| TIMETABLE |
| COMPONENTS | CYCLE | DUE DATE |
| ALL FACULTY: |
| 1. Student Evaluation | Annual | April* |
| 2. Curriculum vitae | Annual | First business day in April |
| 3. Self-evaluation (SES-1) | Annual | First business day in April |
| 4. Comprehensive Peer Review | Every 2 years for non-tenured | April 30 |
| Every 5 years for tenured\n(And Year prior to Promotion\nOr Tenure Application) | April 30 |
| a. Peer reviewer's instrument\n(Forms PR-1, PR-2) | With each peer review | April 30 |
| b. Optional class visitation | With each peer review | April 30 |
| 5. Administrative review\n(Form AR-1) (including conferences) | Annual | Penultimate Friday\nIn April |
| 6. Evaluation materials delivered to dean of next-level administrator | Annual | Determined by\nVPAA |
7. PDP/DEA Annual Last Friday in April
* First-year faculty members are to be evaluated in the fall of their first year. Chairs/supervisors shall use student evaluations of teaching (if results have been made available) and peer reviewed materials such as the curriculum vitae prepared by the faculty member. Chairs/supervisors may require first-year faculty to submit teaching-related materials such as syllabi, class handouts, assignments, examinations, and similar teaching-prepared materials as evidence of teaching effectiveness. Any other faculty member may request fall evaluations and peer review in addition to mandatory ones.
===== PAGE 145 =====
For new faculty, the cycle begins in fall of the first year of appointment, after midterm. At that time, the new faculty member prepares a curriculum vita. Peers review the curriculum vitae and the self-evaluation. Their recommendations are used in conjunction with the Administrator's review to finalize the first PDP/DEA-1. The cycle continues with biennial Comprehensive Peer Review and Annual Administrative Review until year six. This will provide a Comprehensive Peer Review in the spring before the submission of a Tenure and Promotion Dossier. Chairs/supervisors shall use evaluation scores and materials from the entire calendar year to determine merit increases in salary for continuing faculty. Only the relevant portions of the faculty's PDP/DEA-1 forms should be consulted (i.e., spring from previous academic year; summer and fall from current academic year).
In cases where the new faculty member has been awarded years toward fulfilling the probationary period, a calculation shall be made to place the faculty member in a cycle that will provide Comprehensive Peer Review in the spring term prior to application for tenure and/or promotion. Whatever timetable is set, the new faculty member must still prepare curriculum vitae at the end of the first year. When a faculty member begins in the spring term, the cycle shall be adjusted by determining the spring prior to the fall when tenure application would be required and then setting Peer Review dates on a two year cycle from that point back to the appointment date. Faculty who begin their appointment in the summer term will be treated as if they began in the fall of that calendar year.
### III. INSTRUMENTS FOR EVALUATION AND SUMMARY
### A. Curriculum Vitae and Professional Development Plan
Faculty members will develop and maintain current curriculum vitae for the purpose of assessment and evaluation of performance. The Form PDP/DEA-1 is the basis for evaluation of the faculty member for the year for which the plan is written. The curriculum vitae of that year must document how components of the plan have been met or exceeded. The Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1) establishes specific benchmarks for the individual faculty member's performance. These benchmarks identify activities and accomplishments within the faculty member's control that can be achieved within the year. They are also consistent with University performance standards and expectations and the unit criteria for measuring those expectations. The Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1) must be accepted by the unit administrator as well as the faculty member. The Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1) is described in greater detail in Section IV. The forms that would be used to record and report the plan and the evaluation by self, peers, and the administrator are attached in the Appendix.
===== PAGE 146 =====
### B. Assessment Data and Information
### 1. Achievement Benchmarks in the Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1)
Achievement benchmarks are measurable or observable aspects of performance. They must be anchored in a behavior or achievement that can be observed or documented in some way. The benchmarks established by each unit serve as guidelines for what constitutes "meets expectations" and what constitutes "exceeds expectations." On any evaluation form, if the respondent agrees that the faculty member has achieved the benchmarks listed in the faculty member's PDP/DEA-1, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "meets expectations" or "exceeds expectations." If the respondent judges that the faculty member has not reached the benchmarks laid out in the PDP/DEA-1 and has not achieved what is normally expected of a unit peer, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "does not meet expectations." If the respondent judges, on the basis of the unit benchmarks, that either the benchmarks listed in the faculty member's PDP/DEA-1 or the faculty member's achievements documented in the curriculum vitae are beyond what is normally expected of a unit peer, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "exceeds expectations." Benchmarks are to be established by each academic unit.
### 2. Self-Evaluation by Faculty
The faculty member is required to document any rating of “exceeds” or “fails to meet expectations.” The faculty member will summarize the self-evaluation on the Self-Evaluation Summary (Form SES-1), a form that lists major accomplishments for the previous year. The self-evaluation narrative cannot exceed one page in length for each category of the evaluation for a total of three pages overall. Other documentation can be cited and included.
