ARTICLE 26 A
Performance
Appraisal
Regular Tenured Faculty
26A.0 INTRODUCTION
The primary goal of performance appraisal is the
improvement of the quality of the educational program. The process should promote
professionalism, enhance performance, recognize excellent performance, and be
effective in yielding a genuinely useful and substantive assessment of
performance. To achieve this goal,
it is necessary to identify, recognize and nurture competence; to identify
standard performance and indicate areas where improvement is desirable; to
identify performance that requires improvement; and to identify performance so
unsatisfactory that termination may be recommended.
Excellence
in performance is crucial to maintain and extend the learning presently shown
by students at Mission and West Valley Colleges.
The
appraisal process focuses on:
1. Measuring
performance in an objective, unbiased manner.
2. Providing
useful feedback.
3. Ensuring
that appropriate recognition occurs.
4. Encouraging continuing
participation in professional development.
5. Ensuring
that appropriate training opportunities are recommended as needed for members.
6. Supporting
employment status.
The
performance appraisal of a member shall take into account the total assignment
of the member and include the following:
1.
Site observations
2.
Appraisal surveys
3.
Criteria for
Performance Appraisal, Section 26.A.3.
4.
Job description
5.
Self appraisal
6.
Reassigned time
evaluation, if reassigned time is 0.2 FTE or more
7.
An administrative
appraisal, when appropriate, as per 26A.5.3.1
By mutual consent, videotapes or other recording
devices may be used. Anonymous
letters or materials, excluding student survey data, will not be used in the
process.
26A.1 Definitions
A. The
academic year begins July 1 and ends June 30.
B. Faculty
or Faculty Member includes, but is not limited to, instructors, librarians,
counselors, community college health services professionals, lab faculty
specialists, disabled student programs and services professionals, EOP&S
professionals, coordinators and individuals employed to perform a service that,
before July 1, 1990, required non-supervisorial, non-management community
college certification qualifications.
(Education Code Section 87001 C).
C. Performance
Appraisal is a written review of the member’s performance as provided in
this agreement. The Appraisal
Summary Form is to be placed in the member’s official personnel file in
Human Resources. A page listing recommendations, if any, for next appraisal is
to be secured in the appropriate Vice President’s office. All other forms
go back to the appraisee.
D. The
Self-Appraisal provides the individual faculty member an opportunity for
introspection, reflection and planning. It points out areas of significant
competence, effort and contribution made by the appraisee. It also addresses
specific recommendations, if any, made on the appraisee’s last appraisal
cycle.
E. Plan
for Corrective Action: A written plan developed by an appraisal team for
members in Needs-to-Improve or Unsatisfactory status. The plan will reflect specific actions, recommendations, and
timeline for improvement.
F. Satisfactory: Member is meeting the criteria as
outlined in 26A.3.1
–
26A.3.3.
G. Needs-to-Improve: The member is consistently not meeting the preponderance of the criteria
listed in one or more of the criteria categories outlined in 26A.3.1 –
26A.3.3. It is anticipated that the behavior(s) can be improved and the member
will be given the opportunity to return to Satisfactory status by following the
process outlined in 26A.7.
A
Needs-to-Improve may be given in any of the separate criteria categories.
H. Unsatisfactory: Member is unable or unwilling to move
out of Needs-to-Improve in one or more of the categories outlined in 26A.3.1 and/or
26A.3.2.
26A.2 FREQUENCY
OF APPRAISALS
26A.2.1 Except
for annual appraisal surveys, regular members in Satisfactory status shall be
evaluated once every three academic years. Time spent on leave may postpone,
but not cancel, an evaluation. Additional evaluations focusing on specific
areas may occur with the concurrence of the Department Chair, Division Chair,
supervising administrator and appropriate Vice President with notification to
the appropriate ACE grievance officer if:
a. Complaints
are received which are of a serious nature.
b. Appraisal
surveys indicate that a problem may exist.
c. A
member reverts to behaviors that formerly placed him/her on
Needs-to-Improve.
d. A
member consistently fails to meet a significant number of the criteria for performance
appraisal of regular members as outlined in 26A.3.1 – 26A.3.3 .
e. A
member consistently fails to meet usual record keeping obligations and
timelines (grade, census roster, early progress reports, etc.).
These
additional evaluations will have appropriate timelines developed as they occur.
26A.2.2 Regular
members in Needs-to-Improve status will be evaluated every semester according
to the process outlined in 26A.7.
26A.2.3 Regular
members in Unsatisfactory status will be evaluated every semester according to the process outlined in
26A.11.
26A.2.4 Associate
members, long-term substitute and temporary members, and overload assignments
not in a regular member's primary discipline shall be evaluated by the
department involved in accordance with the process outlined in Article 100 and
112.
