Faculty Evaluation Guide
The process for evaluation of faculty members can be confusing based on the various types of faculty (tenured, tenure track, temporary full time, full year, temporary full time, one semester, temporary part time, full year and temporary part time, one semester). This document is intended to assist Deans, Department Chairpersons, Department Evaluation Committee Members and faculty being evaluated with the essential collective bargaining agreement (CBA) provisions related to the evaluation of faculty members.
There are three articles of the APSCUF-PASSHE CBA that define the evaluation process:
- Article 12 - Performance Review and Evaluation of Faculty
- Article 14 - Renewals and Non-Renewals
- Article 15 - Tenure
Article 12 provides the general process for evaluation of Faculty Members and outlines the items which are to be evaluated and the timelines for actions by each particular person or group (Department Evaluation Committee, peer observer, Dean).
It is important that all individuals with a role in the evaluation process recognize the need for the work assigned to be done in a timely and effective manner. The evaluation of faculty members is part of a faculty member and Deanâs work related obligations. Failure of a faculty member or Dean to appropriately perform these responsibilities may be harmful to their colleagues in the tenure and promotion processes and may be treated as a failure on the part of the faculty member or Dean to fulfill their work related responsibilities.
Timelines found in the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) and outlined in this document are deadlines for action. Department Committees and Chairpersons are encouraged to complete their role in the process sooner if at all possible. The earlier a complete evaluation packet may be provided to a Department Chairperson or Dean the more opportunity the chairperson and Dean have to provide a thorough review of the evaluation. This provides the faculty member being evaluated with the same opportunity to more thoroughly review her or his evaluation and provide a timely and well reasoned response to any concerns with the evaluation.
The following guidelines are provided to assist Department Committees, Department Chairpersons, Deans and Faculty Members in the evaluation process:
The Department Committee must consist of at least three members of the academic department. If the department does not have an appropriate number of members to serve on the Department Committee, they may request approval for Faculty Members from outside the department or outside the University to assist in the evaluation process. That request must be submitted in writing to the Dean and be approved by the Provost prior to the person serving on the committee. The approval or denial of approval of the Provost will be provided in writing to the Department Chairperson.
All evaluation packets should include reports of required classroom observations that have been signed by the evaluator and faculty member being evaluated, a copy of the faculty member's vita, copies of the student evaluation summaries as available per the attached guide, a copy of the Department Committee report signed by the committee members and the faculty member, a copy of the Department Chairperson's report signed by the chairperson and the faculty member and a copy of the Deanâs report signed by the Dean and the faculty member.
The packets may include:
- Other material provided by the faculty member being evaluated
- Other material relevant to the performance of the faculty member and cited by either the Department Committee, Department Chairperson and/or Dean
A copy of the Department Committee report should be provided to the faculty member, the Department Chairperson and the Dean. If the receiving party indicates it is acceptable, an electronic copy may be provided to them, however, the packet forwarded through the process should contain a single hard copy of the report.
A copy of the Department Chairperson's report should be provided to the faculty member, the Department Evaluation Committee and the Dean. If the receiving party indicates it is acceptable, an electronic copy may be provided to them, however, the packet forwarded through the process should contain a single hard copy of the report.
A copy of the Dean's report should be provided to the faculty member. The Deanâs report should be specific relative to issues and concerns which must be addressed by the faculty member and provide suggestions for addressing issues and concerns. If the receiving party indicates it is acceptable, an electronic copy may be provided to the individual, however, the packet forwarded through the process should contain a single hard copy of the report.
Responses/Other Correspondence Regarding Evaluation Reports
Any response provided by the faculty member regarding the evaluation by the Department Committee, the Department Chairperson or the Dean should be included in the evaluation packet and is considered a part of the official evaluation packet unless the faculty member specifically indicates he/she does not want the response to be included.
All other correspondence relative to the evaluation from Department Committee members, the Department Chairperson and the Dean should be included with the evaluation packet and is considered part of the official evaluation packet.
In assuring specific contractual timelines are met, the Department Committee, Department Chairperson and Dean should assure the faculty member has a reasonable period of time to review draft evaluations and respond. Five working days is considered reasonable in terms of the timeline for allowing a faculty member to receive, review and respond to the evaluation report of the Department Committee and of the Dean. Due to the timelines, two working days are considered reasonable for a faculty member to receive, review and respond to the evaluation report of the chair.
Should a deadline occur during a semester break the faculty member must provide the Department Committee Chair, Department Chairperson and/or Dean an appropriate mailing or e-mail address for any draft reports to be provided to him/her. Additionally, if a faculty member anticipates being away from the work place for an extended period over a deadline for which he/she is responsible, the faculty member is responsible for providing an appropriate mailing or e-mail address to the appropriate evaluators.
It is imperative that no evaluation report (Department Committee, Department Chairperson or Dean) be finalized without the faculty member being provided a reasonable opportunity to review and respond to the draft evaluation report.
Faculty assigned to conduct a classroom observation should confirm, in writing, the planned date and time of the observation and the course to be observed. Should the faculty member fail to conduct the observation as scheduled he/she is responsible to work directly with the faculty member being evaluated to reschedule the observation in a timely manner. Failure of the faculty member conducting the observation to do so and/or re-schedule the observation may result in disciplinary action against the faculty member scheduled to conduct the observation.
October 11, 2006