Faculty Handbook
SECTION 3
FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
Teaching is the primary responsibility of faculty. Thus, remaining current in one's discipline is an important University expectation and is a key responsibility of each faculty member. Activities leading to this objective include annual evaluations, general professional reading, leaves of absence designed to improve one's general professional competence, travel associated with research or creative efforts, and related activities designed to improve one's professional competence.
The University provides faculty members the opportunity to continue their professional development through such means as sabbatical leaves, support for research, participation in professional organizations, and travel to professional meetings. Individual faculty members are expected to take the initiative in promoting their own growth as teachers, as scholars, and especially in professional and occupational fields, as practitioners. (Refer to Policy 02:225.)
The professional performance of each faculty member is evaluated on the basis of objective and subjective information about the quality and the quantity of work. Evaluation should result in appropriate professional development for individuals and should help faculty members better know their professional strengths and weaknesses. Systematic faculty evaluations will provide a basis for determining retention, tenure and promotion, and, where appropriate, salary increases.
Faculty evaluations will assess professional performance in three areas important to the University's mission and goals: teaching, research/creativity, and service. In accord with the tradition of the University of Montevallo and its mission, teaching is considered a faculty member's most important professional activity. This implies that the other professional activities, research/creativity and/or service, will contribute to an improved educational experience for students, principally in the form of distinguished teaching.
The following guidelines are provided for evaluation of teaching faculty:
Teaching includes all activities that directly and indirectly contribute to students' acquisition of the knowledge and skills which they should acquire from a course or from any other academic project or program. Such activities include, but are not limited to, selecting, organizing, and implementing assignments and other learning experiences; evaluating student performance; directing student research and independent study; student advising; maintaining high academic standards, managing the educational environment in the classroom, laboratory, or other instructional setting; and integrating current scholarship into instruction.
Research and Creativity include scholarly, scientific and artistic endeavors. Such activities will represent a substantial investment in time and work toward products capable of being evaluated by one's peers or other qualified persons. While such research/creativity should contribute to the quality of instruction, it is distinguished from the expected scholarly activities regularly associated with teaching. Examples of research/creativity are: publications, creations or performances having artistic merit, papers presented at professional conferences, development of innovative pedagogical techniques or programs, substantial redesigning of courses or programs, and development of new courses. Because scholarship and creativity are processes that often take more than one year to complete, work in progress should be considered as research or creative activity.
Service includes both on-campus and off-campus activities. On-campus service includes activities whose principal purpose is the efficient and effective functioning of the University. Committee responsibilities are the most obvious examples of such activities, but all activities potentially beneficial to the University community also will be considered service. Off-campus service refers to those activities in which a faculty member, officially or unofficially, serves as a liaison between the University of Montevallo and the local, state, or national communities. Such activities include participation in scholarly and professional organizations, professional consulting, lectures and workshops for off-campus groups, and representing the University at professional activities involving non-University groups, memberships on boards, and service to non-profit organizations.
The following guidelines are provided for evaluation of Library faculty:
Professional responsibilities include all activities that support, promote, and enhance the academic programs of the University. Such activities include, but are not limited to, reference service, collection development, or bibliographic organization and control.
Research and creativity include scholarly, scientific, or artistic endeavors. Such activity will represent a substantial investment in time; it must be noted that librarians have less flexible schedules, not only each day, but throughout the academic year than do teaching faculty. Librarians are, however, expected to do research to improve personal effectiveness and overall quality of library service. Some examples of research/creativity are publications, conferences, development of innovative techniques or programs, and substantial redesigning or development of programs. Because scholarship and creativity are processes that often take more than one year to complete, work in progress should be considered as research or creativity.
Service includes on-campus and off-campus activities. On-campus service includes activities whose principal purpose is the efficient and effective functioning of the University. Committee responsibilities are the most obvious examples of such activities, but all activities potentially beneficial to the UM community, including student advising, also will be considered service. Off-campus service refers to those activities in which a librarian, officially or unofficially, serves as liaison between UM and some external organization, or shares his or her expertise with those outside the University. Such activities will aim to affirm UM's commitment to the larger communities of which it is a part. Such activities include participation in scholarly and professional organizations, professional consulting, lectures and workshops for off-campus groups, and representing UM at professional activities involving groups outside the University.
Every effort should be made to give full consideration in the evaluation to those activities that best reflect the interests, expertise, and assigned duties of the faculty member for that particular year. It is recognized that faculty members may, in a given year, perform more strongly in one of the three areas -- teaching, research, and service. The faculty evaluation should consider the quality as well as the quantity of work performed. Individual faculty members, Chairs, and Deans will make collective reasoned judgments about the quality and quantity of a faculty member's work.
