Faculty Performance Review and Development System Guidebook

Transcription

1 Qatar University Office of Evaluation Faculty Performance Review and Development System Guidebook Job Number: Name: College: Department/Program: (2013/2014) Revised Version for CAS This Faculty Performance Review Guidebook is based upon the policies and procedures located in the QU Faculty Handbook Spring 2010 version. The purpose of faculty evaluation is centered upon the improvement of instruction, for decisions relating to promotion and salary increases, and alignment with the mission and goals of the university and its respective colleges and departments. Faculty Performance Review and Development System Framework 1

2 Introduction: A Faculty Performance Review and Development System is essential to each academic institution looking forward to the longterm promotion of faculty competence and academic excellence. Participants: Performance Review and Development is a joint effort among several participants: Faculty member: 1. Completes the faculty member records in this handbook. 2. Submits all requested documents, including one or more course portfolios, published research papers etc. 3. Sends these materials to the Department Head no later than 15 May of this academic year. Head of the Department: 1. Establishes that the faculty has received the necessary materials to complete the Faculty Performance Review and Development System, and that their Review and Development process has commenced. 2. Presents criteria against which faculty performance will be measured in the respective department. 3. Verifies the documents presented by the faculty member. 4. Meets individually with each faculty to present feedback on strengths and prospective improvements. 5. Agrees on a work plan for the subsequent year. College Dean: 1. Supports and monitor the execution of the system. 2. Verifies and accredits the results submitted by the respective departments. 3. Considers revaluation applications submitted by each faculty. 4. Prepares final college faculty evaluation report. 5. Sends final report/s to the Office of Evaluation. The Office of Evaluation: 1. General supervision of the application of the Faculty Performance Review and Development System. 2. Cooperation with the various departments/colleges at the university to implement the Review and Development System. 3. Contribution in overcoming problems arising at the time of implementation of the Review and Development System. 4. Preparation of the final Faculty Review and Development Report, and submission to university administration. Prospective Weight Distribution: Faculty academic responsibilities are weighted as follows: Domain Weight Teaching performance 50% 60% Scholarly endeavor 20% 40% University and community service 10% 30% Total 100% Heads of Departments, in collaboration with each faculty member, should agree on the different weights for scholarly endeavor and university and community service at the beginning of each academic year, provided that total grade should be equal to 100%. Executive Measures/ Mechanisms: 1. Office of Evaluation distributes the Guidebook to the Faculty during September or October. 2. Every Faculty member should fill out corresponding evaluation records (P. 6; P. 8) after thoroughly reading the guidebook. 3. Faculty and the Head of the Department may agree on which course portfolio(s) to submit for evaluation. Based on needs associated with university or program accreditation, the Department Head may determine more than one course portfolios should be submitted. 4. Faculty should send the completed guidebook, along with relevant documents, to the Head of the Department before May 16 each year. 5. The Head of the Department should complete evaluation records until end of May. 6. The Head of the Department prepares an overall faculty performance assessment report. This may be completed with the input of a selected department. 7. A faculty member is provided with his/her appraisal report and s/he should sign the document. Signing the report does not necessarily indicate agreement, and is not a requirement for filing an appeal. 8. After receiving the report a faculty member has the right to appeal to the Dean of the college within three days of being provided with their appraisal. (Appendix 1 9. The Head of the Department prepares final report reports to be officially endorsed by the Dean. 10. In coordination with the respective Head of the Department, the Dean defines a date for meeting with that faculty whose performance was less than expected or unsatisfactory, and fills out the professional development plan form (appendix 3). 11. Administration of the college reports to the Office of Evaluation. General Principles: 1. Each college is entitled to modify the Review and Development criteria and scales providing that Faculty member are made aware of such changes at the beginning of the academic year. 2. The Head of the Department may seek help from whoever he/she finds necessary to assess any activities or domains included in the evaluation process. 3. The Head of the Department may seek advice from any faculty to report on faculty classroom performance (as per demand of the faculty member, students evaluation, new faculty, or whatever), and should check with the Office of Evaluation about the rules and regulations necessary to this procedure. 4. Period of application of the faculty performance Review and Development system extends from last evaluation to the mid of May, except Scholarly endeavor where the application period is two years (15/5/2012 until 15/5/2014). 5. Faculty may add information they find applicable to this guidebook. 6. The Teaching Performance Domain shall include but not be limited to the following areas: course syllabi assessment, students opinions, and; a final grade should be specified for each activity. Teaching performance evaluation may also be conducted against student and/or program learning outcomes. 7. After completion of the system, the concerned Head of the Department is required to meet with every faculty member in person to provide necessary feedback on strengths and weaknesses of the faculty performance, so as to launch a better future plan. 2

