Overview and Best Practices

Evaluating faculty performance is a challenging but also rewarding responsibility for a department leader. The materials in this chapter will help you understand the purposes of faculty evaluation, the processes for evaluating faculty, and approaches to difficult performance situations. First, it's important to understand the multiple purposes of faculty performance evaluations (as distinct from tenure and promotion processes for tenure-line faculty, clinical faculty, and others who go through a promotion process).

Multiple Purposes of Faculty Evaluation:

    • to review accomplishments as compared to previously set specific objectives for the faculty member by the faculty member and the Chair consistent with the department's policies, the department/College/and University Promotion and Tenure policies, and the expectations for faculty performance outlined in the Boise State Policy Manual, and the department’s mission, vision, and goals;
    • to establish new objectives for the coming year, as appropriate, using clearly understood standards that are consistent with the above;
    • to fairly and honestly assess the performance of the faculty member by the Department Chair and, where appropriate, by colleagues;
    • to identify individual performance areas in need of improvement;
    • to provide the necessary support (resources, environment, personal and official encouragement) to achieve these objectives;
    • to ensure that faculty members contribute to the Department, College, and University missions;
    • to promote a culture of achievement and accomplishment among the faculty; and
    • to recognize and reward outstanding achievement in a given year.

It's helpful to have guiding principles for evaluating performance that faculty have developed collectively and agree to. Here's an example from an English Department:

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROCESS

  1. Aligned with the University and the College of Arts and Sciences, the Department aims to create a culture of excellence in its faculty. The faculty evaluation process will encourage and recognize the qualities necessary for promotion at Boise State University, specifically “outstanding performance and commitment to teaching and scholarly activities,” as well as effective service and collegiality (Policy 4340).
  2. Annual evaluations will be based on multiple measures of performance in each area, be sufficiently flexible to meet the objectives of the department, and be sensitive to multi-year faculty activities and outcomes.
  3. Evidence of performance may not flow at constant rate over time. For these reasons, the Department Chair shall take into account performance over at least the past three years in making evaluations. Because levels of achievement in each of the areas are apt to vary from year to year, the Chair's written report will indicate the place of a particular year's evaluation within the overall pattern of an individual faculty member's performance.
  4. The annual evaluation process will yield multiple outcomes including information for departmental planning, merit salary decisions, progress toward promotion and/or tenure, differential allocation of effort, and strategies for renewal or development.
  5. Faculty workloads will be adjusted according to the department’s Workload Policy, based on performance evaluations over a three-year period.
  6. Standards for performance in all areas will be based on College and University policies for tenure and promotion, as well as professional guidelines for each disciplinary area within English Studies (NCTE, CCCC, WPA, AWP, etc.). The ADE and MLA Statements on faculty work offer general guidelines for excellent teaching, research, and service in English Studies; their positions on integration of those areas are consistent with College and University policies.
  7. In addition, the English department recognizes the importance and existence of scholarship in the many contributions made by faculty to their fields of expertise and interest, to their students and fellow teachers, and to their college. Along with Charles Glasick, et al, Ernest Boyer, and the MLA, we recognize multiple kinds of scholarship that exist in the three traditional areas of faculty work (teaching, research, service).
  8. In the area of research and creative activity a tenure-track or tenured faculty member, as evidence of an on- going research or creative agenda, should produce research or creative activity on a yearly basis that reflects the workload units allocated;
  9. In the area of teaching, as evidence of sustained commitment to and effectiveness of teaching, judgments as to the quality of teaching rely on several kinds of evidence:
  10. In the area of service, judgments as to the effectiveness of service contributions; ability to work effectively and cooperatively in support of the objectives of the department, the College and the University rely on several kinds of evidence:
  11. The annual review process will also include expectations for citizenship and interpersonal skills, consistent with the University’s Statement of Shared Values and Standards of Conduct and performance criteria used by Human Resources.
  12. Within the context of teaching, research/scholarship/creative activity, and service/outreach, the faculty member must demonstrate a willingness and ability to work effectively with colleagues to support the mission of the university and the common goals of the university and the English Department, according to the University’s Statement of Shared Values and Standards for Conduct. A collegial academic environment is an environment in which members of the department, whether agreeing or disagreeing, work together for the good of the Department and its programs in an atmosphere of mutual honesty, professionalism, trust, and respect. A delineation of professional expectations governing relationships with professional colleagues and students cannot anticipate every potential problem. However, University policies offer several guidelines that are used as a basis for departmental expectations. Major indicators of collegiality include, but are not limited to, the capacity and willingness of a staff or faculty member
      1. To communicate openly, honestly and respectfully with other department members,
      2. To work productively with other department members, which includes handling interpersonal conflicts constructively , demonstrating sensitivity to others, and having good collaboration and listening skills
      3. To participate in and otherwise support departmental activities,
      4. To shoulder his/her fair share of departmental tasks, and
      5. To make a continuing positive contribution to the working atmosphere of the Department and its goals.

Collegiality in the English Department may be demonstrated in dozens of ways, some great and some small: by faithful attendance at department meetings, programs, and other functions; by accepting and fully cooperating with academic policy once it has been agreed upon by a majority of the department; by taking seriously one’s responsibility to colleagues on a committee; by helping a colleague with scholarship; by taking an absent colleague’s class; by refusing to encourage or participate in gossip (especially that of students) about colleagues; or by being willing to accept teaching assignments at unpopular times. Without collegiality, the very existence of a department is in serious jeopardy, and it is incumbent upon all of us to nurture it in ourselves and in others.

This expectation of collegiality shall not be construed to mean that a faculty member’s academic freedom or right of free speech is restricted. The principles of academic freedom protect freedom of inquiry and research, freedom of teaching, and freedom of expression and publication. These freedoms enable the University to advance knowledge and its faculty to transmit it effectively to their students and to the public. The University also seeks to foster in its students a mature independence of mind, and this purpose cannot be achieved unless students and faculty are free within the classroom to express the widest range of viewpoints in accord with the standards of scholarly inquiry and professional ethics. The exercise of academic freedom entails correlative duties of professional care when teaching, conducting research, or otherwise acting as a member of the faculty. These duties are set forth in the Standards for Conduct and University policy.

Relevant Policies for Faculty Evaluation