Faculty Evaluation at

1
Faculty Evaluationat

• Willamette University
• Prepared by Ron Loftus

2
Disclaimer

• These slides were created to help frame a
  discussion with colleagues.
• As such, they are kind of talking pointsand do
  not represent anyones viewpoint or
  interpretation but my own.
• I did share an earlier version of them with FC
  colleagues and received some input, but I alone
  am responsible for the content.

3
What are our Standards or Criteria?

• See PPP, Sec. VI. Evaluation Standards and
  Procedures
• The criteria for retention, promotion, tenure
  and step increases shall be
• 1) teaching effectiveness
• 2) professional development, and
• 3) University and community service

4
Key Language from the PPP

• Although faculty members are expected to make
  contributions in all three areas, effective
  teaching is of paramount importance poor
  teaching cannot be redeemed in the other two
  areas.
• However, this endorsement of the centrality of
  effective teaching should not be construed as
  negating the need for a professional development
  program.

5
PPP Language on Teaching

• There is a lot of it under VI., A, 1, a-f
• We find such language as
• Demonstrates substantial understanding of subject
  matter s/he teaches and revises courses when
  necessary to reflect current developments in the
  discipline
• Is well prepared for classes and presents courses
  in an organized fashion
• Seeks to maintain the interest of students and to
  stimulate their intellectual curiosity and
  creative abilities

6
How does FC Evaluate Teaching Effectiveness?

• Are SETEs/SAIs over emphasized?
• What is considered along with course evaluations
  forms?
• Student letters
• Colleague letters
• Teaching materials submitted by the faculty
  member
• Information in the Personal Statement

7
More on Teaching

• Explores new teaching techniques when necessary
• Makes clear to students the objectives and
  requirements of his/her courses and the criteria
  by which students will be evaluated. The
  effective teacher exhibits fairness and
  impartiality in evaluating student achievement.
• Etc.

8
What would constitute Ineffective Teaching?

• What kind of high number on the SETE forms do
  you think should grab (your and) FCs attention?
• What other considerations should be factored in?
• What is the role of student letters?
• What else should be taken into consideration?
• Dont overlook the role of the Personal Statement!

9
Language about Professional Development

• Engages in such scholarly activities as research
  and writing for publication, artistic creativity
  and performance. . .
• Although the nature of what constitutes
  professional development will vary by discipline,
  it is expected that the faculty member
  demonstrates professional development in a manner
  accepted by individuals in his/her field of study
  and subject to the process of peer review.

10
Section VII. C., 1 Promotion to Associate

• 1. In order to be promoted to Associate
  Professor, an Assistant Professor must have
  demonstrated a sustained and consistent record as
  an effective teacher, engaged in a continuing
  program of professional development, and actively
  contributed in the area of of University and
  community service.

11
Promotion to Professor

• VII, C. 2 In order to be promoted to Professor,
  an Associate must have demonstrated consistently
  effective teaching, significant and continuing
  accomplishments in professional development and
  University and community service. The person
  must have additionally demonstrated personal and
  professional traits which are important in
  performing a leadership role as an active and
  effective member of the CLA.

12
So, could we conclude from this that in regard to
Professional Development

• 1. For Tenure and Promotion one needs to
  demonstrate a professional development program
  that is consistent with the standards in ones
  field or discipline
• 2. And that this should include work that is
  subject to the process of peer review?

13
What we are not specifying

• The number of publications
• Their length
• Precisely what is required for tenure in any
  formulaic sense
• But the implication is clear that some
  constellation of activities such as
• Conference presentations or papers
• Shorter, non-peer reviewed writing
• More substantial, peer-reviewed work
• Would be appropriate

14
The Role of the Personal Statement

• In the end, it is up to the faculty member to
  explain to the FC
• What their professional development program
  consists of
• Why it is the appropriate mixture or
  constellation for them at this time in their
  career
• How it conforms for the PPP guidelines

15
Organizing Your CV

• Under Publications, many use the category Peer
  Reviewed Publications
• If a manuscript is submitted, or under review,
  please so indicate.
• If a manuscript is accepted but publication date
  is not certain, say (Forthcoming) after your
  entry.
• If the book or journal has been copy edited, and
  all final changes have been made, you can say (In
  Press).

16
How does the bar differ for Promotion to
Professor?

• Consistently effective teaching record
• Significant and continuing accomplishments in
  professional development and University service
• v.
• engaged in a continuing program of professional
  development
• It follows, then, that when one stands for
  promotion to Professor, a significant and
  continuing record of accomplishment needs to be
  in evidence.

