Based on the HB 250 mandate, Kentucky State University's new process addressing the 2022 calendar year performance evaluation of faculty ensures that processes are clearly articulated and published and are available to all persons in the university community. The process reflects Kentucky State University's set performance standards, as well as respecting the uniqueness of disciplines within the university, and provides appropriate, professional, and flexibility at college and school levels to establish expectations beyond the university performance standards.

RELATED PROCEDURES:

Faculty at Kentucky State University are evaluated annually on the performance standards in three areas: teaching effectiveness and high impact practices in scholarship, and university and community service. Furthermore, faculty are contractually bound to meet the service expectations listed on their faculty contract addendum. The type of performance evaluation conducted (annual, third year, tenure and promotion, or post-tenure review) depends on the nature of the faculty member's contract, rank, and tenure status. The annual, third year, tenure and promotion, or post-tenure review include four rating categories, as identified below:

• Exceeds Expectations has a numeric value equal to three (3) points a faculty member can earn;
• Meets Expectations has a numeric value equal to two (2) points a faculty member can earn;
• Needs Improvement has a numeric value equal to one (1) point a faculty member can earn; and,
• Unsatisfactory has a numeric value equal to zero (0). A faculty member will not earn any points towards their performance in this area.

The categories represent the point per indicator within the category faculty member can earn. The overall average for each category on the rubric found in Appendix D will adhere to the following bands:

3.00 - 2.50 Exceeds Expectations

2.49 to 2.0 Meets Expectations

1.99 to 1.0 Needs Improvement

.99 - 0 Unsatisfactory

University performance standards for faculty evaluations include the following (additional standards can be set by the college, unit, or school within the discipline):

Teaching effectiveness: Faculty members are evaluated on their ability to effectively deliver course content and engage students in authentic and active learning. This includes the use of appropriate teaching methods, the ability to create and use effective assessments, and the ability to provide meaningful feedback to students.

Scholarship and research: Faculty members are evaluated on their ability to conduct and publish scholarly research and contribute to their field of expertise. This includes the quality and quantity of publications, presentations, and other scholarly creative activities as outlined in the rubrics in Appendix D by rank and discipline

2

ALL POLICIES ARE SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT