FPA-1FINAL DRAFT12/10/141

FINAL MASTER Document

DECEMBER, 2012

WAU Full-time Regular Faculty:

The PAS Task Force has been working diligently all semester and is pleased to put forth this draft document for faculty review and input of the Faculty Performance Appraisal (FPA),to replace the former PAS, for faculty review and input.

As you are aware, we are moving to a calendar-year review. To facilitate this, the 2014 FPA will be based on Spring 2014 and Fall 2014 data only. In order to gain all necessary approvals within the governance structure and meet deadlines for the Rank & Review Committee to consider promotions in early March, the PAS Task Force has set the following schedule:

November 29 / FPA draft document distributed to Department Chairs to disseminate to their faculty
November 20 – December 11 / Faculty administer paper-pencil course evaluations (FPA-3)
January 5 – February2 / Provost’s office tabulates course evaluation data
The provost will work with the president to facilitate an electronic vote of the Board of Trustees
January 19 – February 6 / All faculty complete FPA documents 1, 4, 5. Documents 1 & 4 are discussed w/supervisor who will forward them to the Dean. Document 5 is sent directly by the faculty member electronically to the Provost’s Office.
February 9 / FPA Documents 1, 4, 5 due to the Dean
January 19 – February 13 / Department Chairs and Deans complete FPA-2 (one classroom observation of each faculty member)
February 16 / FPA-2 due to Provost’s Office
February 16 – February 27 / Provost’s Office tabulates data (FPA-6)
March 2 / FPA Reports disseminated to each faculty
March 2 / Rank & Review Committee begins deliberations for promotions

PAS Task Force:

Patrick Williams, Glen Bennett, James Bingham, Tijuana Griffin, Daniel Lau, Mike Lee, Joan Francis. Invitee: Provost


  1. The annual review period shall be January 1 to December 31, every year.
  1. To facilitate the move to a calendar year review, all faculty will be evaluated in March, 2015 using data from the Spring and Fall 2014 semester only. All documents will be due to the Provost’s office on February 9, 2015, except the Teaching Observation Form (FPA-2), due on February 16, 2015.
  1. New faculty hires for any Fall semester will be evaluated the following January using data from the preceding Fall semester only. New faculty hires for any Spring semester will be evaluated the following January using data from the preceding Spring and Fall semesters.
  1. Faculty Performance Appraisal (FPA) instruments to be used in any given reporting period are those which are approved for use by the Provost’s office.
  1. The performance appraisal packet is comprised of the components listed in the table on page 2 of this document.
  1. Commencing in 2015, after all components have been completed, the department chair shall meet individually with each faculty member to review the documents contained in the performance appraisal packet no later than February 10 following the December 1 that marks the end of the evaluation period.
  1. In the event that the Department Chair (in concurrence with the Dean) assigns an overall score that falls within the “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” range on the Faculty Assessment Form(FPA-1), or if the final score falls within these ranges (FPA-6), a Performance Improvement Plan(FPA-7) will be completed within 30 days of receiving the overall score. Details are outlined on the Faculty Assessment Form (FPA-1).
  1. The completed performance appraisal packet will be reviewed by the Dean, who may amend the evaluation by appending a separate appraisal to the evaluation. The Dean may also request an individual meeting with the faculty member for any reason.
  1. Department Chairs shall certify, through the Dean of the school, to the office of the Provost that the review has been completed. The FPA packet will be housed in the faculty member’s file in the Provost’s office.

Who completes / Scoring weight / How completed
FPA-1 / Faculty Assessment Form / Sections A, B, and C self-reported by faculty member. Section D completed by supervisor (department chairs for regular faculty, dean for the department chair). / 60% / *Electronically, hard copy signed by faculty member and supervisor; supervisor submits to Dean
FPA-2 / Teaching Observation Form-- Used to document one pre-arranged classroom visit during the calendar year to observe the teacher in the classroom setting. / Completed by department chairs for regular faculty, dean for the department chair. / 15% / Electronically, either via laptop during observation or transferred post- observation; hard copy signed by faculty member and supervisor; supervisor submits to Dean
FPA-3 / Course Evaluation Form
(aggregate total of all) / Completed by all students enrolled in the faculty member’s courses. / 20% / Paper/Pencil
Tabulated by Provost’s office
FPA-4 / Professional Planning Form / Completed by the faculty member to outline and describe his/her professional goals for the coming year. / 2.5% / *Electronically
Hard copy signed by faculty member and supervisor; supervisor submits to Dean
FPA-5 / Evaluation of Supervisor / Faculty members complete for department chairs; department chairs complete for deans. / 2.5% / *Electronically
Faculty member e-mails directly to Provost’s office
FPA-6 / Scoring Sheet / 100% / Completed by Provost’s office
FPA-7 / Performance Improvement Plan / Must be completed within 30 days of receiving an overall score of “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” from supervisor on the Faculty Assessment Form (FPA-1). / *Electronically
Hard copy signed by faculty member and supervisor; supervisor submits to Dean

* All forms will be e-mailed to faculty. They should be filled out on the computer (rather than by hand), then printed out and signed by the appropriate parties where indicated. All forms listed above, except FPA-3 (Course Evaluation) should be discussed between the faculty member and the supervisor, then signed and ultimately submitted to the dean, who will review and submit to the provost.


