1 / 72

Peer Review Ad Hoc Chair Training

Peer Review Ad Hoc Chair Training. University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources COOPERATIVE EXTENSION. January 18, 2006. Developed by: Academic Assembly Council Personnel Committee. Agenda. Welcome! Electronic Review (no slides) Program Review Process

nay
Download Presentation

Peer Review Ad Hoc Chair Training

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Peer Review Ad Hoc Chair Training University of CaliforniaAgriculture and Natural Resources COOPERATIVE EXTENSION January 18, 2006 Developed by: Academic Assembly Council Personnel Committee

  2. Agenda • Welcome! • Electronic Review (no slides) • Program Review Process • Performance level, criteria and expectations • Lunch • Ad Hoc Reports • Logistics • Evaluation

  3. Requesting Help & Additional Information • If you have any questions, or need to clarify issues contact: Carolyn Frazier (510)987-0082, carolyn.frazier@ucop.edu • Do not contact the candidate, CD, RD or Personnel Committee directly!!

  4. Personnel Committee Members July 05 - June 06 • Fe Moncloa, 4H YD (CC&S) – Chair • Mike De Lasaux, FA (NC&M) – Chair elect • Glenn Nader, FA (CV) – Past Chair • Dennis Pittenger, FA (CC&S) • Rachel Elkins, CD, FA (NC&M) • Jeff Mitchell, Specialist, KAC • Linda Garica, CD, FA (NC&M) • Martha L. López, NFCS (CC&S) • Mario Moratorio, FA (CV) • Teresa Ward, FA (CV)

  5. Role of Personnel Committee • Coordinates academic merit & promotion process. • A resource for training workshops. • Nominates ad hoc review committee

  6. Role of Personnel Committeefor ad hoc committee • Chair training • Reviews ad hoc committee reports for readability, positive comments and thoroughness in addressing review criteria.

  7. Ad Hoc Review Committee Selection Criteria • Composed of at least three academic staff. • When possible, two members are at or above rank the candidate is seeking. • At least two committee members work in the discipline of the candidate.

  8. Ad Hoc Review Committee Selection Criteria • At least one person should be familiar with candidate’s program. • A committee with ethnicity and gender balance is sought. • No one may serve as committee chair two consecutive years.

  9. Ad Hoc Review Committee Selection Criteria • Supervisors of candidates may not serve on committee. • Committee members can not be from the same county as the candidate(s). • Candidates for advancement may not serve as committee chairs in the same year. May serve on committees.

  10. Role of PC with Ad Hoc Review Committee Reports • Intent of ad hoc reports be mentoring in nature and/or provide constructive comments. • PC reviews all ad hoc committee reports prior to administrative review. • PC does not approve or disapprove reports. • PC checks for clarity and constructive comments to candidate.

  11. Role of PC with Ad Hoc Review Committee Reports • If inappropriate statements are found in the report, ad hoc committee chairs will be contacted and asked to modify them. • not changed then the PC attaches a disclaimer statement:

  12. Role of PC with Ad Hoc Review Committee Reports “It is the intent of the Personnel Committee that the ad hoc reports be mentoring in nature and/or provide constructive comments. The Personnel Committee does not approve or disapprove ad hoc reports, but does occasionally suggest some changes to improve the clarity and the advice or information that is conveyed. Personnel Committee members were unable to obtain the changes to the contents of this report that they thought were needed.”

  13. Program Review Process • Promotion is an Advancement • Assistant to Associate • Associate to Full Title • Full Title from Step V to VI • Acceleration • May be requested for Merit or Promotion that occurs earlier than normal.

  14. Program Review Process Vice President Appeals Ad Hoc Associate Vice President (final decision) Senior Administrative Council Ad Hoc All Cases Regional Director Prepares Recommendation All Cases CD and SSP Director Prepares Recommendation All Cases Promo/Acceleration Candidate Prepares PR Dossier

  15. Senior Administrative Council (SAC) Roles • RD completes evaluation of all Merit, Promotion and Acceleration dossiers • Process used by SAC • PL presents packet and makes recommendation • RD Adds comments/defends • Discussion by all SAC members • Recommendation made to AVP Standiford

  16. Program Review Process Vice President Appeals Ad Hoc Associate Vice President (final decision)

  17. Definite Appointments & Term Reviews Ad Hoc Committees 1st Cycle 2nd Cycle 3rd Cycle Merit Term Review only Period since last salary action Promotion Promotion & Term Review Entire period in rank Acceleration Acceleration & Term Review For merit: since last merit, For promotion: since last promotion Unless negative by CD or RD which triggers appointment of Ad Hoc comm. Can not be considered for an acceleration.

