, 2019 from the college and the University. The proposal’s various sections and their evaluation criteria were as follows:
- Description of the proposed scholarly agenda, including goals and activities: Evaluation criteria: clarity of the proposal; and contribution to knowledge and scholarship in the discipline. 25 points.
- Anticipated RSCA outputs with timeline: Evaluation criteria: how outputs align with the RSCA agenda; where relevant to agenda, how outputs may have other impacts; and feasibility (the CV and past RSCA support are also considered). 17 points.
- Description of how the RSCA agenda benefits students. 8 points.
All three sections total 50 points (25+17+8).
To assess the record of success, faculty provided details of their RSCA outputs in four groups (List A, B, C, and D). List A included scholarly books; List B included long documentaries and performances; List C included edited books, journal articles, book chapters, external grants, etc.; and List D included conference presentations, invited RSCA talks, internal grants, etc. Different criteria were then used to assess tenure-track and tenured faculty productivity.
Tenure Track faculty (Assistant Professors):
All tenure-track faculty who met minimum RSCA productivity standards received full credit for this section. In order to be considered minimally productive, tenure track faculty had to have one (1) item from List A or List B, OR two (2) items from List C, OR any one (1) item from List C and four (4) items from List D. All applicants met this standard.
Tenured faculty (Associate and Full Professors):
The RSCA output of the 23 tenured faculty applications was evaluated using a weighting scheme. List A outputs (scholarly books) were weighted 1.33 times the outputs in List B (long documentaries and performances), four times the outputs in List C (edited books, journal articles, book chapters, external grants, etc.), and sixteen times the outputs in List D (conference presentations, invited RSCA talks, internal grants, etc.). Single-authored RSCA outputs were weighted two times the multi-authored outputs where the applicant is not a principal author or an equal co-author. Outputs as a principal author or an equal co-author were weighted 1.5 times other multi-authored outputs. Grants/contracts as sole investigator were weighted two times the grants/contracts as an investigator on a multi-member grant and four times the grants/contracts as a consultant. Grants/contracts as a PI/lead or a Co-PI were weighted 1.5 times the grants/contracts as an investigator on a multi-member grant. Next, using this weighting scheme, RSCA Output (RO) scores were calculated for each faculty. For example, a RO score of 11 means that the faculty produced equivalent of 11 sole-authored/funded List C outputs. Finally, a “bucket approach” was adopted to assign 50% weight to the RO scores. RO scores from 10 and 15 were assigned weighted RO scores from 45 to 49.9, RO scores from 5 to 9.9 were assigned weighted RO scores from 40 to 44.9, and so on.
Finally, for the tenured faculty a total score was calculated by adding the RSCA Agenda score to the weighted RO score. Of the 23 tenured faculty applicants, those with the highest twelve total scores received awards. All tenure-track applicants received awards.