Faculty Assessment Form(FPA-1)

for (circle one) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Name ______(% FTE) _____ Full Time _____ Part Time

Department ______Rank ______

This form consists of four parts:

Section A / Teaching and Direct Instructional Activities / Self-reported
Section B / Service to Students, Department, School, University, Church, and Community / Self-reported
Section C / Professional Development and Research Activities / Self-reported
Section D / Teaching and Direct Instructional Activities / Filled out by supervisor

For each area, performance should be assessed as it relates to the University mission. To assign a criterion rating for each section from 1 – 5, rounded to one decimal place, refer to page 2,Rubric for Rating Categories and Definitions to score.

Instructions for the self-assessing faculty member: You should identify areas where you have experienced success and areas where you are in need of improvement within each category. Written comments are encouraged.

Rubric for Rating Categories and Definitions

5 – Outstanding – Performance is consistently well above the expected levels of competence in all requirements for the review criterion. Performs work above expected levels and may make suggestions for work improvement. Anticipates and responds quickly to changing situations, continually expanding knowledge and skills to address new challenges. Is self-motivated to accomplish tasks and contributes beyond expectations in all areas. / A rating of “Outstanding” for the overall evaluation is used if the faculty consistently performs well above all requirements of the position.
4 – Exceeds Expectations – Performance is occasionally above the expected levels of competence for the review criterion. Performs work at the expected levels, exceeding in most but not all areas as indicated in #5 above. / A rating of “Exceeds Expectations” for the overall evaluation is used if the faculty has met all requirements of the job and has exceeded some, but not all, requirements of the position.
3 – Meets Expectations – Performance meets the expected level of competence for the review criterion. Work is of a satisfactory nature, meeting but not exceeding expectations. / A rating of “Meets Expectations” for the overall evaluation is used if the faculty has consistently met all requirements of the position.
2 – Needs Improvement – Performance does not meet requirements of the review criterion. Overall performance is less than satisfactory. Although work is performed at a satisfactory level, improvement is needed in multiple areas. / A rating of “Needs Improvement” for the overall evaluation is used if the faculty has met some requirements but there are areas where he/she needs improvement to meet requirements of the position, or where performance fluctuates between satisfactory and unsatisfactory. An overall rating of Needs Improvement requires that a Performance Improvement Plan be established for the faculty with a follow-up performance evaluation required 30 days from the date of the Needs Improvement performance rating.
1 – Unsatisfactory – Performance is consistently poor or inadequate in meeting most or all requirements of the review criterion. Work performance is well below expected levels. Few or no goals and objectives are met. Signifies need for immediate improvement. / A rating of “Unsatisfactory” for the overall evaluation indicates that the faculty’s performance does not meet the minimum requirements of the position. Overall performance must improve in order to retain the faculty in his/her present position. A Performance Improvement Plan is required to be established for the faculty with a follow-up performance evaluation required 30 days from the date of the unsatisfactory performance rating. Human Resources must be consulted regarding the faculty’s future status with the institution.

Expand any section if needed. Table may flow to the next page(s) if necessary.

Section A. Teaching and Direct Instructional Activities:
This performance section evaluates activities that include interaction with students related to instruction, preparing for instruction and evaluation of student performance. Consider the quality, quantity and effectiveness of these activities.
Criteria for Evaluation and Comments:
1. Preparation of Course Materials – Selects and secures appropriate texts, instructional aids, materials and supplies required for course presentation. Develops teaching plans and organizes class time in such a way that all required course materials are ready and available for course presentation and that course can be accomplished in the allotted time.
Comments: / Criterion Rating:
2.Course Presentation – Provides individual and group instruction appropriate to the needs of the student(s) and the requirements of the activities being performed. Is present during class time. Assures clear understanding of materials presented. Utilizes and demonstrates required equipment, tools and other instructional aids. Provides sufficient resources for student(s) to perform assignments. Displays mastery of discipline.
Comments:
3.Student Performance Evaluation – Encourages student participation, learning and individual initiative. Provides constructive feedback on tests and assignments. Provides fair and timely grading of student course work.
Comments:
Section A Summary Rating - Add the criterion rating numbers together and divide by 3. Show Section Summary Rating in box at right (round to two decimal places).

Expand any section if needed. Table may flow to the next page(s) if necessary.