  18. 2005-06 Timeline for Merit, Promotion, and Acceleration Actions Oct. CD Requests Letters of Evaluation for Promotions. CD Requests letters for Merit to Full VII and above Dec. Deadline for Request of Optional Regional Ad hoc Review Feb.Completed Package to Supervisor Feb.CD -> RD -> Academic Personnel Office Mar.CD and SSP Director -> Evaluation of Candidate to RD

  19. Timeline Merit/Promotion/Acceleration Actions (continued) Mar. RD -> Pkg w/ RD Evaluation to APO Apr. Ad Hoc Committee Report due to APO Apr. Personnel Committee Review and Evaluation of Ad Hoc Reports May SAC Review All Dossiers and Makes Recommendations to Assoc VP June Final Decision Made by AVP By JulyFinal Decisions Provided to RDs; notification letters mailed to Advisors and County Directors.

  20. COOPERATIVE EXTENSION ADVISOR SALARY SCALES EFFECTIVE 10/01/05 FISCAL YEAR Years at Rank Step Step Annual Monthly Assistant $ 41,400 3,450.00 I 2 Advisor $ 43,500 3,625.00 II 2 $ 45,600 3,800.00 III 2 $ 48,500 4,041.67 IV 2 $ 51,300 4,275.00 Overlap step V 2 $ 54,100 4,508.33 VI 2 Associate $ 51,400 4,283.33 I 2 Advisor $ 54,200 4,516.67 II 2 $ 56,700 4,725.00 III 2 3 $ 61,000 5,083.33 Overlap step IV $ 65,400 5,450.00 V 3 Advisor $ 61,100 5,091.67 I 3 $ 65,500 5,458.33 II 3 $ 71,800 5,983.33 III 3 $ 78,500 6,541.67 IV 3 $ 84,700 7,058.33 V -- $ 92,100 7,675.00 VI -- $ 101,300 8,441.67 VII -- $ 111,500 9,291.70 VIII -- $ 121,200 10,100.00 IX --

  21. MERITS & PROMOTIONS 200020012002 Prom-Acc 80%(5) 50%(10) 50%(4) Prom-Norm 79%(24) 63%(16) 65%(20) Merits-Acc 73%(11) 67%(15) 70%(20) Merits-Norm 90%(63) 88%(49) 93%(54) 200320042005 Prom-Acc 25%(4) 100%(3)42%(12) Prom-Norm 80%(20) 78%(23) 76%(17) Merits-Acc 89%(9) 75%(8)67%(12) Merits-Norm 90%(78) 91%(56) 93%(41)

  22. Acceleration Statistics 2005 Promotion+Accel. 42% (12) Promotion+Normal 76% (17) Merits+Accel. 67% (12) Merits+Normal 93% (41)

  23. OTHER 2004 ACTIONS • Retroactive 1 year • 3 merits • Off Scale • 3 cases

  24. Other 2004 Observations County Directors similar to other advisor 50% of CD promotion accelerations positive (vs. 42% for other advisors) 100% of CD merits positive (vs. 93%) 67% of CD actions positive (vs. 78%) Large number of accelerations (29% of all cases) 47% negative actions received some salary increase (overlapping step, normal merit step, etc.)

  25. Appeals- 2001-2005

  26. Overall PR Organization

  27. Acceleration Statement • Greater than normal productivity in all four criteria for individual’s rank • Exceptional achievement in at least one criteria.

  28. From the “Blue (E) Book” An acceleration … is intended to recognize exemplary efforts beyond what is normally considered … Emphasize activities that represent an unusual or exceptional effort or contribution beyond what is expected for your rank…

  29. Activity Must Be: • Above and beyond in all categories • Such as: • Major educational effort • Research break through • Major service component • For CD’s, increased support for county

  30. Remember • Each case is different • SAC does attempt to equalize across requests • The “driver” needs to be very clear

  31. Your Evaluation is Based on Position Description • All position descriptions that apply to the period of review must be included.

