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.
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:
5-38