Section B. Service to Students, Department, School, University, Church, and Community:
This performance section evaluates the faculty member’s responsibilities to the university and relevant community. Consider the quality, quantity and effectiveness of these activities.
Criteria for Evaluation and Comments:
1. Institutional Service – Maintains required office hours as posted. Submits reports and performs required record-keeping functions in a timely and dependable manner. Works well with colleagues, cooperates and contributes as a team member. Attends departmental/school/university meetings and Chapel. Accepts service assignments and committee work (may include serving as committee chair). May participate in recruiting activities, or serve as departmental chair, or contribute in other ways that add value to the department.
Comments: / Criterion Rating
2. Community Service –Represents the institution in university-related outreach activities (such as public performances and presentations, inservice volunteering, and Service Days). May serve on advisory boards/committees, or hold memberships in civic organizations, or apply academic expertise in the local, state, or national community, or volunteer in local church activities.
Comments:
3. Student Service– May sponsor student activities or groups, or attend student activities, or advise/mentor students, or engage in religious activities with students.
Comments:
Section B Summary Rating - Add the criterion rating numbers together and divide by 3. Show Section Summary Rating in box at right (round to two decimal places).

Expand any section if needed. Table may flow to the next page(s) if necessary.

Section C. Professional Development and Research Activities:
This performance section includes the faculty member’s responsibilities to the teaching and research fields as well as to the discipline. Professional development activities are those that enable faculty members to enhance individual teaching and research knowledge and/or creative capabilities and thus improve significantly the capabilities of the institution. Consider the quality, quantity, and effectiveness of service in these activities.
Criteria for Evaluation and Comments:
1. Developing/Maintaining Professional Relationships – Develops/maintains professional/collegial relationships. Participates in professional organizations, or may give professional presentations, or receive external recognition for professional achievement.
Comments: / Criterion Rating
2. Continuing Education – Attends conferences, seminars, and workshops, or pursues/acquires advanced degrees, certification, etc., or maintains continuing education associated with licensing and/or regulatory requirements.
Comments:
3. Publishing/Writing/Creative/Research Activities – May publish/review professional books/articles, or write/review grant proposals, or publish/record/perform creative works, or participate in research review activities,or perform/oversee research that positively reflects on the institution.
Comments:
Section C Summary Rating –Add the criterion rating numbers together and divide by 3. Show Section Summary Rating in box at right (round to two decimal places).

Instructions for the assessing supervisor: This form to assess teaching and direct instructional activities will be filled out by the faculty member’s supervisor—a Department Chair, or if the faculty member is a Department Chair, by the Dean. In the event that an overall score that falls within the “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” range is assigned by the supervisor, completion of the Performance Improvement Plan (Form FPA-7) will be required within 30 days.

Performanceshould be assessed as it relates to the University mission. To assign a criterion rating for each section from 1 – 5, rounded to one decimal place, refer to page 2,Rubric for Rating Categories and Definitions to score.

Written comments: Your faculty members want your honest, thoughtful suggestions and feedback. Every category should contain a written comment.

Expand any section if needed. Table may flow to the next page(s) if necessary.

Section D. Teaching and Direct Instructional Activities:
This performance section covers activities that include interaction with students related to instruction, preparing for instruction and evaluation of student performance. Consider the quality, quantity and effectiveness of these activities.
Criteria for Evaluation and Comments:
1. Preparation of Course Materials – Selects and secures appropriate texts, instructional aids, materials and supplies required for course presentation. Develops teaching plans and organizes class time in such a way that all required course materials are ready and available for course presentation and that course can be accomplished in the allotted time.
Comments: / Criterion Rating:
2.Course Presentation – Provides individual and group instruction appropriate to the needs of the student(s) and the requirements of the activities being performed. Is present during class time. Assures clear understanding of materials presented. Utilizes and demonstrates required equipment, tools and other instructional aids. Provides sufficient resources for student(s) to perform assignments. Displays mastery of discipline.
Comments:
3.Student Performance Evaluation – Encourages student participation, learning and individual initiative. Provides constructive feedback on tests and assignments. Provides fair and timely grading of student course work.
Comments:
Section A Summary Rating - Add the criterion rating numbers together and divide by 3. Show Section Summary Rating in box at right (round to two decimal places).

Overall Rating Scale = Overall Rating Category

4.50 – 5.00 Outstanding

3.50 – 4.49 Exceeds Expectations

2.50 – 3.49 Meets Expectations

1.50 – 2.49 Needs Improvement *

1.00 – 1.49 Unsatisfactory *

*If the supervisor’s score or overall score falls within these ranges, completion of Performance Improvement Plan (FPA-7) is required within 30 days

Complete only one set of computations:

Overall Score: Section A. (self-reported score: teaching)x .6 = ______

Fill this out if you are a

REGULAR FACULTY

Section B. (self-reported score: service)x .1 = ______

Section C. (self-reported score: research)x .1 = ______

Section D. (supervisor score: teaching)x .2 = ______

TOTAL: =______

Overall Score:

Fill this out if you are aSection A. (self-reported score: teaching)x .2 = ______

DEPARTMENT

CHAIR

Section B. (self-reported score: service)x .5 = ______

Section C. (self-reported score: research)x .1 = ______