Nhs faculty evaluation workshop
Download
1 / 38

NHS Faculty Evaluation Workshop - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 93 Views
  • Updated On :

NHS Faculty Evaluation Workshop. April 14, 2009. Overview. Introduction (Part I) Evaluation Tenure Promotion Evaluation Timeline Comprehensive Review Policy and Procedures Dossier Preparation (Part II) Questions. Faculty Evaluation. Assessment – from Latin, assidere (to sit beside)

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'NHS Faculty Evaluation Workshop' - masao


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Overview l.jpg
Overview

  • Introduction (Part I)

    • Evaluation

    • Tenure

    • Promotion

    • Evaluation Timeline

  • Comprehensive Review Policy and Procedures

  • Dossier Preparation (Part II)

  • Questions


  • Faculty evaluation l.jpg
    Faculty Evaluation

    Assessment – from Latin, assidere (to sit beside)

    • Faculty and administrators work together to establish standards of performance and the rules of evidence

    • Focus of evaluation – collection, analysis, and interpretation of evidence of faculty progress toward tenure and promotion


    More than measurement l.jpg

    Evaluation also involves issues of:

    Value

    Quality

    Effectiveness

    Judgment

    And includes:

    Self-reflection

    Peer judgment

    Institutional standards

    More than Measurement


    Context of evaluation dual roles l.jpg
    Context of Evaluation(Dual Roles)

    • Individual role(faculty growth and development)

      • Feedback for faculty member with goal of better understanding of own work and ways to improve

      • Information to guide faculty development

      • Guide for career pathing


    Context of evaluation dual roles6 l.jpg
    Context of Evaluation(Dual Roles)

    • Institutional role(meet institutional needs)

      • Avenue to judge faculty performance in light of university’s expectations

      • Information re: personnel decisions (retention, tenure and promotion)

      • Rewards

      • Institutional control


    Performance areas l.jpg
    Performance Areas

    • Faculty members at the University of Northern Colorado (UNC) have workload assignments and are evaluated in following areas:

      • Instruction/teaching

      • Scholarship/professional activity

      • Service

  • Performance areas are defined in section 2-3-401(2) of the Board Policy Manual


  • Forms of evaluation in nhs l.jpg
    Forms of Evaluation in NHS

    Annual review

    • Based on calendar year

    • Normally occurs in January or February

    • Informs reappointment decisions

      Comprehensive review

    • Tenure and/or promotion

    • Pre- and Post-tenure

    • Graduate Faculty appointment or reappointment


    Tenure l.jpg
    Tenure

    Tenure is a means to certain ends; specifically:

    • Freedom of teaching and research and of extramural activities, and

    • A sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to men and women of ability

      “Freedom and economic security, hence, tenure, are indispensable to the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations to its students and to society”

      AAUP Statements and Reports


    Tenure10 l.jpg
    Tenure

    The following statement from UNC Board Policy regarding tenure is quite clear about its purposes and implementation [2-3-902(1)]:

    “The purpose of tenure is to create an environment in which the concept of academic freedom is protected. The decision to grant or not grant tenure is influenced by the desirability of maintaining a continuing collegial and professional relationship between the candidate and his or her peer professionals”


    Promotion l.jpg
    Promotion

    The following statement from UNC Board Policy regarding promotion is also quite clear about its purposes and implementation (2-3-901):

    “Promotion at the University provides a mechanism for the recognition of personal contributions of faculty members to the mission of the institution and its reputation as well as a professional contribution of the advancement of the state of the art and the society at large”


    Comprehensive review process l.jpg
    Comprehensive Review Process

    • School/Program Area review

    • Dean review

    • Provost review

    • President review

    • Board of Trustees review


    School program area review l.jpg
    School/Program Area Review

    • Faculty Review

    • Director Review

    • Both evaluate candidate using specific standards re: instruction, professional activity, and service valued by the discipline

    • Eval. Comm. and Director evaluation memo to candidate and Dean


    Slide14 l.jpg

    Dean Review

    • Dean reviews all application materials, including the candidate’s curriculum vitae, dossier and narrative statements, the school/program area faculty vote and recommendation, and director evaluation and recommendation

