CBAPPS 5.01 Faculty Evaluation
CBAPPS 5.01
Faculty Evaluation
PURPOSE
This policy statement describes the faculty evaluation process. It explains the minimum performance expected of all faculty and the criteria used for faculty evaluation. An important goal of this policy statement is to promote a collegial environment that encourages excellence and emphasizes academic professionalism. This policy should be viewed as the minimum requirements for the McCoy College; individual academic departments may include additional criteria for evaluating faculty.
RELATED UNIVERSITY POLICIES
AA/PPS 04.02.01 (8.01) Development/Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty
AA/PPS 04.02.10 (8.09) Performance Evaluation of Continuing Faculty and Post-Tenure Review
AA/PPS 04.02.20 (8.10) Tenure and Promotion Review
AA/PPS 04.02.11 (8.11) Performance Evaluation of Non-Continuing Non-tenure Line Faculty Also see the current Faculty Handbook.
MCCOY COLLEGE POLICIES
CBAPPS 2.06: Participating/Supporting Faculty; Voting at College Faculty Meetings
CBAPPS 5.06: Workload Policy
CBAPPS 5.07: Criteria for Faculty Qualifications 1.
FACULTY EXPECTATIONS
A. Faculty in the McCoy College at Texas State University will carry out their responsibilities with integrity, professionalism, and a spirit of collegiality. Faculty are expected to contribute to the goals of the College through teaching, scholarly activity, and service. Performance evaluation in these areas is the primary basis for decisions concerning salary, promotion, tenure, and other awards. This performance evaluation is based on faculty activities that are documented annually as described in CBAPPS 5.06, “Workload Policy.”
B. Faculty must sustain currency and relevance, and will be categorized as a(n) “Scholarly Academic,” “Practice Academic,” “Scholarly Practitioner,” or “Instructional Practitioner” as described in CBAPPS 5.07, “Criteria for Faculty Qualifications.” All tenured faculty must maintain “Scholarly Academic” or “Practice Academic” status. Failure to maintain currency and relevance affects the faculty workload plan as described in CBAPPS 5.06, “Workload Policy” and the faculty member will be categorized as “other.”
2. EVALUATION PROCESS
A. Faculty members will submit annually an Activity Plan and Activity Report as described in CBAPPS 5.06, “Workload Policy,” and a current vita detailing activities in the areas of teaching, scholarly activity, and service/professional activities. The department chair and the department Personnel Committee will evaluate the performance-related materials for each faculty member. When evaluating an individual’s performance, the department chair will rely on information provided by the faculty member in his/her Activity Report and any other documentation (such as peer reviews of teaching) available. The department chair’s evaluation will be independent of any evaluation by the Personnel Committee. The results of the chair's evaluation of each faculty member will be documented in the department.
B. Members of a department’s Personnel Committee, individually or collectively, shall be provided the opportunity to evaluate their departmental colleagues. The Personnel Committee may choose to elect a subcommittee or individual from the Personnel Committee to conduct this evaluation. Specific procedures for Personnel Committee participation in performance and merit evaluation will be developed by each academic department. Based on a review of Personnel Committee recommendations, department chairs may make adjustments to a faculty member’s evaluation, as the department chair deems appropriate. Department chairs will make available to the dean any written evaluations submitted by the Personnel Committee.
C. Faculty will be evaluated in three categories: teaching, scholarship and service/professional activities. Evaluations will be discussed by the chair and the individual faculty members as part of the feedback process.
D. For tenured faculty the weights typically assigned toeach evaluation category are 40% teaching, 40% scholarship and 20% service/professional activities.
E. For tenure-track faculty, the assigned weights to each evaluation category are typically 40% teaching, 50% scholarship, and 10% service/professional activities.
F. For clinical faculty, the assigned weights to each evaluation category are typically 40% teaching, 40% scholarship, and 20% service/professional activities.
G. For faculty of practice, the assigned weights to each evaluation category are typically 60% teaching, 20% scholarship, and 20% service/professional activities.
H. For lecturers and senior lecturers, the assigned weights to each evaluation category are typically 80% teaching, 0% scholarship, and 20% service/professional activities.
I. For per course faculty, the assigned weights to each evaluation category are typically 100% teaching, 0% scholarship, and 0% service/professional activities.
J. The opportunity to set or reset weights will be given to each participating faculty member during the evaluation process; however, weights must sum to 100 percent and fall between the following defined parameters. (See CBAPPS 2.06, “Participating/Supporting Faculty; Voting atCollege Faculty Meetings” for the description of “participating” and “supporting” faculty.)
K. Tenured faculty requesting a weighting adjustment may propose different weights within the guidelines presented below. Tenured faculty: - 30-50% Teaching; - 30-50% Scholarship; and, - 10-30% Service/Professional Activities. Clinical faculty: - 40-60% Teaching; - 20-40% Scholarship; and, - 20-40% Service/Professional Activities
L. Tenure-track faculty members may not request different weights for the evaluation categories.
M. Participating non-tenure line faculty may propose weights from the percentage ranges below. The faculty member and the department chair will discuss the proposed weights and will reach agreement about the appropriate weights. If the faculty member and department chair cannot agree, the Personnel Committee shall decide. Participating non-tenure line faculty (with the exception of clinical faculty):: - 60-80% Teaching; - 0%-20% Scholarship; and, - 20-40% Service/Professional Activities.