3. Student Evaluation of Instruction. (Not applicable to librarians unless they teach University courses.)
Faculty will utilize data from the student evaluation of instruction as they prepare both self-evaluation and Form PDP/DEA-1. Administrators will utilize the data to improve courses and instruction. The procedure for administering and tabulating the student evaluation process is as follows:
a. A "Student Evaluation of Instruction" instrument shall be used by students to evaluate their instructors and courses. That instrument shall include general questions and questions appropriate for the type of class—traditional (on campus) class, online class, or hybrid class (some on campus meetings with strong online support). The faculty member may choose to administer the evaluation during part of a class or allow students to complete it online. (See Appendix for a copy of the "Student Evaluation of Instruction" instrument, Form ST-1.)
b. Courses at Kentucky State University shall be evaluated using the “Student Evaluation of Instruction” instrument. At a minimum, all faculty regardless of any other duties and responsibilities the individual may have at the University will select at least two courses
===== PAGE 147 =====
each fall that will become a part of his or her current evaluation dossier. (Example: adjunct, part-time faculty, Chairpersons, Deans, or other administrators who teach courses shall be evaluated by use of the "Student Evaluation of Instruction" instrument.)
c. The numerical results of the evaluations selected by the faculty member shall be placed in his or her file in April (see Calendar) for use by the supervisor in his or her evaluation of the faculty member. These numerical results are not to be compiled or averaged in any manner considered statistically invalid. Written comments by students shall not be included as part of the faculty member's evaluation, but will be used exclusively, in conjunction with the numerical data, for self-development by the faculty member.
d. Student evaluations of teaching shall be regularly scheduled campus-wide.
e. Faculty normally will be evaluated in all courses or sections of courses which they are teaching.
f. Every instructor shall receive a copy of the compilation of results for each course evaluated, including a typed copy of all student comments from each course evaluation, after the compilation is completed. Results of student evaluations will not be distributed to faculty members until all grades for that term have been submitted to the Office of the Registrar.
g. The "Student Evaluation of Instruction" instrument that is used on campus will be completed using a computer-scorable answer sheet for ease in compilation of results.
4. Peer Review of Self-Evaluation and Curriculum Vitae by Colleagues.
These ratings must reflect the extent to which the faculty member has achieved the benchmarks in the Form PDP/DEA-1. The intent of this system is to moderate the extremes of performance and identify exceptional performance (and failure as well). If all or most of the faculty are rated as exceeding expectations, then the expectations and standards they represent are too low.
A peer review panel shall be appointed in accordance with the stipulations below for each faculty member scheduled to undergo a Comprehensive Peer Review. Each reviewer must review the curriculum vitae, the self-evaluation summary, and any optional documentation, focusing on the Professional Development Plan, as recorded on Form PDP/DEA-1, to determine whether the faculty member has fulfilled the objectives of the Professional Development Plan. Any peer reviewer may request specific documentation of any claim made in the curriculum vitae or in the self-evaluation summary. Peer reviewers will determine whether the faculty member meets unit and University expectations for faculty performance, exceeds those expectations, or fails to meet those expectations in the three categories of teaching effectiveness (professional competence), professional achievement, and service. The benchmarks established by each unit serve as guidelines for what constitutes "meets expectations" and what constitutes "exceeds expectations." On any evaluation form, if the respondent agrees that the faculty member has achieved the benchmarks listed in the faculty member's Form PDP/DEA-1, the respondent must mark the
===== PAGE 148 =====
faculty member as "meets expectations" or "exceeds expectations." If the respondent judges that the faculty member has not reached the benchmarks laid out in the Form PDP/DEA-1 and has not achieved what is normally expected of a unit peer, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "does not meet expectations." If the respondent judges, on the basis of the unit benchmarks, that either the benchmarks listed in the faculty member's Form PDP/DEA-1 or the faculty member's achievements documented in the curriculum vitae are beyond what is normally expected of a unit peer, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "exceeds expectations." In cases where the faculty either fails to meet standards or exceeds expectations set forth in the Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1), the peer reviewer must offer a rationale for the evaluation and identify documentation (or lack thereof). Peer review forms are placed in the Portfolio and identified by a reviewer number (Peer Reviewer #1, etc.). The Peer Review Ratings shall be recorded and submitted on Form PR-1 and Form PR-2.
a. Peer evaluation instruments, designed by individual units, shall be used by faculty members to evaluate their colleagues. (See the Appendix for Peer Reviewer Form PR-1 and Form PR-2).
b. All persons with faculty rank at Kentucky State University shall be evaluated by their peers regarding all aspects of their duties and responsibilities at the University. Faculty must have three to five faculty members on their Peer Review panels. The Peer Reviewer Assignments must include a sufficient number of Area Peers to meet the applicable minimum number of reviewers and at least one Division or Unit Peer. The Peer Reviewer Assignments are recorded on Form AS-1. The unit administrator and the faculty member agree on the selection of Peer Reviewers.
