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) Revised: June 2024 (changes)
Related Documents: Appendix A1 - Standards and Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure for Academic Rank Appendix A2 - Standards for Promotion for Clinical Rank Annual Faculty Activity Review Form Appendix B1 – Guidelines for Doctorally Prepared Faculty Role Differentiation 4.4.6(1) Promotion and Tenure for Academic Rank 4.4.6(2) Promotion for Clinical Rank UNMC Interprofessional Academy of Educators (IAE) Peer Feedback on Teaching for Health Professions Lectures Form 4.2.9 Peer Feedback for Teaching Mission 5.1.8 Student Ratings of Instruction Bylaws of the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska Procedure 4.5: Standards for Promotion, Continuous Appointment, and Salary Adjustment Bylaws of the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska Procedure 4.6: Evaluation of Faculty Performance

Purpose

The purposes of faculty evaluation are the following:

• Review contributions to the tripartite mission of teaching, scholarship/research and service/practice
• Review and 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 improvement
• Provide for an annual review of goal achievement

Scope

This policy applies to all faculty.

Policy

1. In accordance with the Bylaws of the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska Procedures 4.5 & 4.6, all faculty are evaluated at least annually by their division assistant dean or appropriate supervisor. The supervisor makes merit recommendations with rationale, including a completed performance appraisal, to the dean.
2. The Associate Dean for Research collaborates with the supervisor and is included in the evaluation meeting for those faculty who have >30% scholarship effort.
3. The Associate Dean for Transformational Practice & Partnerships collaborates with the supervisor and is included in the evaluation meeting for those faculty who have >40% practice effort.
4. The designated supervisor shall orient newly hired faculty to evaluation policies, procedures and forms at the time of employment.
5. The period of evaluation is from January 1 to December 31 of the previous year. For a faculty member employed for a partial year, the supervisor shall consider the time period employed during the review of the faculty’s contributions related to the metric benchmarks.
6. Multiple sources of data are used for faculty evaluations from each mission area where faculty are assigned Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) allocation.
7. Metrics for each mission area are delineated in categories and by level of achievement. Levels of achievement are listed for each rating level using UNMC performance ratings. Level 1 (unsatisfactory performance seldom meets established standards), Level 2 (needs improvement, sometimes meets established standards but lacks consistency), Level 3 (meets and occasionally exceeds established standards, or Level 4 (consistently meets and almost always exceeds expected levels of performance. See University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) College of Nursing (CON) Faculty Annual Evaluation Form for expected outcomes for each mission’s metrics by level.
   • Teaching mission metrics are included for peer feedback in the appropriate timeframe (see 4.2.9 Peer Feedback for Teaching Mission), education specific continuing education, and student evaluation of faculty in courses (see 5.1.8 Student Ratings of Instruction).
   • Scholarly activity mission metrics are included for grants and publications (see Appendix B1 Guidelines for Doctoral Prepared Faculty Role Differentiation).
   • Practice mission metrics are included for practice hours, contracted agency satisfaction with faculty, continuing clinical education attendance, and dissemination of practice scholarship.
   • Service mission metrics are included for organizational committee participation and professional organization participation.
   • Administrative job description duties would be used to evaluate faculty holding administrative positions.
8. To prepare for an annual evaluation, faculty members submit to designated supervisor the following:
   • annual faculty activity review form which includes assessment of previous year’s goals and plans for current year’s goals.
   • supporting documentation (e.g., UNMC Interprofessional Academy of Educators (IAE) Peer Feedback on Teaching for Health Professions Lectures Form and actionable ideas to implement, student evaluations).
   • updated curriculum vita (CV) using the UNMC approved format, including continuing education listings and credits. Activities for the year under review shall be highlighted.
9. Faculty members shall make an appointment with their supervisor for the review after their fully completed materials listed above are submitted to the supervisor.
10. The supervisor shall review the documents and provide performance ratings of the faculty member’s performance relative to each tripartite mission role function. The supervisor also provides a brief narrative evaluation summary.
11. The faculty member, designated supervisor, and/or the Associate Dean for Research and/or the Associate Dean for Transformational Practice and Partnerships as appropriate shall 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 (4.4.6(1), 4.4.6(2), Appendix A1, Appendix A2), the tripartite mission, and, as appropriate, with the strategic plan.
12. Designated supervisors shall provide faculty members guidance on how to improve in areas which have been identified for growth.
13. The final written evaluation shall be dated and signed by the faculty member and designated supervisor.
14. A faculty member has the opportunity to respond in writing to the evaluation.
15. After the meeting, the designated supervisor shall provide a copy of the signed evaluation materials to the faculty member and place the original documents in the faculty member's permanent file in the dean’s office.
16. Evaluation records are confidential. Designated supervisors 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.