PERIODIC EVALUATION vs PERFORMANCE REVIEW



PERIODIC EVALUATION vs PERFORMANCE REVIEW

PERIODIC EVALUATION

• A PERIODIC EVALUATION is an evaluation primarily developmental in nature; it does NOT contain formal recommendations regarding future employment, retention, tenure, or promotion. The PERIODIC EVALUATION focuses on providing the faculty member with important development feedback, both positive and negative, with the goal of maintaining and/or improving performance (FPPP 10.1.4). It shall consider the faculty member’s past performance and future plans in the areas of teaching effectiveness, professional growth and service to the University and Community (FPPP 8.1 and 11.0 series).

• The PERIODIC EVALUATION does not include a summary evaluation in the areas of instruction, professional growth, and other contributions to the university and community (Superior, Effective, Adequate, Inadequate).

• Probationary faculty: evaluations normally occur in the first, third, and fifth years in a position. A PERIODIC EVALUATION will cover the period since the faculty member’s date of hire, previous PERIODIC EVALUATION, or previous PERFORMANCE REVIEW, whichever is more recent (FPPP 10.1.11).

• Tenured faculty: evaluations are to take place at intervals no greater than five years.(FPPP 11.2.1.a).

• Temporary faculty: each temporary faculty member neither eligible for nor currently holding a three-year appointment will undergo an annual review for the initial two personnel cycles of his/her appointment, followed by biennial rather than annual reviews. Criteria for evaluation of temporary faculty differs from those of probationary or tenured faculty. See FPPP 9.1.2 for criteria. All TEMPORARY faculty eligible for an initial three-year appointment pursuant to CBA Article 12.12 shall be evaluated in the academic year preceding the issuance of the initial three-year appointment (FPPP 8.1.4.a.2). All TEMPORARY faculty holding three-year appointments pursuant to CBA Articles 12.13, 15.26 and 15.29 shall be evaluated in the third year of their appointment (FPPP 9.1.4.d). .

• The department personnel committee prepares the evaluation for temporary faculty. The department chair shall concur, with or without comments, or not concur, with comments. The department chair shall transmit the REPORT and his/her comments, if any, to the candidate and to the appropriate DEAN for review and entry into the PERSONNEL A FILE

• PERIODIC EVALUATION reports for probationary and temporary faculty go to the department committee, department chair, and college dean. Responses and rebuttals remain with the reports and become part of the file.

• This process usually begins no sooner than March 15 each year and the deadline for completion is in May of each year (FPPP 10.7.1). Exceptions may apply if the candidate has a fall only appointment.

PERFORMANCE REVIEW

• A PERFORMANCE REVIEW is required when a probationary faculty member is a candidate for retention, tenure, or promotion; or a tenured faculty is being considered for promotion to a higher rank. The result is a formal report containing a recommendation regarding retention, tenure, or promotion.

• New probationary tenure track faculty normally fall in this area of review during their second, fourth, and sixth years in a position. (FPPP 10.1.5)

• Temporary faculty do not receive PERFORMANCE REVIEWs.

• PERFORMANCE REVIEWs cover the period since the faculty member’s date of hire or previous PERFORMANCE REVIEW, whichever is more recent. A faculty member’s first PERFORMANCE REVIEW will include work that is part of a service credit year or years. Work completed after the offer of appointment (date of contract) but prior to employment (effective start date) falls within the period to be considered for PERFORMANCE REVIEW (FPPP 10.1.11).

• While the nature of PERFORMANCE REVIEWS is necessarily evaluative, PERFORMANCE REVIEW REPORTS must also contain developmental feedback for each candidate. Developmental feedback helps the candidate improve performance in each area reviewed, focusing on the candidate's eventual success at the University and in the professional field. While this feedback should guide the candidate's progression towards further retention, tenure, and/or promotion, it will not normally establish firm goals for the candidate's future performance. If a REPORT makes it clear that specific goals are to be met, the developmental feedback may be used as a basis for evaluation in future years' REPORTS. The purpose is to help the candidate meet what should already be reasonably clear goals for success in the RTP process (FPPP 10.3.2).

• PERFORMANCE REVIEWS conducted in the faculty member’s fourth year (including service credit) or in the fifth year, if a PERIODIC EVALUATION was done in the fourth year, will provide the faculty member with an assessment of the person’s prospect for tenure, given the member’s entire record and evidence of ongoing performance. (FPPP 10.3.7)

• PERFORMANCE REVIEWS cover the areas of Instruction, Professional Growth and Achievement, and Other Contributions to the University and Community and each includes a Summary Evaluation (Superior, Effective, Adequate, Inadequate; hyphenated Summary Evaluations are NOT permissible) (FPPP 10.3.4).

• After the Level II reviews are complete, PERFORMANCE REVIEWS are forwarded to the Provost via the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs (Kndl 104), along with the original signature page, and any responses and/or rebuttals. If the PERFORMANCE REVIEW is for Retention, a current vita is attached to the reports. If the PERFORMANCE REVIEW is for Promotion or Tenure, the candidates Dossiers/WPAF are forwarded directly to the Office of the Provost.

• The PERFORMANCE REVIEW process begins in the fall and ends in May.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download