3.03 Procedures for Faculty Evaluation
Faculty will receive formal evaluation on the departmental or college level each calendar year. Objective and subject information will be gathered at appropriate times throughout the year, principally by the faculty member, and presented in a prescribed format to the Chair or (where appropriate) Dean at an annual evaluation conference, early in the spring semester, for the preceding calendar year's activities.
Each faculty member will be evaluated in a given year in teaching (or professional responsibilities for the library faculty) and in at least one of the other two areas: research/creativity or service. A faculty member may choose to be evaluated in all three areas — and, during a five year period must be evaluated at least once in each of the non-teaching areas. Because 60% to 75% of the final evaluation is based on teaching, the actual percentage will be determined by the faculty member in concert with the department Chair (or where appropriate, the Dean). Service and/or research/creativity will comprise from 25% to 40% of the final evaluation; combined with the percentages assigned to teaching the total will equal 100%. When the faculty member and Chair cannot agree on the distribution of effort, the Dean will make the final determination of percentages, consistent with the procedures for faculty evaluation described herein. While some faculty may exclude service or research/creativity from their individual evaluations in a given year, collectively each college and department should contribute appropriately to these activities. In some cases, accreditation requirements and departmental or college objectives may preclude an individual's being able to select or exclude categories for evaluation in a given year.
Each faculty member will complete annually a Faculty Evaluation Form, provided by the department Chair or Dean, and submit it to the Chair or (where appropriate) Dean for evaluation covering the calendar year from January 1 to December 31. In this form the faculty member will describe and document contributions under each selected activity: teaching or professional responsibility, research/creativity and/or service. Along with self-descriptive responses, the faculty member will also submit any pertinent evaluation statements or data which might help in the assessment of the quality of the work. The faculty member should receive a narrative description prepared by the Chair or Dean with a corresponding numerical rating for each selected area of evaluation—teaching, research/creativity, and/or service. The Chair's or Dean's narrative should describe the faculty member's strengths and weaknesses and, where appropriate, describe suggestions for improvement.
After the Chair, or where appropriate the Dean, has reviewed data for evaluation, the faculty member and the Chair or Dean will confer about the evaluation and attempt to reach an agreement about the evaluation. The Chair or Dean will provide the faculty member with a copy of the evaluation. The Chair will then submit the evaluation and any supporting data to the Dean, who will review and arrive at a final evaluation. Faculty members with irreconcilable differences with the Chair or the Dean about evaluations may attach a written dissent, which will be sent to the Dean or the Provost with the Chair's and Dean's assessments. If the Dean or the Provost disagrees with the Chair's or Dean's evaluation or recommendations, he or she shall promptly inform the faculty member involved, in writing, of the modification and the supporting rationale for it. The faculty member who does not concur with the alteration of the recommendation or evaluation may present his or her case to the Dean and Provost.
Faculty evaluations will use a 5-point scale as follows: 1. poor; 2. less than satisfactory; 3. satisfactory; 4. good; 5. outstanding. The following descriptions provide broad, general guidelines for numerical ratings:
Teaching
Rating of 1- The poor instructor willfully or inadvertently neglects duties, does not meet classes, does not thoughtfully prepare or plan, refuses to accept teaching assignments when given by the departmental Chair or Dean, and/or receives consistently poor student evaluations.
Rating of 2 - The less than satisfactory instructor meets classes but conducts them without enthusiasm and without imagination. He/she may not keep office hours or may be unavailable to students. He/she might use the same material from year to year, not keeping up with developments in the discipline. He/she might not cooperate in the planning of courses with multiple sections and may receive below average student evaluations.
Rating of 3 - The satisfactory instructor fulfills all duties in teaching as expected, conducts classes competently, is available to students, is current in the discipline, and cooperates in all departmental or University-wide teaching endeavors while receiving average student evaluations.
Rating of 4 - The good instructor is imaginative and enthusiastic in teaching, plans carefully and carries through. Students find this instructor to be stimulating in the classroom. This instructor plans carefully, reads widely in the discipline, continuously introduces into courses the results of his/her own investigations, and is recognized by students and colleagues as a good teacher.
Rating of 5 - The outstanding instructor is one whom students consider among the best. He/she is highly imaginative, completely dependable, and in command of his/her disciplines. Though demanding, this instructor is humane in relationships with students and exerts every effort to be personally supportive.
Research and Creativity:
Rating of 1 - Poor faculty members show little or no activity in research, scholarship, and/or creative endeavors and do not keep current in their disciplines.
Rating of 2 - Less than satisfactory faculty members demonstrate infrequent activity in research, scholarship, and/or creative endeavors and study or reading in the discipline, but do enough to "get by."
Rating of 3 - Satisfactory faculty members demonstrate interest and enthusiasm in research and creativity by attending professional meetings, regularly reading for the preparation of classes, presenting papers, or giving other public performances and/or exhibits.