c. Faculty members with tenure will undergo a Comprehensive Peer Review every five years; those without tenure will undergo a Comprehensive Peer Review every two years. Adjunct professors who are re-hired regularly by the University are to undergo Comprehensive Peer Review in the semester that they are re-hired after having completed twelve credit hours of teaching at the University.
d. Peer reviews shall be conducted by April 30 of each academic year. All Peer Review Forms will be due in the unit administrator's office no later than April 30 of each academic year.
e. Every faculty member being evaluated shall receive a copy of the Peer Review Form (Form PR-1), the Peer Reviewer's Rationale for Ratings Form (Form PR-2), and the Administrator Review Form (Form AR-1). These forms are to be placed in the faculty member's file. After the conference with the Administrator, the finalized and signed copies of the Professional Development Plan Summary (Form PDP/DEA-1) and the Administrative Tabulation (Form AT-1 and Form AT-2) must be placed in the file. The Peer Reviewer Number Assignments shall remain confidential.
### 5. Classroom Visitation
===== PAGE 149 =====
Classroom visitation by a team of colleagues will be an optional part of each Comprehensive Peer Review and will occur by April 30 of each academic year for those faculty members scheduled to undergo Comprehensive Peer Review that year. Any member of the peer review panel has the right to require a classroom visit if he/she feels that one is necessary for rendering a fair and informed judgment of teaching ability. The exception to this is for first year faculty, for whom classroom visitation is a mandatory component of the peer review and who will be reviewed after midterm of the Fall semester. The visitation team will be selected by the faculty member and the unit administrator, with each having equal input, and will consist of a minimum of two and a maximum of three faculty members. The visitation team may be composed of members of the Peer Review Panel, but others may be chosen. The classroom evaluation shall be based on one or more classroom visits. Members of the visitation team will use criteria established by their units. Faculty members who receive ratings of "does not meet expectations" in the performance category of teaching are required to have classroom observation as part of their Comprehensive Peer Review.
### 6. Unit Administrator Review
The unit administrator will review the curriculum vitae, the self-evaluation summary, and other optional documentation in the same manner as the peer reviewers. Any administrative reviewer may request specific documentation of any claim made in the curriculum vitae or in the self-evaluation summary. The administrator's review is due May 15 of the Academic year. Judgments in each category are "meets expectations"; "exceeds expectations"; or "does not meet expectations." The benchmarks established by each unit serve as guidelines for what constitutes "meets expectations" and what constitutes "exceeds expectations." If the respondent judges that the faculty member has not reached the benchmarks laid out in Form PDP/DEA-1 and has not achieved what is normally expected of a unit peer, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "does not meet expectations." If the respondent judges, on the basis of the unit benchmarks, that either the benchmarks listed in the faculty member's Form PDP/DEA-1 or the faculty member's achievements documented in the curriculum vitae are beyond what is normally expected of a unit peer, the respondent must mark the faculty member as "exceeds expectations."
### C. Administrative Tabulation and Review Process
### 1. Unit Administrator Tabulation and Faculty Conference
Administrative evaluation consists of the tabulation of the peer, self, and administrative review (see above). The peer review forms will be tabulated by indicating the number of ratings in each category that were "meets," "exceeds," or "fails to meet." These judgments cannot be averaged. For instance, if seven reviewers each review a faculty member, he or she could receive five (5) meets expectations and two (2) exceeds in teaching, three (3) meets expectations and four (4) exceeds expectations in professional activity, and one (1) fails to meet, three (3) meets, and three (3) exceeds in service. These would all be recorded on the Administrative Tabulation form.
The faculty member and unit administrator will reach an agreement on the ratings to be given and will finalize the Professional Development Plan on Form PDP/DEA-1. At the
===== PAGE 150 =====
conclusion of the conference, the administrator will record one rating for each category area. The faculty will be judged to have met, exceeded, or not met expectations (or failed to meet) in each of the three areas. An evaluation of failure to meet must be documented and must have an identifiable remedy in Form PDP/DEA-1 that is prepared for the coming year. Failure to meet expectations in one or more areas requires that the administrator establish a plan for monitoring progress toward the remedy. Failure to meet expectations will also be used to determine the retention of probationary faculty.
### 2. Summary Evaluation
The final evaluation and the ratings from the Peer Reviewer Forms (PR-1 and PR-2), the Administrator Review Form (AR-1), and the Self-Evaluation Summary Form (SES-1) are summarized on the Administrative Tabulation, Form AT-1, and signed by both the faculty member and the administrator. A copy of this signed form is then placed in the faculty member's file. This summary is completed during or after the conference in September.
### 3. Administrative Chain
The unit administrator submits the Administrator Tabulation (Form AT-1 and AT-2), and the finalized Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1) for each faculty and the Unit Faculty Evaluation Summary (Form AS-2) to his or her immediate supervising Administrator. That administrator (Dean or Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs) may reject the recommendations of the unit administrator, but must submit clear explanation for the rejection. The unit administrator must then resubmit the evaluation or request a review. During the reevaluation, the rationale for the original evaluation being rejected must be presented to the faculty member.
