|
Section
IV: Programs
SACS Comprehensive Standard for Faculty
IV-24. The institution regularly evaluates the effectiveness
of each faculty member, regardless of contractual or tenured status.
JUDGMENT OF COMPLIANCE
Yes, East Tennessee State University is able to provide
a portfolio of evidence supporting compliance
STATEMENT OF RATIONALE FOR JUDGMENT OF COMPLIANCE
At East Tennessee State University, annual evaluations
are conducted for all faculty members, regardless of contract status,
as a responsibility of each department chair (ETSU Faculty Handbook,
Annual Evaluation of Faculty). Part-time, adjunct faculty members
are evaluated each semester by the department chair and appropriate college
dean. The mandated process for full-time faculty is composed of three
sequential steps, each of which originates with the faculty member, is
approved and/or modified by the department chair, and is further reviewed
and approved by the college dean. The three steps include:
-
Faculty
Activities Plan (FAP),
-
Faculty
Activities Report (FAR), and
-
Faculty
Activities Evaluation (FAE).
The FAP and FAR contain divisions pertaining to four
primary dimensions of faculty effort: teaching, research, service, and
administration. Faculty members are encouraged to develop plans that
are consistent with departmental, college, and university goals. Faculty
members also participate in the development of these goals to ensure that
their interests and expertise are represented and consistent with the
university's strategic plan.
The FAE provides a summative characterization of the
faculty member's effort for the year as Exceptional, Meritorious, Commendable,
Satisfactory, Marginal, or Unsatisfactory, along with comments by the
department chair. The reporting process was revised in 1993 by the addition
of a division for faculty development activities, as recommended by the
department chair and dean during the evaluation process (SACS Standard
IV-25). The purpose of this revision was to unify follow-up with
the planning, reporting, and evaluation process and ensure its inclusion
as a part of the official faculty evaluation record. Results of these
annual evaluations serve as part of the documentation of faculty performance
for tenure and promotion decisions and for merit pay consideration, when
available.
The ETSU Teaching and Learning Center (TLC) was
established in 1995 as an outcome of an ETSU Faculty Senate initiative.
The TLC is charged with helping faculty document teaching effectiveness,
increasing faculty dialogue and exchange on educational issues, and assisting
faculty in their efforts to strengthen and/or improve areas revealed in
the evaluation and instructional assessment processes.
The ETSU Student Assessment of Instruction
(SAI) is the only system-wide measure of teaching effectiveness at ETSU
and the only source of instructional evaluation mandated by ETSU policy.
Each faculty member (regardless of rank, contractual status, or tenure
status) is required to undergo evaluation in two classes each semester.
Classes are selected in consultation with department chairs to represent
different levels and modes of instruction, when possible. The SAI consists
of 21 questions abstracted from the Aleamoni Course/Instructor Evaluation
Questionnaire (CIEQ), using a Likert-scale response format and a scan-type
reporting form. Departments may add up to 19 questions specific to the
academic discipline or degree program. Students also are asked for written
comments in five different areas. Both the written comments and a statistical
summary of responses for each class are returned to faculty the following
semester. Written student responses to subjective questions also are
routed to department chairs for use in instructional improvement follow-up
and as a component of the annual faculty evaluation process. The importance
of developing a portfolio of multiple methods of assessing the effectiveness
of classroom instruction is central to current discussions on campus directed
at improving the evaluation process.
Recently, three colleges have received approval from
the ETSU Faculty Senate to adapt the FAP/FAR/FAE process to include a
more formative approach to faculty evaluation. These variations on the
process have been informative to the university's Continuous Improvement
Team on Faculty Evaluation that studied the faculty evaluation process
and recommended changes.
In 1998 the Continuous Improvement Team on Faculty
Evaluation was constituted to review and suggest areas of improvement
for the faculty evaluation process. The primary goals of this continuous
improvement project were to increase the meaningfulness of the faculty
evaluation process beyond administrative decision-making and to enhance
the linkage between faculty evaluation and faculty development. After
a two-year study, the final report includes recommendations in four areas
(policy, process and documentation, assessment of instruction, and training),
has been approved by the ETSU Faculty Senate, and endorsed by the ETSU
Student Government Association. Recently a "conference committee"
(composed of representatives from the continuous improvement team, ETSU
Faculty Senate, Council of Academic Chairs, and Dean's Council) has completed
its charge of designing implementation strategies for proposed recommendations.
Currently, the conference committee is completing a study of how to link
recommendations to other improvements under consideration for merit pay
distribution and departmentally weighted promotion and tenure criteria
(ETSU Academic Council, Minutes). Although the existing process
of faculty evaluation at ETSU is thorough, we feel that the effectiveness
and significance of the process to faculty will be enhanced with the implementation
of these new recommendations.
An additional perspective on faculty evaluations
also is provided by information from external peer reviewers employed
in accreditation and academic program reviews. This information typically
addresses collective faculty contributions and is used by chairs and deans
to evaluate faculty effectiveness to ETSU's educational and degree programs.
This integrated faculty evaluation effort is consistent with the institution's
five-year strategic plan (ETSU Strategic Plan Goals, 2000-2005),
provides linkages to the annual university budget process, and ensures
that support for improvement of individual and collective faculty performance
is reviewed. The university regularly allocates budget resources to support
the professional development and improvement of the faculty (SACS Standard
IV-25).
DOCUMENTATION
SOURCE
|
LOCATION
|
ETSU Faculty Handbook, Section 2.6, Annual
Evaluation of Faculty
|
|
SACS Standard IV-25
|
|
ETSU Teaching and Learning Center
|
|
ETSU Student Assessment of Instruction
|
SACS Documentation Files
|
ETSU Continuous Improvement Team on Faculty Evaluation
|
|
ETSU Academic Council, Minutes
|
Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic
Affairs, 206 Dossett Hall
|
ETSU Strategic Plan Goals, 2000-2005
|
|
|
|