3 Faculty Performance Rating Scale The following scale is used to objectively evaluate faculty performance. The scale is characterized by: A qualitative side expressing the level of performance and a quantitative side expressing assessed standards for each domain; Fivepoint performance rating scales. Dimensions of the scale: Grade General performance Specific performance/in Quantitative/qualitative different domains Exceptional Exceed expectation Meet expectation Below expectation unsatisfactory Overall effectiveness rating will be the result of multiplication of the percentage obtained with the grade. Example: Domain Percentage Grade Teaching performance 60% 3 Scholarly endeavor 25% 4 University and community service 15% 3 Total 100% 3.25 Grade: Exceptional Exceed expectation Meet expectation Below expectation unsatisfactory Steps to estimate overall rating: (1): Percentage is multiplied by grade: Teaching performance = 3 X 60% = 1.8 Academic effort = 4 X 25% = 1.0 University and community service = 3 X 15% = 0.45 (2) Overall score total = = 3.25 (3) Overall rating = expected 3

4 General criterion against which Faculty Performance is to be measured (These criteria are not all inclusive but represent common standards and/or conditions) Activity Criterion Teaching process/course Content of the course(s) is/are comprehensive and valid Presented course material is new How far material presented covers the course Variety and compatibility of the activities with the objectives and outcomes of the course Innovations (innovative teaching methodsinnovative teaching activities) Course content & instructional strategies satisfy accreditation standards/criteria Academic advising Present during the period/s specified for academic advising, early registration and add and drop Solves problems facing students at the time of registration/add and drop Presents samples of students advising files Resolves all problems facing students Scholarly Endeavor Nature of participation (main participant/associate participant) Agency/body of publication (periodical/conference/regional periodical/regional conference etc. University and Attends various committee meetings community service Actively participates in the activities of committees Presented a seminar, lecture, workshop or training sessions Other services for university or society Professional relations See attached rating scale Course portfolio Contents 1. course description Course data Instructor data Course description Course objectives Educational outcomes Distribution of contents Methods of teaching Teaching aids Methods of students evaluation Objectives and tasks Instructions for References/sources students 2. Course teaching philosophy 3. samples of teacher work Innovations introduced into the course Variety of assessment methods Variety of presentation methods Innovations introduced to course references and sources 4. Samples of students work 5. Reflection page Updating contents Recommendations about Development of evaluation Variety of course presentation methods advantages/disadvantages methods Problems facing course instructor Suggestions for further course improvement 4

5 Faculty DomainBased Performance Rating Domain Exceptional (5) Exceed expectation (4) Meet expectation (3) Below expectation (2) Unsatisfactory (1) Teaching Performance Teaching activity/course portfolio All components are present in the course portfolio; achieves, at least, six of the following: Handles and presents the course material in a nonconventional style as is reflected in the course portfolio Uses modern and varying teaching resources recent textbook, DVD, online sources, Blackboard Uses teaching practices and utilizes them in alignment to learning outcomes Diversifies student assessment methods Devises comprehensive exam questions that are aligned with the Student Learning Outcomes Students' final grades conform to accepted criteria, if number of students is reasonable Presents constructive suggestions to develop the course and solve existing problems in his/her reflection page AND Receives Teaching Excellence Award from the college/university Reaches the final stage in the nominations for the Teaching Excellence Award All components are present in the course portfolio; achieves, at least, five of the following: Handles and presents the course material in a nonconventional style as is reflected in the course portfolio Uses modern and varying teaching resources recent textbook, DVD, online sources, Blackboard Uses teaching practices and utilizes them in alignment to learning outcomes Diversifies student assessment methods Devises comprehensive exam questions that are aligned with the Student Learning Outcomes Students' final grades conform to accepted criteria, if number of students is reasonable Presents constructive suggestions to develop the course and solve existing problems in his/her reflection page All components are present in the course portfolio; achieves, at least, three of the following: Teaching performance within acceptable standards of university teaching Utilizes available teaching practices in presenting the course, e.g. use of technology, application of update teaching methods (problemsolving teaching, guided discovering, exchange of questions and answer) as is reflected in the course portfolio Uses the methods of interactive teaching and critical thinking Diversifies student assessment methods Devises comprehensive exam questions that are aligned with the Student Learning Outcomes Follows up students' attendance actively and constructively Teaching performance is below accepted standards of university teaching as reflected in the course portfolio. At least three of the following apply: Does not utilize the advanced facilities and practices in teaching which are available at the University Course portfolio is incomplete Does not Diversify student assessment methods Exam questions are not comprehensive Problems arise out of his/her not following up students' attendance Course content is clearly inadequate, as reflected in the course portfolio Doesn't submit a course portfolio Doesn't keep his/her office hours or his classes Does not follow up students attendance Students' survey 15% Attains Excellent rating in student survey (90100 ) Attains Above expectation rating in student survey (8089) Attains Average rating in student survey (7079) Attains Below Average rating in student survey (6069) Attains Unsatisfactory rating in student survey (60 > ) 5