### D. Location of the file and Review Forms
The file is considered the property of the faculty member, but it shall be retained, with all the appropriate forms, in the unit office. The summary forms will be forwarded to the next level.
### 1. Retention of Review Documents and Forms
The Unit Administrator must retain review and tabulation forms for six years for non-tenured faculty and, once tenured, for five years. The policy concerning faculty members whose performance does not meet expectations may stipulate retention of documents for longer periods of time. However, once a problem has been corrected, the review and tabulation documents are to be destroyed after five years. This statement does not supersede any legal obligation to retain records.
### E. Rights of the Faculty Member
Since the purposes of the Comprehensive Evaluation System are to provide the faculty member with feedback on various aspects of job performance for use in self-improvement and to provide a fair and standardized mechanism for personnel decisions, each faculty member has certain rights regarding the evaluation process. Except where limited by the Policy on Appointment, Rank,
===== PAGE 151 =====
Tenure, and Promotion, these rights are as follows:
1. The right to receive tabulations for each item from student evaluations for each course evaluated.
2. The right to receive typed copies of all comments made by students on the student evaluation instruments for each course evaluated.
3. The right to receive copies of Peer Review Forms.
4. The right to receive typed copies of all comments made by peers.
5. The right to review the summary reports (see Forms AT-1 and AT-2, PR-1 and PR-2, and AR-1) and any narrative prepared by the faculty member's unit administrator and to respond in writing to the administrative evaluation before the report is forwarded.
6. The right to require that the materials provided by the faculty member as part of the evaluation file maintained in the office of the faculty member's unit administrator be forwarded to persons involved in the administrative review process. (Normally, only the summary reports and administrative tabulation would be forwarded.)
7. The right to be informed, in writing, of the nature of complaints made in confidential materials and respond to such complaints.
The Policy on Appointment, Rank, Tenure, and Promotion as published in the Faculty Handbook in some cases limits the rights of the faculty member applying for tenure and/or promotion and in some cases grants the faculty member additional rights. In these cases, the governing regulations shall be those contained in the Policy on Appointment, Rank, Tenure, and Promotion.
### IV. THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
### A. The Nature of the Professional Development Plan
The Professional Development Plan, as recorded on Form PDP/DEA-1, represents the agreement between the faculty member and his or her unit administrator upon specific performance benchmarks that the faculty member will seek to meet in the coming year. A Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1) from the preceding year provides the means of assessing the effectiveness of a faculty member's performance by identifying the specific performance objectives that had been set for the year. The curriculum vitae and other documentation then serve to document the faculty member's achievement of these objectives. A critical element for the Professional Development Plan is that both the faculty member (and the faculty on the whole) and the unit administrator agree to specific objectives or benchmarks of performance. Further, the individual faculty member then works toward the accepted objectives. On the other hand, the Professional Development Plan, since it is accepted by the administration, also reflects the commitment of the administration to the continuing growth and development of the faculty.
===== PAGE 152 =====
member. Some activities, such as engaging in research, presenting results of research, attending meetings and workshops, and so on may require funding that is beyond the means of the faculty member. In such cases, the faculty member should seek appropriate funding from the University or external sources. Likewise, the unit administrator should utilize the anticipated needs of the unit faculty to make funding requests. The Professional Development Plans prepared by faculty should contribute to the planning process in this way. If proper funding is unavailable, the faculty member cannot be held accountable for completing that particular activity and should find alternative activities, whenever possible.
The individual faculty member will identify benchmarks appropriate to his or her professional expertise and teaching duties. The Professional Development Plan, recorded on Form PDP/DEA-1, must indicate the specific benchmarks relevant to the faculty member and actually provide specific details of activity. A faculty member may identify specific workshops (on instruction or instructional technology, for example) or specific professional meetings to attend. By identifying these on the Form PDP/DEA-1, the unit administrators may then request budgetary support to support the professional development activities of the unit faculty. In this way, the PDP can contribute to the planning process. In general, the PDP/DEA-1, developed by the individual faculty member and endorsed by the unit administrator, reflects a mutual commitment to specific activities that will contribute to both the faculty member's effectiveness and the quality of instruction at the University generally.
### B. Guidelines for Developing the Professional Development Plan
The Professional Development Plan, as recorded on Form PDP/DEA-1, must reflect the strengths and weaknesses of a faculty member as they have been identified in the various evaluation instruments. Student evaluation of instruction, peer review comments, administrator review, and self-evaluation should provide the basis for identifying areas of needed development and areas of professional strength. The Professional Development Plan must address the identified areas of weakness as well as identify activities that support continued professional growth.
