WELCOME TO THE FACULTY FORUM ON THE FACULTY EVALUATION SYSTEM Thank you for coming! November 2002

WELCOME TO THE FACULTY WELCOME TO THE FACULTY FORUM ON THE FACULTY FORUM ON THE FACULTY

EVALUATION SYSTEMEVALUATION SYSTEM

Thank you for coming!Thank you for coming!November 2002November 2002

Objectives of the Faculty Objectives of the Faculty Evaluation and Development Evaluation and Development

Task ForceTask Force

review current faculty evaluation review current faculty evaluation systemsystem

make appropriate revisions to make appropriate revisions to current evaluation systemcurrent evaluation system

design faculty development programdesign faculty development program

Faculty Evaluation and Faculty Evaluation and Development Task ForceDevelopment Task Force

Dr. Bob Cason – ChairDr. Bob Cason – ChairDr. Steve Lohmann – ex-officio memberDr. Steve Lohmann – ex-officio member

Dr. James BowenDr. James BowenDr. Mike KnedlerDr. Mike KnedlerDr. Dorothy DayDr. Dorothy DayDr. Marcia FearDr. Marcia Fear

Dr. Cindy Pfeifer-HillDr. Cindy Pfeifer-HillDr. Jim YatesDr. Jim Yates

Mr. Tim MaharryMr. Tim MaharryMrs. Tammy BrownMrs. Tammy Brown

Developing a Comprehensive Developing a Comprehensive Faculty Evaluation SystemFaculty Evaluation System

CEDA WorkshopCEDA Workshop

St. Louis, MOSt. Louis, MO

October14-15, 2002October14-15, 2002

Current Faculty Evaluation Current Faculty Evaluation SystemSystem

summative summative used primarily for personnel used primarily for personnel

decisionsdecisions based on limited sourcesbased on limited sources

- student evaluation- student evaluation

- academic dean evaluation- academic dean evaluation

Key Elements for the Revised Key Elements for the Revised Faculty Evaluation SystemFaculty Evaluation System

1) promotes faculty 1) promotes faculty development in addition to development in addition to providing information for providing information for

personnel decisionspersonnel decisions

2) collects information from a 2) collects information from a number of different sources number of different sources while adhering to the “best while adhering to the “best

source principle”source principle”

““best source principle: get best source principle: get information from those who information from those who have have first hand experiencefirst hand experience

with the performance in with the performance in question”question”

Raoul A. Arreola, Ph.D.Raoul A. Arreola, Ph.D.

3) involves faculty in the 3) involves faculty in the development of the evaluation development of the evaluation system including input on what system including input on what

areas are evaluatedareas are evaluated

4) allows for consistency and 4) allows for consistency and flexibilityflexibility

““Controlled Subjectivity”Controlled Subjectivity”

The process of evaluation is subjective by The process of evaluation is subjective by definition. definition. Consistency of conclusionsConsistency of conclusions, ,

however, may be achieved through however, may be achieved through “controlled subjectivity.”“controlled subjectivity.”

This is achieved with “the consistent This is achieved with “the consistent application of a consensus-based set of application of a consensus-based set of

values in the interpretation of measurement values in the interpretation of measurement datadata.”.”

Raoul A. Arreola, Ph.D.Raoul A. Arreola, Ph.D.

You still can individualize You still can individualize the evaluation to reflect the evaluation to reflect

differing responsibilities and differing responsibilities and assignmentsassignments..

Recommended Recommended Development ProcedureDevelopment Procedure

Based on “Developing a Based on “Developing a Comprehensive Faculty Evaluation Comprehensive Faculty Evaluation

System” by Raoul A. Arreola, a System” by Raoul A. Arreola, a CEDA WorkshopCEDA Workshop

Arreola, R. A. (2000) Arreola, R. A. (2000) Developing a Comprehensive Developing a Comprehensive Faculty Evaluation System, 2Faculty Evaluation System, 2ndnd

ed. ed. Bolton, MA:Bolton, MA: Anker Anker Publishing Company, Inc.Publishing Company, Inc.

Step #1 – Determine the Step #1 – Determine the Faculty Role ModelFaculty Role Model

Determine which activities that Determine which activities that faculty engage in should be faculty engage in should be evaluated. These are the “roles” evaluated. These are the “roles” that make up the faculty role that make up the faculty role model.model.

Examples of RolesExamples of Roles

TeachingTeaching AdvisementAdvisement Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development Scholarly Activity and ResearchScholarly Activity and Research Administration and ManagementAdministration and Management Institutional InvolvementInstitutional Involvement

Step #2 – Determine the Step #2 – Determine the Faculty Role Model Parameter Faculty Role Model Parameter

ValuesValuesDetermine the relative importance Determine the relative importance

of each role to Northwestern of each role to Northwestern faculty. Answer the question of faculty. Answer the question of how much weight should be how much weight should be placed on each role. The placed on each role. The weights will be in ranges of weights will be in ranges of percents.percents.