    • Dean’s evaluation memo


    Slide15 l.jpg

    Evaluation Conference Committee

    • Convened by the Dean

    • Members are the Dean, School Director, and Program Area Faculty or their designee

    • Purpose is for conflict resolution when there is a recommendation disagreement among the voting faculty, the School Director, and the Dean

    • Reexamines evaluation materials

    • If consensus cannot be reached then individual recommendations are forwarded to the CAO


    Slide16 l.jpg

    Evaluatee Feedback

    • Evaluatee will receive evaluation results at each review step

    • Evaluatee will be given the opportunity to provide commentary and additional supporting documentation at each review step

    • Evaluatee may appeal the results of the review process using established faculty grievance procedures

    • BPM 1-1-307


    Pre tenure review l.jpg
    Pre-Tenure Review

    • Mid-point of probationary period

    • Intended as a check on an individual’s progress toward tenure

    • Program, School, and College level only


    Instruction scholarship and service workload l.jpg
    Instruction, Scholarship, and Service Workload

    • Each is assigned a weight for evaluation purposes such that sum = 1.0

    • Basis for the workload of individuals in the college - fifteen (15) credit hour per semester equated load

    • Most faculty will have a work assignment of:

      0.6 - instruction

      0.2 - scholarship

      0.2 - service

    • Weighting may vary as college or school needs dictate


    Overall evaluation l.jpg
    Overall Evaluation

    • Performance evaluation yields an overall evaluation based on the weighted areas of the individual’s workload

    • The weights and the evaluation rating assigned for each area are multiplied and the products are summed to yield an overall evaluation measure between one (I) and five (V)


    University evaluation scale l.jpg
    University Evaluation Scale

    The 3 areas and the overall evaluation is assigned according to the university scale, as follows:


    External peer evaluation l.jpg
    External Peer Evaluation

    • Individuals applying for tenure or promotion at any rank are required to include a minimum of two (2) peer evaluations of scholarship from faculty within the discipline from other institutions

    • Candidates should provide to their Director the names and contact information of three to four prospective outside peer evaluators. Must not be current collaborators or have served on faculty members thesis/dissertation committees.

    • Director serves as point of contact for external reviewers

    • Need at least 1 month to secure letters


    Slide22 l.jpg

    External Peer Evaluation

    • External peer evaluations are not required for faculty preparing for pre-tenure and post-tenure comprehensive review

    • Candidates shall have the right to view external review letters and this fact shall be conveyed to all prospective peer reviewers

    • The standard letter of instruction for peer reviewers is provided in Appendix C (p. 20) of the NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and Procedures document http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdf


    Basis for tenure recommendation l.jpg
    Basis for Tenure Recommendation

    • Pre-Tenure Review

      - Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity

      - Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas

    • Tenure

      - Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity

      - Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas

      - Assistant professors may only be granted tenure if promoted to

      associate professor at the same time

    • Post-Tenure Review

      An individual is evaluated on his/her assigned workload over a five-year period. To receive an overall satisfactory performance evaluation, the faculty member must be rated as Level III or above overall, which must include a Level III rating in instruction


    Basis for promotion recommendation l.jpg
    Basis for Promotion Recommendation

    • Promotion to Associate Professor

      - Earned doctorate in the discipline or other terminal degree

      specified by the School or program area is required

      - Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity

      - Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas

    • Promotion to Professor

      - Level IV or V rating for instruction and professional activity

      - Level III, IV, or V rating for service


    Performance standards l.jpg
    Performance Standards

    • Instruction - the effective instructor is guided by the “teacher/scholar” model

    • Scholarship - Faculty are expected to engage in advancing one or more aspects of their discipline through scholarly pursuits

    • Service - Faculty are expected to contribute substantively to the governance and professionally related service activities of the school/program area and college

    • Specific guidelines and criteria found in NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and Procedures document (pp. 6-9)

      http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdf

    • College performance standards form

      http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdf


    Typical faculty evaluation timeline tenure clock tt astp with no years credit l.jpg
    Typical Faculty Evaluation Timeline (Tenure Clock)(TT ASTP with no years credit)