6 Exceptional (5) Exceed expectation (4) Meet expectation (3) Below expectation (2) Unsatisfactory (1) Scholarly Endeavor * Receives an excellence or honorary award in his/her field of research from the university or other professional organization/body; Publishes a refereed research in his/her field in an internationally leading/high impact journal as the main author; Publishes as a main author a refereed book in his/her field by an internationally leading/high impact publishing house; Publishes as a main author a refereed research or study in his/her field in a reference book refereed by an internationally leading/high impact publishing house; Acts as a chief editor of an international refereed journal; Awarded a NPRP grant as a Lead PI. Publishes a refereed research in an international journal as a coauthor; Authors or Coauthors a refereed book in his/her field; Translates a reference book in his/her own field; Obtains a grant for an externally funded refereed research as a PI or CoPI. Publishes a refereed research in his/her field in an international journal as the main researcher; Publishes as a main author a refereed book in his/her field by an international publishing house; Publishes as a main author a refereed research or study in his/her field in a reference book refereed by an international publishing house Awarded a NPRP grant as a CoLeadPI where the LeadPI is based outside Qatar Publishes a refereed research in an academic journal; Participates in the translation of a book in his/her field; Participates in an ongoing refereed and financed research project (graduation projects), and presents a paper in an academic conference; Publishes a refereed paper in the proceedings of an international conference. Publishes unrefereed research in his/her field; Attends an academic conference in his/her field. No of evidence of the mentioned criteria. * A publication or activity that is used for evaluation for two years will be ranked one level lower in the second year. 6

7 University and Community Service Exceptional (5) Exceed expectation (4) Meet expectation (3) Below expectation (2) Unsatisfactory (1)** Receives an award from a wellknown organization/body in the field of community service; aattains an outstanding evaluation in at least four committees two of which should be departmental committees based on demonstrated evidence for his/her above expected contributions, which should be included in the portfolio and evaluated as such by the department Head; AND binitiates active partnership with community organizations in field of specialization with outstanding benefits for both, his college and the community (e.g. succeeded in raising funds for departmental activities, or collaborative organized conference). He/she is a member in at least three committees and attains an 'Exceed expectation' evaluation for work in at least two of them. AND Follows up his advisees continually and helps in solving their problems* In addition to at least two of the following activities: Actively participates in developing his/her field of specialization (program development, revising course descriptions, active participation in launching a new program); Plays a leading role in the operations of the department; He/she is a member in at least three committees and attains a Meet Expectation' evaluation for work in at least two of them. AND Attends departmental seminars and college activities; AND Uses the electronic students advising systems made available by the University; AND Follows up his advisees continually and helps in solving their problems* In addition to at least two of the following activities: Carries out duties and works assigned to him/her with high efficiency; Attains a 'below expectation' rating for his/her work in at least two committees In addition to one of the following Absence from most department and college activities His/her students face problems in academic advising resulting from his/her negligence of advising responsibilities Hasn't satisfactorily carried out any of the duties assigned; Has not participated in any committee work; Has not attended department and college activities; Has not provided any academic advising to students. Conducts a workshop or a training course in his/her field; Presents a paper in the department or college seminar series; Actively participates in establishing student clubs or professional societies; Plays an active role in the organization of a scientific conference; Regularly writes articles and essays in international magazines and newspapers; Acts as a member of the editorial board in an internationally leading/high Being an invited speaker at a scientific conference; Regularly writes articles and essays in local magazines and newspapers; 7

8 impact international refereed journal; Acts as a referee for more than one article for an internationally leading/high impact publication Acts as a referee in academic promotions; Acts as a member of the editorial board of an international refereed journal. *Those who are not required to do advising will be evaluated according to other tasks assigned by the department Head. **Meeting one of the conditions of unsatisfactory overrides meeting the conditions of the other higher levels. 8