Example of a Dynamic Faculty Example of a Dynamic Faculty Role Model:Role Model:

MinimumMinimum MaximumMaximum

weightweight weightweight

50%50% Teaching Teaching 85% 85%

0%0% Scholarly Activity Scholarly Activity 35% 35%

10% Faculty Service 25%10% Faculty Service 25%

5% Community Service5% Community Service 15% 15%

Step #3 – Define the rolesStep #3 – Define the roles

Define each role of the faculty role Define each role of the faculty role model utilizing performances or model utilizing performances or products that can be observed or products that can be observed or documented. Each role will documented. Each role will consist of components that can consist of components that can be observed or documented.be observed or documented.

Examples of components of Examples of components of the “Teaching” Rolethe “Teaching” Role

content expertisecontent expertise instructional design skillsinstructional design skills instructional delivery skillsinstructional delivery skills course managementcourse management

Step #4 – Determine Roles’ Step #4 – Determine Roles’ Component WeightsComponent Weights

Determine how much weight will Determine how much weight will be placed on each component of be placed on each component of each role. each role.

Example component weights Example component weights for the “Teaching” rolefor the “Teaching” role

instructional delivery skillsinstructional delivery skills 35%35%

instructional design skillsinstructional design skills35%35%

content expertisecontent expertise 25%25%

course managementcourse management 5%5%

100%100%

Step #5 – Determine Step #5 – Determine Appropriate Sources of Appropriate Sources of

InformationInformationDetermine who will provide the Determine who will provide the

information for each component information for each component of each role. Remember to of each role. Remember to obtain information from those obtain information from those who have first hand experience who have first hand experience with the performance that is with the performance that is being evaluated. being evaluated.

Possible sources:Possible sources:

studentsstudents department chairdepartment chair peerspeers selfself othersothers

Step #6 – Determine Source Step #6 – Determine Source and Source Impact Weightsand Source Impact Weights

Determine how much value or Determine how much value or weight will be given to each weight will be given to each selected source for each selected source for each component of each role. component of each role.

Example of Source Impact Example of Source Impact WeightsWeights

Evaluation of Instructional Design SkillsEvaluation of Instructional Design Skills

SourceSource WeightWeight

students students 30%30%

department chair department chair 35%35%

peers peers 35% 35%

Step #7 – Determine How Step #7 – Determine How Information Will be GatheredInformation Will be Gathered

Determine the method to be used Determine the method to be used to gather information from each to gather information from each source. Examples include source. Examples include questionnaires, checklists, questionnaires, checklists, interviews, etc.interviews, etc.

Possible techniques:Possible techniques:

Peers utilize a checklist to evaluate Peers utilize a checklist to evaluate course materials presented in a course materials presented in a portfolio.portfolio.

Students complete a questionnaire.Students complete a questionnaire. Department chair completes a Department chair completes a

checklist during an interview.checklist during an interview.

Step #8 – Design or Select Step #8 – Design or Select Appropriate Form(s)Appropriate Form(s)

Design, develop, or select Design, develop, or select questionnaires, checklists, and questionnaires, checklists, and other procedures to be utilized other procedures to be utilized for information gathering. for information gathering.

Once the system has been Once the system has been developed, policies and developed, policies and

procedures must be developed procedures must be developed to govern use and application to govern use and application

of the system.of the system.

Possible Applications:Possible Applications:

PromotionPromotion TenureTenure RaisesRaises Merit payMerit pay

Arreola’s 8-Step ProcessArreola’s 8-Step Process

1.1. Determine the Faculty Role ModelDetermine the Faculty Role Model2.2. Determine the Faculty Role Model Parameter Determine the Faculty Role Model Parameter

ValuesValues3.3. Define RolesDefine Roles4.4. Define Roles’ Component WeightsDefine Roles’ Component Weights5.5. Determine Appropriate Sources of InformationDetermine Appropriate Sources of Information6.6. Determine Source & Source Impact WeightsDetermine Source & Source Impact Weights7.7. Determine how information from each source Determine how information from each source

should be gatheredshould be gathered

8.8. Design or select appropriate form(sDesign or select appropriate form(s))

Final Goal:Final Goal:

The faculty evaluation system is linked The faculty evaluation system is linked to a faculty development system to to a faculty development system to promote self-improvement and promote self-improvement and faculty learning. faculty learning.

For maximum effectiveness faculty For maximum effectiveness faculty evaluation evaluation mustmust be linked to faculty be linked to faculty

development programsdevelopment programs

The next step:The next step:

Academic deans address faculty Academic deans address faculty input with department chairsinput with department chairs

During department meetings During department meetings faculty will develop lists of faculty will develop lists of activities on which to be evaluated activities on which to be evaluated for purposes of developing the for purposes of developing the faculty role model for Northwesternfaculty role model for Northwestern

DiscussionDiscussionPeriodPeriod