The Plan developed by the faculty must reflect the level of achievement necessary to be rated as having met expectations. Should a faculty member exceed expectations in service in one year, the level of expectation does not increase in the next year. It would be unfair if the quality performance of a faculty member one year meant that in the next he or she had to do even more to be recognized just to meet expectations. A faculty member can indicate in his or her PDP/DEA-1 an intention to undertake an activity that would be evaluated as exceeding expectations. This activity may be writing a grant and then receiving a grant award, writing and publishing a book, giving a performance, serving as chair of a major civic or professional organization, etc. Examples of these activities must be collected and published as part of the process of establishing benchmarks. Individual creativity and the need for flexibility must be sustained. In many cases, an individual cannot anticipate some special opportunities. Similarly, a faculty member should not be barred from an activity because he or she failed to place it on the plan. Opportunities may develop throughout the year (the contingencies should be anticipated in the budgeting and planning process).
Here are the general guidelines for selecting specific activities for the Professional Development Plan:
===== PAGE 153 =====
1. The PDP/DEA-1 must identify areas of growth that address recognized weaknesses and then provide specific activities that will remedy the weakness.
2. The PDP/DEA-1 must identify areas of growth with respect to identified strengths and then provide specific activities that will enhance the strength.
3. The PDP/DEA-1 must specify levels of performance that reflect the rating of "meets expectations." Thus, should the faculty member complete with quality all the specified activities, that faculty member would be judged to have met expectations.
4. The PDP/DEA-1 should specify activities that, if successfully completed, would be recognized as exceptional performance.
The level of performance necessary to be rated as "meets expectations" must be agreed upon by the faculty member and the unit administrator. The number and quality of these activities must be relatively uniform throughout the University and the individual unit.
For each portion of the Professional Development Plan--Instructional Development, Professional Activity Development, and Service Development--specific benchmarks must be stated and the means of measuring or evaluating the achievements must be made clear. A list of resources that the faculty member needs in order to be able to accomplish the identified benchmarks must be offered if the resources are not available within the unit or college. For example, a faculty member may identify a need for support of study time, financial support to attend a conference or a workshop, or support to visit a funding agency.
## CONTENTS OF THE FACULTY MEMBER'S FILE:
The following is a list of items that must or may be included in the faculty member's file. The required material is marked with and asterisk. Other items are optional.
## Required Information
### *1. SES-1
This is to be used as a basis of assessment by peer reviewers as well as by the administrator. The faculty member may include a narrative summary as well.
###*2. Peer reviewer Forms, Administrative Reviewer Form, and Administrative Tabulation (PR-1, PR-2, AR-1, AT-1, AT-2)
These evaluations should be addressed by the Professional Development Plan. The peer review evaluations are not to be consulted by the administrator in filling out form AR-1.
###*3. Professional Development Plan (Form PDP/DEA-1)
The Professional Development Plan is described in more detail in Part IV. Every file must have a PDP/DEA-1 for the previous year and a proposed PDP/DEA-1 for the coming year.
===== PAGE 154 =====
After the conference with the unit administrator, the finalized version of the PDP/DEA-1 must be placed in the file.
###4. Curriculum vitae
The current vita must be comprehensive and must indicate items that are reported for the first time.
###*5. Student Evaluations
Only the numerical portion of the student evaluations is required for this file, and it is to be included for the purpose of professional self-development and administrative evaluation only.
## Optional Information
. Instructional Assessment Data
a. Syllabi
b. Course development documentation
c. Advising documentation
d. Special instructional materials.
7. Professional Achievements
8. Service Assessment Data
a. University service documentation
b. Unit service documentation
c. Community service documentation
9. Other documentation
a. Transcripts
b. Letters from professional organizations
c. Commendations, Awards, Recognitions
d. Other
===== PAGE 155 =====
# Kentucky State University DISTRIBUTION OF EFFORT AGREEMENT / PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACADEMIC YEAR Data and Scheduling Sheet
NAME: ___ CWID: ___
Home Address: ___HomePhone: ___
E-Mail: ___
Office Location: ___ Office Phone: ___
Degree and Grantor: ___
Rank, Status, Since, Tenure date: ___
College, Division: ___*List courses in numeric order.
## Teaching Schedule, Fall Semester 2013
Prefix No, Sem. *Contact Class Room
Class Room
Bldg.
Section Course Title Hrs. Hrs. Days Hours Code Enrollment #
1. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
2. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
3. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
4. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
5. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
Office Schedule: Fall Semester 2013
Days Times Days Times
Monday ___ Thursday ___
Tuesday _____
Friday ___
Wednesday ___
Wednesday _____ Saturday _____
Teaching Schedule, Spring Semester 2014
Prefix No, Sem. *Contact Classroom Plds
Bldg
Section Course Title Hrs. Hrs. Days Hours Code Enrollment#
1. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
2. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
3. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
4. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
5. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
6. ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
## Office Schedule: Spring Semester 2014
Days Times Days Times
Monday Thursday ___
Tuesday Friday
Wednesday _____ Saturday _____
Contact hours are the number of hours you are in classes/laboratories each week. In keeping with the usual method of calculating contact hours, instructional periods that are just short of one hour in length are to be counted as a full hour; that is, a class that meets from 8 a.m. until 8:50 a.m. constitutes one contact hour per weekly meeting.