17
What is the Role of Service?

• Is service is being downplayed?
• NOT necessarily so.
• Service is one of the three criteria by which we
  are judged.
• Service is more than committee work what kinds
  of things might be be included in service?
• service to ones profession,
• community service
• At the same time, some writing or publication may
  fall into the service category

18
Professional Development v. Service

• Can the argument be made that now Prof. Devt is
  more likely to be a deal breaker than service?
• Another way to pose the question Unlike
  twenty-some years ago, when a very strong service
  record and relatively little PD might have
  secured promotion, is the opposite now the more
  likely scenario?

19
What about Criteria for Step Increases?

• This language added only recently because we had
  none. See VII, E
• Step advances are not automatic. . .In order to
  receive a step advance a faculty member must
  demonstrate consistent teaching effectiveness, a
  continuing program of professional development,
  and a commitment to University and community
  service as defined in Sec. VI. A.

20
General Practices

• For 3-year periodic reviews, if a faculty member
  seems to be struggling in any of the three areas,
  and the area of difficulty is not one that FC has
  previously drawn attention to, then
• Mention will be made in a letter so that in the
  ensuing review, if the problem persists, the step
  advance may not be forthcoming.

21
Have our Evaluation Standards Changed
Significantly over the Years?

• Yes. . .and No depending how far back one wishes
  to go.
• WU did go through a transition from a primarily
  teaching institution to one where expectations
  for professional development were articulated.
• Anyone who joined WU since 1980, however, has
  heard a consistent message a professional
  development record is required for tenure and
  promotion.

22
Has the Bar, then, been Raised?

• In some senses, yes. Language about significant
  and continuing accomplishments and peer review
  now exist in the PPP.
• At the same time, more and more junior faculty
  members come to WU with such expectations of
  themselves, and they proceed to demonstrate a
  strong record of professional development early
  in their careers here.

23
A Typical Tenure Review File?

• Demonstration of a sustained and consistent
  record of effective teaching
• Engagement in a continuing program of
  professional development
• Evidence of some peer reviewed work
• Some conference papers, posters, or presentations
• Concise Personal Statement that addresses
  accomplishments and future directions
• A record of service appropriate to the faculty
  member

24
What exactly are the Expectations that FC works
with?

• This is the question I hear the most.
• But what does it really mean?
• Do faculty honestly want to hear that we all must
  have 3 articles, 4 conference presentations, 2 or
  more book reviews in our portfolios to receive
  tenure?
• Would some formula like this work for everybody?
  I dont think so!

25
As stated previously,

• You need to tell FC what it is you do in the area
  of Professional Development
• And WHY that is the appropriate trajectory for
  you to be on.
• If it is a tenure or promotion decision, and
  outside evaluators will comment on the
  contributions you make to your discipline and how
  appropriate your professional development agenda
  appears to them.

26
You should be aware that

• Outside evaluators, sometimes from top-50 liberal
  arts colleges, do inform us that the file they
  were asked to review might be considered thin
  or even inadequate in the realm of professional
  development at their institutions.
• But they usually hasten to add that teaching
  requirements appear to be heavier at WU, and FC
  adjusts its expectations accordingly.

27
Is our Evaluation Process Fair and Consistent?

• Absolute consistency may be difficult to achieve
  simply because each Council, with its elected
  membership, will be differently nuanced.
• But each Council works within parameters set by
  previous Councils as outlined in their letters to
  the faculty member.
• Since FC often begins its review of a file with a
  careful reading of previous FC letters, a clearly
  demarcated channel keeps the FCs discussion
  within certain established parameters.

28
How to Read FC Letters

• With some care!
• Letters summarize what FC sees in the file
• Letters provide feedback in terms of student and
  colleague comments
• Letters also point to areas of performance that
  may need to be addressed
• Letters provide a record for future Councils
• Letters constitute a record of an ongoing
  conversation between FC and faculty member

29
A Personal View

• While we may give up something in terms of
  disciplinary expertise by having a committee
  made up of elected generalists,
• We compensate for this by requiring external
  evaluators to assist the FC.
• And we always operate within the parameters set
  by previous FC reviews which should militate
  against wildly inconsistent decisions.

30
Furthermore

• By not having a hierarchical structure whereby FC
  and Administration views of a case need to be
  reconciled
• We do not experience the inconsistency of a FC
  decision being reversed by a Dean only to be
  reinstated by a VP or Provost only to be reversed
  again by the President.
• Therefore, for all its flaws, our evaluation
  system is, on the whole, very unique and faculty
  friendly.