9 Professional Relations Rating Descriptor Unacceptable Acceptable Working with others Promoting a professional work environment Following departmental or university procedures Communication with others Personal and professional involvement May project an attitude of being better than other colleagues. Treats staff and/or clinical faculty members as inferior members of the department. Trends to be rude or standoffish toward others, causing people to avoid interacting with him/her. Makes inappropriate or negative comments to others after taking a stance on an issue. Is unwilling to accept compromise, refuses to contribute for the good of the department, university or organization. Does nonrelated activities during meetings (e.g., grades papers, reads the newspaper, talks on the phone, sleeps) and rarely contributes. Seems to look for ways to avoid following departmental/university policy. Feels that rules were created for others, not for self. When problems arise, goes above the intermediate supervisor for a solution. Does not respond to s or phone messages. Avoids contact with individuals rather than facing and resolving problems. Avoids participating in new or additional activities/tasks. Treats others with respect, including staff and clinical faculty. Is willing to compromise on issues that impact the department, college, or organization. Respects the ideas of others and behaves in a cordial manner. Treats others without prejudice. Completes all tasks assigned to him/her in resemble & expected time frame. Is generally upbeat and positive while at work. Is approachable and interacts with others informally as well as professionally. Is attentive at meetings and other professional activities. Follows procedures established by the department/university. When confronted with an unfamiliar situation, asks the Chair for the answer. Tries to resolve issues before going to the Chair or Dean for a solution. Responds to s and phone messages in a timely manner. Practices good communication skills (e.g., eye contact, positive body language, etc.). Addresses issues as they arise rather than allowing them to fester. Participates willingly in new or additional activities/tasks. Contributes to these responsibilities in a positive manner. Will accept leadership positions when asked. 9

10 Checklists for the academic year (20.. / 20.) (To be filled out by the faculty member) 1. Teaching Performance 1.a. Course: Data on the course(s) to be presented for evaluation Course number Course title semester No. of students 1.b. Academic Advising: Are you officially in charge of academic advising? Yes no If (yes, define number of the students):.. 2. Scholarly Effort:..% Preparation and publication of Scholarly works/participation in Scholarly Projects/Compiling and Translation between (15/5/ /5/2014) Title of the work Category* Place of/body responsible for publication Nature of Participation Date of publication * Categories: 1. Published; 2. Accepted for publication; 3. Scholarly project; 4. Translation; 5. Composition; 6. Work in process 3. University and community service: Percentage.% 3.a. Participation in committees/duties (inside and outside University) Committee or Task Body/Institution Nature of the participation From Date* to * In case one has resigned from the committee or completed the task 10

11 3. b. Participation in conferences, symposiums, training sessions, and workshops Subject Category 1. conference 2. symposium 3. Presenter 4. participant Date 1. coordinator 2. head of a session 3. Presenter 4. participant Organizing institute/body Place 4. Other activities: 11

12 Reflection Page Dear Colleague, Filling out this form may help the Head of the Department evaluate properly your performance. Therefore, please give your judgments about your activities in the following domains: * Teaching performance: * Scholarly endeavor: * University and community service: In the light of the data you provided above, please lay down the academic work plan for next year. Objective Activity Name of the instructor: signature: Date: 12

13 Percentage of General Performance (To be filled out by the Head of the Department) Percentage of General Faculty Performance Serial Domain Activity Percentage Grade 1 Teaching process/ course 50% 60% Grade: Teaching performance Students opinion Grade: 2 Scholarly endeavor 10% 40% 3 University and community service University and community service Academic advising Grade: 10% 30% Grade: Total 100% * Grade: Exceptional: 5 Above expected: 4 Expected: 3 Less than Expected: 2 Unsatisfactory: 1 Justification of the result: How do you describe the faculty member s Professional Relations: (Give reasons and refer to rating rubric) Good Unsatisfactory Faculty signature: Signature of the Head of the Department: Dean s Signature: Date: Faculty signature in the specified fields in this guidebook does not necessarily imply his acceptance of the result, but rather to prove that he/she was informed about evaluation results. 13

14 Appendix (1) Faculty Revaluation Request Form College: Department Faculty Name: Job Number: * Reasons why the result should be revaluated: Signature: Date: * How to submit the application form: 1. The form should be filled out by faculty member and sent to his/her respective Dean s office; copies of the form may be sent to other pertinent offices (e.g. the department Head, Associate Dean). 2. The concerned Dean should discuss the evaluation results with faculty member in the presence of the Head of the Department. 3. After reviewing the sides of the case, the Dean decides upon the proper.outcome of the appeal. 14

15 Appendix (2) Revaluation Results Form * College: Department Faculty Name: Job Number: Date: Venue: Revaluation Results * Justification of the result: Faculty member: Head of Department: Dean: Date: * This form used by dean of the faculty and keep with the original form; a copy of the form may be sent to faculty member and another copy to the Head of the Department. 15

16 Appendix (3) Professional Development Plan Form In coordination with the Head of the Department, the Dean may assign a date to meet with faculty whose teaching performance was less than expected or unsatisfactory. The following form may be filled out or used as a guide in documenting this meeting: Purpose of the meeting Why faculty member couldn t score the required marks: ( If Applicable) Performance strengths: Domains in his/her performance to be improved: Suggestions for improvement (Professional Development Plan) Teaching performance: Objectives: Future activities: Scientific endeavor: Objectives: Future activities: University and community service: Objectives: Future activities: Name of faculty: Head of the Department: Dean: Date 16