### I. Teaching:
===== PAGE 156 =====
Professional Development Plan Information:
List the specific activities and benchmarks you expect to achieve this year (May to May).
List the specific activities and benchmarks you expect to achieve this year (May to May).
## DEA Summary:
### I. Teaching and Related Activities
Calculate the percentages of your time that you will be involved in the PDP activities stated above. Include the total percent of time you anticipate spending in the subcategories I.A, I.B, and I.C. Full-time teaching faculty are to use 60-90% of their time in this category. Record the total percentage below.
I. A. Classroom Instruction ___% This % is based on the number of contact hours you teach. To calculate this %, divide the total number of contact hours you teach each week by the average number of hours you work each week, as specified in Section IV of this form.
I. B. Instruction Preparation and Grading _____% Include in this % the time you anticipate spending preparing for classes and grading assignments.
I. C. Student Advisement _____% Include in this % the time you anticipate spending each week having conferences with and advising students.
List the number of students officially assigned to you for academic advising: ___.
Section I Total: (60-90%)** _____%
**NOTE:** The range of percentages for each category applies to faculty who are teaching full-time. If you are an administrator, or if your primary job responsibilities are in categories other than Teaching & Related Activities, adjust the percentages accordingly. The percentages selected must be approved by your immediate supervisor. In all cases the percentages used for the categories must total to 100%.
### II. Scholarly Research and Creative Activity/Professional Development: Professional Development Plan Information:
List the specific activities and benchmarks you expect to achieve this year (May to May).
===== PAGE 157 =====
## DEA Summary:
II. A. Research and Creative Activities (0-30%) ___% Include in this % the time you anticipate spending each week on funded and on non-funded research. Non-funded research includes performing and creating art works and writing professional articles and books.
If the research is funded, provide the account number: _____
II. B. Professional Activities & Development (0-30%) ___% Include in this % the time you anticipate spending in taking courses, participating in professional development workshops and organizations, reviewing journals, etc. Exclude civic, religious, social and political activities in which you will participate as a citizen unless they related directly to your professional area(s) of expertise.
II. C. Administrative Duties ___% List the official percent of time designated for your serving as an administrator, that is, Academic Chairperson or Dean, grant coordinator, and President or Secretary of Faculty Senate. Identify the specific duties on the lines below.
List the duties: ___
Section II Total: _____%
### III. Service:
Professional Development Plan Information:
List the specific activities and benchmarks you expect to achieve this year (May to May).
## DEA Summary:
III. A. Public Service (0-30%) ___ % Public service is the application of your professional expertise in the community without pay, or with only token pay. Include in this % the amount of time you anticipate spending participating in KSU's Speakers Bureau, presenting lectures, seminars, demonstrations and performances, and serving as a juror or judge for contests or exhibits.
III. B. Institutional Service (10-40%) ___% Attach a list of all standing and ad hoc committees on which you serve or expect to serve. Place one asterisk in front of each committee that you will chair and two asterisks in front of those that you will serve as the secretary. Describe any other officially assigned duties.
i. Committees: ___ % (Total of 1-3)
1) University standing committees and other assigned activities. ___%
2) College/School committees and other assigned activities. ___%
3) Division/Department committees and other assigned activities. ___%
===== PAGE 158 =====
ii. Course and Curriculum Development ___% Include in this % the time you anticipate spending on developing new courses, instructional materials, and revising curricula. Development activities should be for future use; improvements in current course offerings are to be recorded under I.B: Instruction Preparation and Grading.
iii. Other Types of Institutional Service ___% Provide a brief description:
___
Section III Total (10%-40%): ___%
IV. Average Work Week In Hours ___ Report the total number of hours per week you spend "on task" in all categories for which you reported a percentage on this form. Note that research indicates that a full-time faculty member's average work week is from 50 to 53 hours.
Signature of Faculty Member
Date Signature of Chairperson or Dean
Date
Distribution of this Form: The original is to be retained by the academic unit to be used as criteria for evaluating the faculty member's performance, and a copy of this agreement is to be given to the faculty member.
===== PAGE 159 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM UNIT FACULTY EVALUATION SUMMARY
Academic Unit: ___ ___
Date:
Unit Administrator:_____
Signature: _____
This form reports the evaluation information for the Academic Unit Faculty. Please list alphabetically. For Librarians, report Professional Competence in the Teaching Category.
