CON Faculty Evaluation

Home

Faculty Policies

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER COLLEGE OF NURSING
Faculty Evaluation	Subsection: 4.2.7
Section 4.0 - Faculty Policies/Guidelines	Originating Date: October 1975
Responsible Reviewing/Approving Agency: Executive Council	Revised: October 1997 Revised: May 2003 Revised: November 2007 Revised: January 2015 (changes) Revised: February 2016 (changes) Revised: September 2018 (changes) Revised: January 2022 (changes)
Related Documents: Appendix A1 - Standards and Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure for Academic Rank Appendix A2 - Standards for Promotion for Clinical Rank Appendix A3 - Assistant Dean Guidelines Appendix A4 - Procedure for Requesting Emeritus Faculty Appointment Appendix B - Annual Faculty Activity Review Appendix B1 – Guidelines for Doctorally Prepared Faculty Role Differentiation Promotion and Tenure for Academic Rank 4.4.6(1) Promotion for Clinical Rank 4.4.6(2)

Policy

The purposes of faculty evaluation are the following:

• Review contributions to the tripartite mission: a) teaching, b) scholarship/research and c) service/practice
• Review/assist faculty development, including career advancement such as promotion and recognition
• Identify goals and strengths of individual faculty to better match the university mission
• Identify plans for growth (mentoring) and/or improvement
• Provide for an annual review of goal achievement

The designated administrators orient newly hired faculty to evaluation policies, procedures and forms at the time of employment.

All faculty are evaluated at least annually by their Division Assistant Dean or appropriate administrator. The administrators make merit recommendations with rationale, including a completed performance appraisal, to the dean.

Multiple sources of data are used for faculty evaluations. At a minimum, annual evaluations are based on faculty self-evaluation, student evaluations, and designated administrator evaluation. Other data, such as peer evaluation or evaluation by outside consultants, can be sought at the discretion of the designated administrator and/or the faculty. New faculty members are evaluated at the end of their first term of teaching, as well as the end of the year; the first evaluation is typically formative and focuses on mentoring and counseling.

To prepare for an annual evaluation, faculty members submit to designated administrator the following: 1) annual faculty self-evaluation form, 2) student evaluations and 3) updated curriculum vita (CV).

Evaluation records are confidential. Designated administrators have access to files of faculty whom they supervise. The dean has access to all faculty files. Faculty evaluations are kept in the official personnel file. Faculty also have access to their personnel files at any time.

Graduate or Teaching Assistants (GA or TA), whether teaching or performing other College of Nursing work such as research or practice, also are evaluated annually by their designated administrator or other appropriate supervisor. If appropriate, student evaluations are submitted to be considered in the evaluation.

Procedures

Annual Evaluation Meeting:

1. The period of evaluation is from January 1 to December 31 of the previous year in line with an approximately 12-month period.
2. An annual evaluation meeting is held between the faculty member and the Division Assistant Dean for the purpose of discussing and completing the evaluation.
3. In advance of the meeting, the faculty member completes the Annual Faculty Self-Evaluation form and updates their CV according to the UNMC guidelines by the designated due date. The faculty member also collects and supplies any other documents to be included in the evaluation (e.g., peer evaluations, letters of support or recognition, other documentation); and emails the packet to his/her designated administrator. The administrator will consider the material and provide performance ratings of the faculty member’s performance relative to each tripartite mission role function and a brief narrative evaluation summary.
4. When faculty evaluation materials are completed, the faculty member contacts the designated administrator's support staff to schedule a time to the evaluation meeting.
5. The faculty member and designated administrator meet to discuss the evaluative materials and set goals for the next academic year as well as plans for achieving the goals. In collaboration with their designated administrator, faculty members develop annual goals that are congruent with the CON standards for Promotion and Tenure (See Appendix A1 and A2), the tripartite mission, and, as appropriate, with the strategic plan. A summary of progress toward promotion and tenure across the years since last appointment be provided and reviewed with the Division Assistant Dean/Supervisor on an annual basis.
6. Designated administrators provide faculty members guidance on how to improve in areas which have been identified for growth.
7. The final written evaluation is dated and signed by the faculty member and designated administrator.
8. A faculty member has the opportunity to respond in writing to the evaluation.
9. After the meeting, the designated administrator provides a copy of the signed evaluation materials to the faculty member, and places the original documents in the faculty member's permanent file in the Dean’s Office.

Student Evaluation of Faculty:

The purpose of student evaluation of faculty is to:

1. Allow students to give anonymous feedback on what they considered to be the positive and negative aspects of the classroom and clinical faculty’s teaching effectiveness.
2. Provide faculty with evaluative data for potential changes in teaching effectiveness
3. Provide data for administrative evaluation of faculty, including the annual evaluation.

1. All students, regardless of course delivery method, are given an opportunity to evaluate each course they are taking and the faculty teaching in that course.
2. An online, electronic evaluation process is used and provides anonymity for the student and student’s comments.
3. Student evaluations of faculty are given to the respective faculty member and the Division Assistant Dean. Results of student course evaluations are given to those identified above as well as the appropriate program director, appropriate curriculum committee, and Director of Evaluation.
4. Students are sent an email with instructions on how and when to complete the evaluation. Generally, evaluations will be open for student input for two weeks, opening the Wednesday before finals week and closing the Wednesday after finals week. Classes that do not start and stop on the usual semester schedule may have slightly different availability dates, but availability will in no case be less than two weeks and will always extend beyond the date of the final exam.
5. Results of the evaluations are sent to the faculty (automatically) one day after grades are due for that semester.

Peer Evaluation of Faculty

The purpose of peer review of the faculty is to:

1. Afford faculty an evaluation from a peer or peers on role performance for continuous improvement.
2. Provide data from peers for administrative evaluation of faculty, including the annual evaluation.
3. Allow for promotion and tenure or triggered post-tenure review.

1. A faculty member and/or faculty Division Assistant Dean may request that a peer or peers evaluate the faculty’s role performance as part of an annual evaluation process, a requested review to improve role performance and/or as part of a special administrative review.
2. Peer reviewer(s) may be selected by the faculty and/or faculty Division Assistant Dean. Peer reviewer(s) should be knowledgeable about the role(s) to be evaluated.
3. The faculty and/or administrative evaluator make arrangements with the peer reviewer(s) on where, when and what is to be evaluated within a specified time frame. Faculty and/or the Division Assistant Dean supply needed materials to the peer reviewer.
4. The peer reviewer forwards the written peer evaluation to the faculty’s Division Assistant Dean.
5. The Division Assistant Dean discusses the peer review evaluation with the faculty to identify areas for improvement.