NHS Faculty NHS Faculty Evaluation Evaluation WorkshopWorkshop

April 15, 2008April 15, 2008

April 16, 2008April 16, 2008

OverviewOverview

I.I. Introduction (Part I)Introduction (Part I)• EvaluationEvaluation• TenureTenure• PromotionPromotion• Evaluation TimelineEvaluation Timeline

II.II. Comprehensive Review Policy and Comprehensive Review Policy and ProceduresProcedures

III.III. Dossier Preparation (Part II)Dossier Preparation (Part II)

IV.IV. QuestionsQuestions

Faculty EvaluationFaculty Evaluation

AssessmentAssessment – from Latin, – from Latin, assidere assidere (to sit beside)(to sit beside)

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

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

More than MeasurementMore than Measurement

Evaluation also Evaluation also involves issues of:involves issues of:

• ValueValue

• QualityQuality

• EffectivenessEffectiveness

• JudgmentJudgment

And includes:And includes:

• Self-reflectionSelf-reflection

• Peer judgmentPeer judgment

• Institutional standardsInstitutional standards

Context of EvaluationContext of Evaluation(Dual Roles)(Dual Roles)

1.1. Individual roleIndividual role (faculty growth and development)(faculty growth and development)

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

• Information to guide faculty developmentInformation to guide faculty development

• Guide for career pathingGuide for career pathing

2.2. Institutional roleInstitutional role (meet institutional needs)(meet institutional needs)

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

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

• RewardsRewards

• Institutional controlInstitutional control

Context of EvaluationContext of Evaluation(Dual Roles)(Dual Roles)

Performance AreasPerformance Areas

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

1.1. Instruction/teachingInstruction/teaching2.2. Scholarship/professional activityScholarship/professional activity3.3. ServiceService

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

Forms of Evaluation in NHSForms of Evaluation in NHS

Annual reviewAnnual review• Based on calendar yearBased on calendar year• Normally occurs in January or FebruaryNormally occurs in January or February• Informs reappointment decisionsInforms reappointment decisions

Comprehensive reviewComprehensive review• Tenure and/or promotionTenure and/or promotion• Pre- and Post-tenurePre- and Post-tenure• Graduate Faculty appointment or Graduate Faculty appointment or

reappointmentreappointment

TenureTenure

Tenure is a means to certain ends; specifically:Tenure is a means to certain ends; specifically:

1.1. Freedom of teaching and research and of Freedom of teaching and research and of extramural activities, andextramural activities, and

2.2. A sufficient degree of economic security to make A sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to men and women of the profession attractive to men and women of abilityability

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

AAUP Statements and ReportsAAUP Statements and Reports

TenureTenure

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

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

PromotionPromotion

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

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

Comprehensive Review Comprehensive Review ProcessProcess

1.1. School/Program Area review School/Program Area review

2.2. Dean review Dean review

3.3. Provost reviewProvost review

4.4. President reviewPresident review

5.5. Board of Trustees reviewBoard of Trustees review

School/Program Area ReviewSchool/Program Area Review

• Faculty ReviewFaculty Review

• Director ReviewDirector Review

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

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

Dean ReviewDean Review

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

• Dean’s evaluation memoDean’s evaluation memo

Evaluation Conference Evaluation Conference CommitteeCommittee

• Convened by the DeanConvened by the Dean

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

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

• Reexamines evaluation materials

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

Evaluatee FeedbackEvaluatee Feedback

• Evaluatee will receive evaluation results at each Evaluatee will receive evaluation results at each review stepreview step

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

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

• BPM 1-1-307

Pre-Tenure ReviewPre-Tenure Review

• Mid-point of probationary periodMid-point of probationary period

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

• Program, School, and College level onlyProgram, School, and College level only

Years of tenure credit awarded to faculty member

Pre-tenure review will occur during the faculty member’s

0 Third full academic year

1 Second full academic year

2 Second full academic year

3 Not applicable

Instruction, Scholarship, and Instruction, Scholarship, and Service WorkloadService Workload

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

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

• Most faculty will have a work assignment of:Most faculty will have a work assignment of:0.6 - instruction0.6 - instruction0.2 - scholarship0.2 - scholarship0.2 - service0.2 - service

• Weighting may vary as college or school needs dictateWeighting may vary as college or school needs dictate