## SUMMARY RATINGS
## Exceeds ExpectationsÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÅ-----ÄÄÄÅ¿ Meets ExpectationsÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ-ÄÄÄÅ¿ Does Not Meet ExpectationsÄÅ¿
Faculty Member: _____ SS# _____
Faculty Member: ___ SS# ___
1. With regard to Teaching, this faculty member: □ □ □
2. With regard to Professional and Creative Activity, this faculty member □ □ □
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: □ □ □
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: ___
Faculty Member: ___ SS# ___
Faculty Member: ___ SS# ___
1. With regard to Teaching, this faculty member: □ □ □
2. With regard to Professional and Creative Activity, this faculty member: □ □ □
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: □ □ □
Faculty Member: ___ SS# ___
1. With regard to Teaching, this faculty member: □ □ □
2. With regard to Professional and Creative Activity, this faculty member: □ □ □
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: □ □ □
Faculty Member: ___ SS# ___
1. With regard to Teaching, this faculty member: □ □ □
2. With regard to Professional and Creative Activity, this faculty member: □ □ □
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: □ □ □
Faculty Member: ___ SS# ___
1. With regard to Teaching, this faculty member: □ □ □
2. With regard to Professional and Creative Activity, this faculty member: □ □ □
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: □ □ □
===== PAGE 160 =====
Exceeds Expectationsఋணాలుఒకే ఒక ఒక
ఒక ముఖ్యమైన మానవుడు సాధారణ మానవమైన సమానమైన సమానమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మానవమైన మా
===== PAGE 161 =====
3. With regard to Service, this faculty member:
===== PAGE 162 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM INDIVIDUAL FACULTY CHECKLIST
Form AT-3
Faculty Member: ___
Date:
Academic Unit: ___
Check When Complete:
□ Peer Reviewer 1 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 2 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 3 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 4 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 5 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 6 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 7 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer Number Assignment □ Form AS-1
□ Self-Evaluation □ Form SES-1 □ Curriculum Vitae □ DEA/PDP-1
□ Administrator's Review □ Form AR-1
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2
□ Faculty Member signed:□ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2
Summary Ratings Recorded for this Faculty Member on Form AS-2
□ Check when complete
===== PAGE 163 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM UNIT FACULTY EVALUATION SUMMARY CHECKLIST
Form AS-3
Forms forwarded on _____:
Summary Ratings Recorded for all Faculty Members on Form AS-2
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member:
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member:
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
2023
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Forr
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: _____
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: _____
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: _____
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
===== PAGE 164 =====
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: _____
Administrative Tabulation Box Form AT-1 Box Form AT-2 Box Form PDP/DEA-1
Box Administrative Tabulation Box Form AT-1 Box Form AT-2 Box Form PDP/DEA-1
Box Administrative Tabulation Box Form AT-1 Box Form AT-2 Box Form PDP/DEA-1
Administrative Tabulation Box Form AT-1 Box Form AT-2 Box Form PDP/DEA-1
Administrative Tabulation Form AT-1 Form AT-2 Form PDP/DEA-1
Box Administrative Tabulation Box Form AT-1 Box Form AT-2 Box Form PDP/DEA-1
Box Administrative Tabulation Box Form AT-1 Box Form AT-2 Box Form PDP/DEA-1
Administrative Tabulation blacksquare Form AT-1 blacksquare Form AT-2 blacksquare Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: _____
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
Faculty Member: _____
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
□ Administrative Tabulation □ Form AT-1 □ Form AT-2 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
Faculty Member: ___
Faculty Member: _____
Faculty Member: ___
===== PAGE 165 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR'S CHECKLIST
Form AT-4
## In each Faculty Member's file, place:
□ Peer Reviewer 1 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 2 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 3 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 4 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 5 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 6 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Peer Reviewer 7 □ Form PR-1 □ Form PR-2
□ Self-Evaluation □ Form SES-1 □ Curriculum Vitae □ Form PDP/DEA-1
□ Administrator's Review □ Form AR-1
Signed Administrative Tabulation Form AT-1 Form AT-2
## Retain in Unit Records:
□ Unit Faculty Evaluation Summary □ Form AS-2
□ Peer Reviewer Number Assignment □ Form AS-1
□ Self-Evaluation □ Form SES-1 □ Form PDP/DEA-1
□ Administrator's Review □ Form AR-1
Signed Administrative Tabulation Form AT-1 Form AT-2
Signed:_____
Unit Administrator
===== PAGE 166 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM
Form PR-1
## PEER REVIEW FORM
Peer Reviewer Number: ___
Faculty
Member: _____
Date:
Division/Unit: ___
This review is based on the reviewer's examination of the faculty member's achievements as presented in the curriculum vitae, success with respect to the Professional Development Plan/Distribution of Effort Agreement prepared for the previous year, and observations of teaching (when appropriate). For each of the three evaluated areas below, any rating of "does not meet expectations" or "exceeds expectations" must be accompanied with clear and specific rationale. The reviewer is required to make reference to specific items in the curriculum vitae or in the Professional Development Plan/Distribution of Effort Agreement that support any rating other than "meets expectations."
This review includes a classroom observation: ☐ Yes ☐ No
## RATING CATEGORIES
## Exceeds ExpectationsÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Meets ExpectationsÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Does Not Meet ExpectationsÄ
### 1. Teaching:
Summary for Teaching:
aching: Summary for Teaching:
a. Instruction: □ □ □ Overall, this faculty member:
b. Planning and Preparation: □ □ □ Does Not Meet Expectations
c. Advising: □ □ □ Meets Expectations
d. Continuing Growth: □ □ □ Exceeds Expectations
d. Continuing Growth: ___ Exceeds Expectations
Note: For Categories 2 and 3, a Faculty Member is not expected to have ratings in each sub-category. It is possible and acceptable to receive a rating of “exceeds expectations” in only one sub-category and then also receive an overall rating of “exceeds expectations” for the entire category. Mark only the areas that apply.