    Fall

    Spring

    Probationary period = 7 years


    Sources l.jpg
    Sources

    • NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and Procedures document

      http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdf

    • NHS College Performance Standards form

      http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdf

    • Board Policy Manual

      http://www.unco.edu/trustees/Policy_Manual.pdf

    • University Regulations

      http://www.unco.edu/trustees/University_Regulations.pdf



    Guidelines for dossier preparation l.jpg
    Guidelines for Dossier* Preparation

    Dossier – portfolio of information relative to performance and accomplishments during the comprehensive evaluation period, which shall include:

    • Updated curriculum vitae

    • Appropriate documentation (evidence)

    • Representative sample of student evaluations

    • Other materials determined by the School/Program Area

    BPM “it shall be the responsibility of the candidate to document satisfactory fulfillment of the appropriate areas of consideration”

    *Appendix A of the NHS Faculty Evaluation document provides specific

    guidance on the organization and format of the dossier (p. 15)


    Elements in dossier l.jpg
    Elements in Dossier

    • All materials limited to 2-inch loose leaf binder

      Pocket Materials

    • Letter of transmittal

    • University request forms

    • Copies of Annual Evaluations – forms, faculty reports, director reports, dean reports

    • Faculty Comprehensive Evaluation – includes current year annual review

    • Director Comprehensive Evaluation – includes current year annual review

    • Dean Comprehensive Evaluation


    Comprehensive performance report tab 1 l.jpg
    Comprehensive Performance Report – Tab 1

    • Brief narrative comprehensive summary report of accomplishments over the period that is used to educate and inform your colleagues

    • Current CV in UNC format

    • External peer review letters (required for P&T)


    Instruction performance report tab 2 l.jpg
    Instruction Performance Report– Tab 2

    Guidelines for Instruction Materials

    • Brief narrative summary report of accomplishments over the period that is used to educate and inform your colleagues

    • Demonstrate effectiveness as an instructor

    • Demonstrate ability to develop students’ ethical and critical thinking and analytical and expressive abilities

      • Note: In NHS, advising related to career development and students’ academic progress will be considered service, while mentoring associated with theses and dissertations, directed studies courses, and the like, will be classified as instruction

        List of suggested materials in NHS Faculty Evaluation document (pp. 15-16)


    Professional activity performance report tab 3 l.jpg
    Professional Activity Performance Report – Tab 3

    Guidelines for Professional Activity Materials

    • Brief narrative summary report of accomplishments over the period that is used to educate and inform your colleagues

    • Provide evidence and/or examples

    • Highlight the significance or noteworthiness of your research, scholarship, and grants

      List of suggested materials in NHS Faculty Evaluation document (pp. 16-17)


    Service performance report tab 4 l.jpg
    Service Performance Report – Tab 4

    Guidelines for Service Materials

    • Brief narrative summary report of accomplishments over the period that is used to educate and inform your colleagues

    • Provide evidence and/or examples

    • Highlight the significance or noteworthiness of your service activities

      • Note: In NHS, advising related to career development and students’ academic progress will be considered service, while mentoring associated with theses and dissertations, directed studies courses, and the like, will be classified as instruction

        List of suggested materials in NHS Faculty Evaluation document (pp. 17-18)


    Keys to success l.jpg
    Keys to Success

    Well prepared, easy-to-read dossier – your application will be seen by many people during the evaluation process

    • Carefully follow dossier guidelines - include ALL

      necessary forms and materials

    • Make materials easy to find and read – find examples

      and have your colleagues provide feedback prior to

      submission

    • Highlight significance/impact of your efforts

    • Make efforts obvious to those unfamiliar with your

      area


    Faculty evaluation deadlines l.jpg
    Faculty Evaluation Deadlines*

    Comprehensive Reviews - other than pre-tenure reviews (including applications for promotion and/or tenure, and graduate faculty status; and post-tenure review):

    • DUE: NHS Dean’s office – February 1

    • Academic Affairs – First half of March

      Pre-Tenure Reviews

    • DUE: NHS Dean’s office – March 1

      * APPENDIX B of the NHS Faculty Evaluation document


    Sources37 l.jpg
    Sources

    • NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and Procedures document

      http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdf

    • NHS College Performance Standards form

      http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdf

    • Board Policy Manual

      http://www.unco.edu/trustees/Policy_Manual.pdf

    • University Regulations

      http://www.unco.edu/trustees/University_Regulations.pdf



    ad