N. Each department will establish clear guidelines linking the workload policy and the evaluation process; these guidelines will be used in determining merit raises as described in CBAPPS 5.04.
O. Each department will develop guidelines for yearly written evaluation of temporary, non- continuing faculty members. (See PPS 8.11, Performance Evaluation of NonContinuing Nontenure Line Faculty. See PPS 7.22, Faculty Responsibilities, Definitions, and Titles for definition of temporary, non-continuing faculty.)
3. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND DOCUMENTATION
A. Teaching
B. Evaluation of teaching performance will consider faculty members’ knowledge of their subject field, including current developments in that field; the ability to select, organize, and effectively present course materials at an appropriate level, and if a core class, following core class guidelines and assessment expectations; the ability to stimulate student interest and motivation; and evidence of active concern for the academic progress of students. Documentation for teaching should address the following areas:
i. Courses and number of students taught at Texas State during the time frame being reviewed;
ii. Evaluations of teaching effectiveness completed during the time frame under review.The review process also may include evaluations by students, peers, graduating seniors, and alumni of the college;
iii. Development or revision of courses, with emphasis on the preparation and use of innovative instructional materials and teaching techniques;
iv. Direction of service-learning projects, major student projects, independent studies, honors’ theses, or masters’ theses. Meeting with students outside the classroom for purposes of academic advising and consultation.
v. Honors or recognitions received for teaching effectiveness; and,
vi. Self-development activities focused on improving teaching effectiveness, including formal study in relevant academic areas, as well as attendance at conferences, short courses or workshops, and other documentation the faculty member wishes to submit.
C. The above list is not intended to depict the order of priority or importance; neither is it all- inclusive.
D. Scholarship
E. The intellectual contributions of each faculty member will be evaluated annually. The evaluation process will consider the quantity and quality of a faculty member’s intellectual contributions and how these scholarship activities have contributed to the McCoy College mission. The evaluation results will be discussed by the faculty member and his/her chair during the annual faculty performance evaluation. In addition, appropriate outlets for future intellectual contributions may be discussed at that time.
F. Documentation for scholarly activities should address the following areas:
i. Peer-reviewed journal articles (learning and pedagogical research, contributions to practice, and/or discipline-based scholarship).
ii. Non-peer reviewed journals (learning and pedagogical, contributions to practice, and/or discipline-based scholarship).
iii. Grants (all external funded grants, unfunded governmental grants, unfunded grants in excess of $100,000). iv. Research monographs. (teaching/pedagogical, practice/applied, and/or discipline-based research). v. Books. (textbooks, professional/practice/trade, and/or scholarly).
vi. Chapters in books. (textbooks, professional/practice/trade, and/or scholarly).
vii. Peer-reviewed proceedings from teaching/pedagogical meetings, professional/practice meetings, and/or scholarly meetings.
viii. Peer-reviewed paper presentations at teaching/pedagogical meetings, professional/practical meetings, and/or academic meetings.
ix. Faculty workshops (teaching/pedagogical, practice oriented, and/or discipline based research seminar). x. Other activities: Examples of documentation of other scholarly activities include (but are not limited to) peer-reviewed cases with instructional materials, instructional software, publicly available material describing the design and implementation of new curricula or courses, technical reports related to funded projects, issued patents, or publicly available research working papers.
G. Service/Professional Activities
H. Service and professional activities are an integral part of faculty responsibilities and essential for all participating department faculty members. Service may be performed at the department, college, university, professional, and/or community level.
I. Evidence of service effectiveness should be documented and includes the following areas:
i. Serving on university, college and/or department committees;
ii. Participating and/or providing leadership in national, regional, and/or local professional organizations;
iii. Reviewing manuscripts and serving on editorial review boards; iv. Serving as faculty advisor to student organizations;
v. Participating in community service, including pro bono consulting activities; vi. Formally mentoring students or faculty;
vii. Reviewing grant proposals;
viii. Chairing university, college, or department committees; and,
ix. Performing an administrative role.
J. Because faculty have diverse interests and areas of expertise, different types of endeavors can be considered for professional activity purposes. Examples of professional activities and substantive linkages to practice include, but are not limited to:
i. Participating in faculty externships;
ii. Participating in business or professional organizations that result in sharing of expert knowledge;
iii. Participating in presentations at professional events that focus on the practice of business disciplines;
iv. Providing pro bono consulting to community or professional organizations;
v. Developing and presenting executive education programs;
vi. Serving on boards of directors of business or professional organizations;
vii. Participating, at an appropriate level of managerial responsibility, in a public, private, or not-for-profit enterprise, or in professional or pro-bono consulting that is material in terms of time and service;
viii. Participating in other activities that place faculty in direct contact with business or professional organizations;
ix. Engaging in significant, documented continuing professional education experiences; x. Serving as an officer or on a board or committee for professional, discipline related organizations;
xi. Serving as an officer or on a board or committee for a professional academic organizations;
xii. Acting as a discussant or referee for a paper at an academic conference; xiii. Engaging in active editorships with relevant academic journals or other business publications; and,
xiv. Reviewing papers for an academic conference.
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
This CBAPPS has been approved by the reviewers listed below and represents the McCoy College of Business Administration policy and procedure from the date of the document until superseded.
Last Update: December 5, 2018
Review Cycle: E5Y
Next Review Date: September. 1, 2020