NHS Faculty Evaluation Workshop

1. NHS Faculty Evaluation Workshop April 15, 2008 April 16, 2008

2. Overview • Introduction (Part I) • Evaluation • Tenure • Promotion • Evaluation Timeline • Comprehensive Review Policy and Procedures • Dossier Preparation (Part II) • Questions

3. 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

4. Evaluation also involves issues of: Value Quality Effectiveness Judgment And includes: Self-reflection Peer judgment Institutional standards More than Measurement

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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”

11. 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”

12. Comprehensive Review Process • School/Program Area review • Dean review • Provost review • President review • Board of Trustees review

13. 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

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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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 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

19. 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)

20. University Evaluation Scale The 3 areas and the overall evaluation is assigned according to the university scale, as follows:

21. 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 • Director serves as point of contact for external reviewers • External peer evaluations are not required for faculty preparing for pre-tenure and post-tenure comprehensive review

22. External Peer Evaluation • 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

26. Typical Faculty Evaluation Timeline (Tenure Clock)(TT ASTP with no years credit) Fall Spring Probationary period = 7 years

27. 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

28. Questions and Discussion

29. 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”

30. Elements in Dossier* • Letter of transmittal • University request forms • Evaluative materials – School review • Evaluative materials – College review • Current CV in UNC format • Comprehensive performance report • Copies of annual evaluations • External peer review letters (not letters of support) * Appendix A of the NHS Faculty Evaluation document provides specific guidance on the organization and format of the dossier (p. 15)

31. Performance Report of Instruction Guidelines for Instruction Materials • 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)

32. Performance Report of Professional Activity Guidelines for Professional Activity Materials • 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)

33. Performance Report of Service Guidelines for Service Materials • 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)

34. 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

35. 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 - Last half of January • Academic Affairs - First half of March Pre-Tenure Reviews • DUE: NHS Dean’s office – First week in March * APPENDIX B of the NHS Faculty Evaluation document

36. 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

37. Questions and Discussion