Overall Evaluation Overall Evaluation

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

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

University Evaluation ScaleUniversity Evaluation Scale

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

LEVELLEVEL RATINGRATING OVERALL EVALUATIONOVERALL EVALUATION VV 4.6 – 5.0 4.6 – 5.0 ExcellentExcellent

IVIV 3.6 – 4.5 3.6 – 4.5 Exceeds ExpectationsExceeds Expectations

IIIIII 2.6 – 3.5 2.6 – 3.5 Meets ExpectationsMeets Expectations

IIII 1.6 – 2.5 1.6 – 2.5 Needs ImprovementNeeds Improvement

II 1.0 – 1.5 1.0 – 1.5 UnsatisfactoryUnsatisfactory

External Peer EvaluationExternal Peer Evaluation

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

• Candidates should provide to their Director the names Candidates should provide to their Director the names and contact information of three to four prospective and contact information of three to four prospective outside peer evaluatorsoutside peer evaluators

• Director serves as point of contact for external Director serves as point of contact for external reviewersreviewers

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

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

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

External Peer EvaluationExternal Peer Evaluation

Basis for Tenure RecommendationBasis for Tenure Recommendation

• Pre-Tenure ReviewPre-Tenure Review- Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity- Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity- Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas- Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas

• TenureTenure- Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity- Level IV or V rating for instruction or professional activity- Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas- Level III, IV, or V rating for the other two performance areas- Assistant professors may only be granted tenure if promoted to - Assistant professors may only be granted tenure if promoted to associate professor at the same timeassociate professor at the same time

• Post-tenure ReviewPost-tenure Review

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

Basis for Promotion Basis for Promotion RecommendationRecommendation

• Promotion to Associate ProfessorPromotion to Associate Professor- Earned doctorate in the discipline or other terminal degree- Earned doctorate in the discipline or other terminal degree

specified by the School or program area is requiredspecified by the School or program area is required

- Level IV or V rating for instruction - Level IV or V rating for instruction oror professional activity professional activity

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

• Promotion to ProfessorPromotion to Professor

- Level IV or V rating for instruction - Level IV or V rating for instruction andand professional activity professional activity

- Level III, IV, or V rating for service- Level III, IV, or V rating for service

Performance StandardsPerformance Standards

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

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

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

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

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

• College performance standards formCollege performance standards form http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdfhttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdf

Typical Faculty Evaluation Timeline Typical Faculty Evaluation Timeline (Tenure Clock)(Tenure Clock)

(TT ASTP with no years credit)(TT ASTP with no years credit)

AY2007-08

AY2008-09

AY2009-10

AY2010-11

AY2011-12

AY2012-13(Tenure effective)

AY2013-14 (Tenure effective)

3rd year

reappoint

(Dec)

Comprehen-

sive review

(Pre-tenure)

Eligible for

comprehen-

sive review

(T/P)

Mandatory

comprehen-

sive review

(T/P)

Annual

evaluation

2nd year

reappoint

(March)

Annual

evaluation

4th year

reappoint

(May)

Annual

evaluation

5th year

reappoint

(May)

Annual

evaluation

6th year

reappoint

(May)

Annual

evaluation

7th year

reappoint*

(May)

Annual

evaluation

7th year

reappoint**

(May)

Terminal year

if not

awarded

tenure

1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year 4th Year 5th Year 6th Year 7th Year

Probationary period = 7 years

Fall

Spring

SourcesSources• NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and

Procedures documentProcedures documenthttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdfhttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdf

• NHS College Performance Standards formNHS College Performance Standards formhttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdfcollege_performance_standards.pdf

• Board Policy ManualBoard Policy Manualhttp://www.unco.edu/trustees/Policy_Manual.pdfhttp://www.unco.edu/trustees/Policy_Manual.pdf

• University RegulationsUniversity Regulationshttp://www.unco.edu/trustees/http://www.unco.edu/trustees/University_Regulations.pdfUniversity_Regulations.pdf

Questions and Discussion

Guidelines for Dossier Guidelines for Dossier PreparationPreparation

DossierDossier – portfolio of information relative to performance – portfolio of information relative to performance and accomplishments during the comprehensive and accomplishments during the comprehensive evaluation period, which shall include:evaluation period, which shall include:• Updated curriculum vitaeUpdated curriculum vitae• Appropriate documentation (evidence)Appropriate documentation (evidence)• Representative sample of student evaluationsRepresentative sample of student evaluations• Other materials determined by the School/Program Other materials determined by the School/Program