Rating of 4 - Good faculty members set out and follow systematic plans for research, read new books and journals for the field, often write and submit to professional organizations for presentation, exhibition, or publication, or otherwise participate in public performances or exhibits.
Rating of 5 - Outstanding faculty members' research, scholarship and/or creative work make them professionally respected beyond the campus. They publish frequently in professional journals or otherwise have scholarly and/or creative work recognized by external professional colleagues.
Service:
Rating of 1 - Poor faculty members are not involved in University activities, are not active in professional societies, and make no contribution to service functions relevant to the discipline.
Rating of 2 - Less than satisfactory faculty members do minimal service and do not perform any leadership roles in the profession or the community.
Rating of 3 - Satisfactory faculty members are active members of at least one national/regional professional society, and have official assignments to committees or other special work on campus. They may be involved in local community groups or projects relevant to their disciplines and/or to the University's interests.
Rating of 4 - Good faculty members demonstrate membership and occasional leadership roles in one or more professional societies, and several committee/special projects assignments on campus. These faculty members are active in local community activities relevant to their disciplines and/or to the University's interests.
Rating of 5 - Outstanding faculty members have records of sustained involvement in national/regional professional societies in leadership and/or special assignment roles. That same record will exist on campus through service in a variety of University committee/special projects assignments and in local/state community activities relevant to their disciplines and/or to the University's interests.
3.05 Factors in Evaluation of Teaching Faculty
Evaluation of Teaching- Evaluators should consider such factors as: class load; number of students taught; number of preparations; types of subjects taught; advising responsibilities and activities; enthusiasm of instructor; student perceptions; regular attendance at scheduled classes; efforts to remain current in knowledge of subject material; conscientiousness in upholding academic standards, both in grades and instructional assignments; conscientiousness in assigning student's work and grades; efforts to develop professionally as a teacher and scholar/artist/performer; accessibility to students; encouragement of students' growth through field trips and extra activities; participation in Honors Program, direction of theses, independent studies, plays, forensics, exhibits; administration of comprehensive examination; quality of course syllabi.
Evaluation of Research/Creativity- Evaluators should consider such factors as the following: exhibitions, recitals, concerts and other performances; published materials; papers presented to scholarly and/or professional organizations; participation in workshops and seminars; receipt of awards and honors for outstanding scholarly or creative achievement.
Evaluation of Service- Evaluators should consider such factors as the following: number and nature of departmental, college, and University committee assignments; degree of responsibility within the department; willingness to assume service responsibilities; activities in which a faculty member officially or unofficially serves as a liaison between the University and external organizations or communities; sharing expertise with others outside the University; service to external organizations; receipt of awards and honors for outstanding service or professional achievement.
3.06 Factors in Evaluation of Library Faculty
Evaluation of Professional Responsibilities- Evaluators should consider such factors as: effectiveness in fulfilling professional responsibilities; conscientiousness in upholding professional standards; willingness to assume additional responsibilities as well as to share them; efforts to remain current and to develop further professionally; ability to work effectively with colleagues and clients.
Evaluation of Research/Creativity- Evaluators should consider such factors as the following: published materials; papers given to scholarly or professional organizations; research directed toward innovative or extraordinary projects for the general benefit of the library or the profession; participation in workshops and seminars; continued formal training.
Evaluation of Service- Evaluators should consider such factors as the following: number and nature of library, college and University committee assignments; degree of responsibility within the library; activities in which a librarian, officially, or unofficially, serves as a liaison between the University and external organizations or communities; sharing expertise with others outside the University.
3.07 Evaluation of Department Chairs
Chairs serve in the special role of both Department Chair and faculty member. In their position as faculty, they are evaluated using procedures detailed above; in their role as Chair, they also are evaluated by the University's administrative assessment procedure and by their respective deans.
3.08 Research Assistance, Grants, and Contracts
The University regularly budgets funds for expenses related to faculty research. Faculty members are encouraged to continue their studies and research and to secure external grants and resources wherever practical. Guidelines and requirements regarding preparation and submission of external grants and contracts may be found under "Policies" on the University's web site and in Policy Manuals, available in department offices. (Refer to Policy 03:050.)
Faculty sabbatical leaves are intended to develop and strengthen the University of Montevallo's academic programs and to provide faculty with opportunities for professional development, scholarly pursuits, and professional and intellectual renewal. Tenured faculty members who have completed at least six years of continuous service at the University of Montevallo are eligible for consideration for sabbatical leave. (Refer to Policy 04:110.)
Requests for authorization of travel should be sent to the appropriate Director, Chair, Dean, or the Provost for approval prior to the proposed travel. Travel not so approved in advance will not be reimbursed. Expenses incurred for travel in connection with authorized University business will be reimbursed according to applicable policy. (Refer to Policy 03:040.)