  32. Self-Statement • Candidate may include: • programs’ overall goal • issues addressed • summary of major results and impacts • external factors that influenced the balance of their program

  33. Extending knowledge, research and creative activity • One page project descriptions Candidate may include: • Outline at the beginning of each sub-section • A 1/2 page describing each category with overall results and impacts

  34. Extending knowledge, research and creative activity Format for project descriptions: 1. Project title 2. Collaborators (if applicable) 3. Grant and program support (if applicable) 4. Background, Rationale, Objective(s) 5. Methods a. Research (if applicable) b. Extension (if applicable) 6. My role 7. Results 8. Impact

  35. Affirmative Action • AA should be described in self-statement and the four criteria areas (where relevant) • In the stand alone AA section, efforts and accomplishments should be highlighted • Methods used to reach under- represented clientele • Not exceed two pages

  36. Bibliography 1. Chronological order and serialized 2. Candidates are expected to identify their activity/role for items during current review period and to highlight them. 3. Should be divided into peer reviewed & non-peer reviewed Peer review means “ subject to possibility of rejection” 4. “In press” publications must include acceptance letter in an appendix.

  37. Publication examples • For promotions, accelerations and merits to FT VII to FT IX only

  38. Performance Level for Academic RanksAssistant Rank • Entry level • Demonstrate ability to assess needs and set priorities, plan, organize, implement and evaluate • Positive AA commitment • Evidence of professional competence and activity and dedication to continue professional improvement • All four criteria needNOT BE equally developed • Emphasis will be on extending knowledge and applied/creative activity.

  39. Performance Level for Academic Ranks-Associate Rank • Reserved for academics who demonstrate significant potential for a productive career in CE • Must have demonstrated an ability to set program priorities • Relate and interact well w/ colleagues/clientele • Demonstrated initiative and leadership in total program development and delivery • Positive AA commitment and effort • Becoming a career staff employee & demonstrate movement towards balanced program.

  40. Performance Level for Academic Ranks-Full Rank • Must have developed an excellent program in the four criteria and AA • Successful in terms of positive contributions to their discipline, intellectual development, program growth, depth, clientele and colleague respect, AA accomplishment and professional improvement • Program results show excellence in education • Should include peer reviewed publications and county and/or statewide publications for clientele • Expected to have demonstrated long range planning leadership w/in their program area.

  41. Full Rank, Step VI • Documented evidence of an outstanding program which shows a balance of significant and continuous growth in the four criteria • Within the criteria there must be demonstrated effort & commitment in AA • Evidence that the candidate’s influence has continued to grow and that s/he is widely recognized in his/her specialty.

  42. Full Rank, Step VII, VIII, IX • Reserved for persons who have made exceptionalcontributions to a major program area, resulting in significant benefits to the people of CA and contributing favorably to the prestige of UC and UCCE • Evidence of continuing superior ability, professional attainment and growth in the individual’s field • Also demonstrate peer leadership, originality, and ability to work effectively with others

  43. Continued Full Rank, Step VII, VIII, IX • Advancement to Step IX is reserved for persons of the highest distinction whose work has been nationally recognized and acclaimed • Show strong evidence of a well-balanced program w/ outstanding performance in all four criteria areas and AA • Strong evidence of a wide scope of recognition and highly meritorious service.

  44. Academic Coordinators • They administer academic research or educational programs that are intended to serve the general public. • Types of coordinating activities in these positions are quite diverse • Updated position description including salary changes are listed in APM-375 found at: • http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadpers/apm/apm-375.pdf

  45. Review Criteria for Academic Coordinators • Administrative Performance • Professional competence and Activity • University and Public Service • Affirmative Action • Questions: Contact Carolyn Frazier

  46. County Directors Performance in Extending Knowledge & Info • Leadership, management, and organizational skills should include: • Development, motivation and evaluation of staff • Evidence of efforts related to local and regional issues • Relationships with Co. government and agencies • Activity in cross-discipline or regional programs

  47. County Directors Performance--Applied Research/Creative Activity • Accomplishments related to administrative innovations should include such areas as: • Leadership w/ staff/programs to reach new audiences • Procurement and management of budget resources • Procurement and management of facilities • Techniques of personnel evaluation • Public relation efforts • Creative staffing • Leadership in encouraging applied research in all subject areas addressed by CE

  48. County Directors Professional Competence and Activity • There should be evidence of: • Leadership in professional societies and groups • In local boards and advisory groups • Staff involvement in professional development • Also include recognition by colleagues/clientele for administrative leadership provided

  49. County Directors University and Public Service • There should be evidence of: • Activity on Regional and/or Division Committees and workgroups • Contributions to county, community, regional, and statewide activities

  50. County Directors Affirmative Action • There should be evidence of: • Efforts of CD and of Staff in reaching underrepresented clientele • Outreach programs and of training provided • Initiating innovative programs which effectively impact underserved and minority issues • Describe staff efforts regarding parity/compliance.

More Related