26A.2.5 REASSIGNED
TIME
Regular
faculty who are reassigned with at least 20% reassigned time during any
semester except if funded and supervised outside the district (e.g. ACE and
State Academic Senate) will be evaluated on the performance of reassigned time
activities prior to the thirteenth week during the term of the assignment. If the reassigned time assignment
continues for more than one academic year, evaluation shall be on an annual
basis during the spring semester.
Upon the assignment of reassigned time, the regular member shall meet
with the appropriate administrator/designee to establish written goals for the
reassigned time and set a date (or dates) for meeting to assess progress toward
those goals. The appropriate Vice
President will determine which administrator or designee will oversee and
complete the appraisal process for the reassigned time.
Results
of any reassigned time evaluation shall be forwarded to the appropriate Vice
President for inclusion in the next full performance appraisal of the member.
Outcomes
of the evaluation of the reassigned time assignment may be:
a. Satisfactory. If the outcome is Satisfactory, the
assignment will continue.
b. Needs-to-Improve. If the outcome is Needs-to-Improve, the
appropriate administrator/designee will work with the member to develop a Plan
for Corrective Action.
c. Discontinuance. If the outcome is not Satisfactory, the reassigned time may
be discontinued at the option of the appropriate administrator/designee.
26A.2.6 PENDING
RESIGNATION OR RETIREMENT
When
a regular member’s year of retirement or resignation coincides with an
appraisal year, the appraisal process may be waived, except when the member
wants to earn reemployment preference as an associate member (see Article
15.0.5). The member’s
written letter of intent to resign or retire on file with the District will
serve as notification to the appropriate Vice President who may approve the
waiver.
26A.3 CRITERIA
FOR APPRAISAL OF REGULAR MEMBERS
All criteria appropriate to the member's
assignment included in this section will be used in the Performance Appraisal
Process.
26A.3.1 Professional
Criteria Category
Each member shall:
a. Demonstrate
currency and depth of knowledge of the field in the performance of assignment.
b. Demonstrate
the ability to communicate subject matter clearly, correctly, and
effectively.
c. Demonstrate
an ability to achieve objectives in the area of assignment.
d. Demonstrate
an ability to adapt methodologies for students/clientele with special needs and
different learning styles.
e. Utilize
methods and materials appropriate to the subject matter.
f. Demonstrate
evidence of careful preparation and organizational skills in area of
assignment.
g. Provide
clear assignments or directives to students and regularly inform students of
academic standing in class.
h. Provide
for each student a current course syllabus as outlined in the Faculty/Staff
Handbook and as required by Title 5 and provide a copy to the Division
Office.
i. Demonstrate
a commitment to student learning by beginning and ending classes according to
schedule, holding regular office hours, and meeting student needs as
professionally required.
j. Evidence
currency in the field through participation in professional conferences,
workshops, seminars, etc.
k. Meet record keeping obligations on time,
e.g., grades, requisitions,
schedules, textbook orders, rosters.
l. Carry
out budget responsibilities effectively if it is an agreed part of
member’s assignment.
m. Supervise
classified personnel appropriately if it is an agreed part of member’s
assignment.
26A.3.2 Collegial
Criteria Category
Each member shall:
a. Work
cooperatively within the college community.
b. Foster
an environment that protects academic freedom within the college community.
c. Foster
a positive working environment that is free from harassment, prejudice, and/or
bias.
d. Demonstrate
positive communication skills within the college community.
e. Demonstrate
a respect for the dignity of each individual.
26A.3.3 Institutional
Criteria Category
Each member shall:
Evidence a
commitment to his/her department/division, college and district by fulfilling
his/her institutional responsibilities as outlined in Article 22.2.
26A.4 TEAM
MEMBERSHIP AND RESPONSIBILITIES
26A.4.1 Team
Membership
Except
in the case of a reduced appraisal process (see 26A.4.1.1) the appraisal team
shall be composed of two regular faculty in Satisfactory status, within the
member’s department, Division or related discipline. On alternate evaluation years, one of
the faculty members shall be a regular faculty from outside the
appraisee’s department. The
appraisal team has the exclusive right to include a non-voting external
participant for content expertise if that content expertise is not available
within the bargaining unit. The
selection of the person having content expertise is subject to approval by the
appraisee.
Except
in the case of Lab Faculty Specialists and Librarians (see below) team members
will be recommended by the Department Chair and forwarded to the Division Chair
and appropriate Vice President for approval. When the Department Chair is being evaluated, the Division
Chair will recommend the appraisal team to the appropriate Vice President. When
the Division Chair is being evaluated (on instructional duties), the college
Academic Senate President will recommend appraisal teams and forward to the
appropriate Vice President for
approval.