AreaArea

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

Elements in Dossier*Elements in Dossier*

• Letter of transmittalLetter of transmittal• University request formsUniversity request forms• Evaluative materials – School reviewEvaluative materials – School review• Evaluative materials – College reviewEvaluative materials – College review• Current CV in UNC formatCurrent CV in UNC format• Comprehensive performance reportComprehensive performance report• Copies of annual evaluationsCopies of annual evaluations• External peer review letters (not letters of External peer review letters (not letters of

support)support)

* Appendix A of the NHS Faculty Evaluation document provides * Appendix A of the NHS Faculty Evaluation document provides specific guidance on the organization and format of the dossier specific guidance on the organization and format of the dossier (p. 15)(p. 15)

Performance Report of Performance Report of InstructionInstruction

Guidelines for Instruction MaterialsGuidelines for Instruction Materials• Educate and inform your colleaguesEducate and inform your colleagues• Demonstrate effectiveness as an instructorDemonstrate effectiveness as an instructor• Demonstrate ability to develop students’ ethical and Demonstrate ability to develop students’ ethical and

critical thinking and analytical and expressive critical thinking and analytical and expressive abilitiesabilities• Note: In NHS, advising related to career Note: In NHS, advising related to career

development and students’ academic progress will development and students’ academic progress will be considered service, while mentoring associated be considered service, while mentoring associated with theses and dissertations, directed studies with theses and dissertations, directed studies courses, and the like, will be classified as courses, and the like, will be classified as instructioninstruction

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

Performance Report of Performance Report of Professional ActivityProfessional Activity

Guidelines for Professional Activity MaterialsGuidelines for Professional Activity Materials• Provide evidence and/or examplesProvide evidence and/or examples• Highlight the significance or noteworthiness of your Highlight the significance or noteworthiness of your

research, scholarship, and grantsresearch, scholarship, and grants

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

Performance Report of Performance Report of ServiceService

Guidelines for Service MaterialsGuidelines for Service Materials• Provide evidence and/or examplesProvide evidence and/or examples• Highlight the significance or noteworthiness of your Highlight the significance or noteworthiness of your

service activitiesservice activities• Note: In NHS, advising related to career Note: In NHS, advising related to career

development and students’ academic progress development and students’ academic progress will be considered service, while mentoring will be considered service, while mentoring associated with theses and dissertations, directed associated with theses and dissertations, directed studies courses, and the like, will be classified as studies courses, and the like, will be classified as instructioninstruction

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

Keys to SuccessKeys to Success

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

• Carefully follow dossier guidelines - include Carefully follow dossier guidelines - include ALLALL necessary forms and materialsnecessary forms and materials

• Make materials easy to find and read – find examples Make materials easy to find and read – find examples and have your colleagues provide feedback prior toand have your colleagues provide feedback prior to submissionsubmission

• Highlight significance/impact of your efforts Highlight significance/impact of your efforts

• Make efforts obvious to those unfamiliar with your Make efforts obvious to those unfamiliar with your areaarea

Faculty Evaluation Deadlines*Faculty Evaluation Deadlines*

Comprehensive Reviews Comprehensive Reviews - other than pre-tenure - other than pre-tenure reviews (including applications for promotion and/or reviews (including applications for promotion and/or tenure, and graduate faculty status; and post-tenure tenure, and graduate faculty status; and post-tenure review): review): • DUE: NHS Dean’s office - Last half of January DUE: NHS Dean’s office - Last half of January • Academic Affairs - First half of March Academic Affairs - First half of March

Pre-Tenure ReviewsPre-Tenure Reviews • DUE: NHS Dean’s office – First week in MarchDUE: NHS Dean’s office – First week in March

* APPENDIX B of the NHS Faculty Evaluation * APPENDIX B of the NHS Faculty Evaluation documentdocument

SourcesSources• NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and NHS Faculty Evaluation and Performance Policies and

Procedures documentProcedures documenthttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdfhttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/Fac_eval.pdf

• NHS College Performance Standards formNHS College Performance Standards formhttp://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/http://www.unco.edu/nhs/pdf/college_performance_standards.pdfcollege_performance_standards.pdf

• Board Policy ManualBoard Policy Manualhttp://www.unco.edu/trustees/Policy_Manual.pdfhttp://www.unco.edu/trustees/Policy_Manual.pdf

• University RegulationsUniversity Regulationshttp://www.unco.edu/trustees/http://www.unco.edu/trustees/University_Regulations.pdfUniversity_Regulations.pdf

Questions and Discussion