2. Professional/Creative Activity:
a. Publication: □□□ Overall, this faculty member:
b. Research: □□□ Does Not Meet Expectations
c. Performance: □□□ Meets Expectations
d. Development: □□□ Exceeds Expectations
e. Other (Specified in PDP/DEA-1): ___
| Faculty Member: | Date: |
| Administrator: | Division/Unit: Library |
| The following is a tabulation of the Peer Reviewer Forms, the Administrator's Review Form, and the Self-Evaluation Rating Form. The summative ratings below must be accompanied by signatures of the Faculty member and the Administrator. When forwarded to the Dean, Vice President of Academic Affairs, and the President, a completed Professional Development Plan, Form PDP/DEA-1, for the coming year must accompany this form. |
| Faculty Reviewers: | D | COMPETENCE | E | D | PROFESSIONAL | E | D | SERVICE | E |
| M | E | M | E | M | E | E |
| Peer Reviewer 1: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Peer Reviewer 2: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Peer Reviewer 3: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Peer Reviewer 4: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Peer Reviewer 5: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Peer Reviewer 6: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Peer Reviewer 7: | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
| Tally: |
| Administrator: |
| Self-Evaluation: |
| SUMMARY RATINGS |
| Exceeds ExpectationsAAAAAAAAAA-AAAAAAA Meets ExpectationsAAAAAAAAAA-AAAAA Does Not Meet Expectations AAA …… |
| 1. With regard to Professional Competence, this faculty member: |
| 2. With regard to Professional and Creative Activity, this faculty member: |
| 3. With regard to Service, this faculty member: |
| Any summary rating of Does Not Meet Expectations or Exceeds Expectations requires justification. Administrative Tabulation: Rationale for Ratings, Form AT-2 must be attached. |
| These ratings have been discussed and accepted by: |
| Signed: |
| Administrator | Faculty Member |
## COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE TABULATION Form L-AT-1
Accepted by Vice President for Academic Affairs:
Date:
===== PAGE 177 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM ADMINISTRATIVE TABULATION: RATIONALE FOR RATINGS
Form L-AT-2
Faculty Member:
Date:
Administrator: _____
Division/Unit: _____
The following rationale is offered to justify the ratings of Does Not Meet Expectations and Exceeds Expectations in the categories indicated. This form must accompany the Administrative Tabulation, Form AT-1. (Additional paper or clearly marked substitute form may be used.)
1. Professional Competence. Please indicate the benchmarks that had been set for this category and describe how the faculty member either failed to meet expectations or exceeded expectations. Documentary evidence may be required.
Rating: D ☐ M ☐ E ☐
2. Professional and Creative Activity. Please indicate the benchmarks that had been set for this category and describe how the faculty member either failed to meet expectations or exceeded expectations. Documentary evidence may be required.
Rating: D ☐ M ☐ E ☐
3. Service. Please indicate the benchmarks that had been set for this category and describe how the faculty member either failed to meet expectations or exceeded expectations. Documentary evidence may be required.
Rating: D ☐ M ☐ E ☐
These rationales have been discussed and accepted by:
Signed:_____
Administrator
Faculty Member
===== PAGE 178 =====
# COMPREHENSIVE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM SELF-EVALUATION SUMMARY Form L-SES-1
Faculty Member: ___
___
Signature
Division/Unit: Library
Date: ___
Any rationale that is offered should refer to form PDP/DEA-1.
| ITEM | VERIFIED Initial & Date | COMMENTS |
| Applicant | Chair | Dean |
| COVER LETTER OF APPLICATION | | | | |
| FACULTY VITA | | | | |
| COPIES OF GRADUATE TRANSCRIPTS | | | | |
| TEACHING COMPETENCY | | | | |
| Applicant's Self-Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness | | | | |
| Statement of Teaching Philosophy | | | | |
| Official Student Evaluations of Instructor (5 years) | | | | |
| Official Peer Evaluations and Distribution of Effort (5 years) | | | | |
| Syllabi for all courses taught during last 2 years | | | | |
| Samples of noteworthy course materials developed by applicant (last 5 years) | | | | |
| SCHOLARLY & CREATIVE ACTIVITY | | | | |
| Applicant's Self-Evaluation of Scholarly and Creative Activity | | | | |
| Evidence of Scholarly/Creative Activity | | | | |
| SERVICE | | | | |
| Applicant's Self-Evaluation of University and Community Service | | | | |
| Evidence of university and community service | | | | |
| OTHER RELEVANT MATERIALS | | | | |
| | | | |
===== PAGE 181 =====