The
leader of the team shall be elected by its members. The appraisal team leader
will, whenever possible, be from the same area/department as the appraisee.
On
an as-needed basis, the appraisal team leader may invite an appropriate
administrator to serve as a non-voting member of the appraisal team. If a
regular faculty member has received a Needs-to-Improve or an Unsatisfactory
performance appraisal, the composition of the appraisal team varies. (See
section 26A.7 or 26A.11 as appropriate.)
In
the case of Lab Faculty Specialists and Librarians, the college Academic Senate
President will recommend appraisal teams from those areas and forward to the
Vice President of Instruction for approval.
In
those cases where the direct supervisor of the member is an administrator, as
is the case with such positions as Librarians and Lab Faculty Specialists, the
administrator shall complete an independent appraisal of that member. (See
26A.5.3.1)
In
order to allow time for other institutional responsibilities, members, other
than the Department Chair, should not serve on more than five (5) appraisal
teams within one (1) academic year.
26A.4.1.1 Reduced
Appraisal Process
When
a Regular Faculty member receives three consecutive Satisfactory appraisal
outcomes the next regular evaluation process will be as follows:
a. The evaluation team will consist of only one
member in Satisfactory
status.
b.
Only one classroom observation needs to be performed.
c.
Appraisal surveys will be done for all sections during the evaluation
year; however, appraisal surveys will not be required during non-appraisal
years.
Successive
evaluations of a member in Reduced Appraisal status are not to be conducted by
the same individual.
26A.4.2 Team
Leader Responsibilities
The
appraisal team leader is responsible for ensuring that the appraisal process is
completed in accordance with the appropriate provisions and timelines of the
contract. The responsibilities of
the team leader will include at least the following items:
a. Obtaining a list of any recommendations
resulting from the appraisee’s prior appraisal and surveys done during intervening years kept in the appropriate
Vice President’s office.
b.
Scheduling and conducting the pre-appraisal conference.
c. Coordinating appraisal observations and
surveying appropriate administrative and other personnel regarding the
performance of responsibilities that cannot be assessed by a classroom
observation, and summarizing such input for inclusion in the post appraisal
performance conference.
d. Ensuring
that the appraisal surveys are completed in a timely manner.
e. Obtaining completed
administrative appraisal as per 26A.5.3.1.
f.
Reviewing the results of the pre-appraisal conference, appraisal
observations, surveys and comments, and other information such as
commendations, record-keeping documents, attendance, course syllabi and
drop/retention rates with the team.
g.
Preparing for and conducting the post-appraisal conference. Prior to the
post-appraisal conference, the appraisal team leader will compile and prepare
all of the appropriate documents for the conference using the criteria from
Section 26A.3 and following the process specified in Section 26A.5.
h. Completing the post-appraisal
summary form.
26A.5 APPRAISAL
PROCESS
26A.5.1 The
appraisee will obtain a copy of the previous team’s recommendations (if
any) from the current team leader. The appraisee will complete a self-appraisal
on the Faculty Self-Appraisal form.
26A.5.2 Pre-Appraisal
Conference
It
is recommended that by the end of the 5th week of instruction, the appraisal
team will meet with the member to discuss the Faculty Self-Appraisal, the
elements of the appraisal, and other information such as commendations, record
keeping documents, attendance, course syllabi and drop/retention rates, and establish
expectations as defined in the job description. Documents related to the evaluation process will be
distributed.
26A.5.3 Observations
There will be a minimum of one observation by each
member of the appraisal team.
Observations may be conducted without advance notice, and should be
completed no later than week 13 of the semester. Observations will include activities appropriate to the
member’s service area(s).
26A.5.3.1 An
administrator authorized to perform an independent appraisal of a regular
faculty member, as in 26A.4.1, shall observe the member in the activities
appropriate to the member’s service area(s) or otherwise in those duties
outlined in the member’s position description. The administrator will
complete her or his written appraisal report and must deliver the report to the
appraisal team leader at least one week prior to the post-appraisal conference.
All substantive points made in the administrator’s appraisal will be
included in the team’s summary report.
26A.5.4 Appraisal
Surveys
26A.5.4.1 Classroom
Activities
Evaluation
year. Student appraisal surveys
will be conducted using official ACE forms in each class section during one
semester of the appraisal year.
Surveys will be completed between weeks 6 and 13. When administering student surveys, a
member of the appraisal team or its designee, which could be the appraisee,
shall read the written instructions to the class and distribute the evaluation
forms. That person will inform the students that ratings and written comments
will be used in the appraisals and that the instructor will not have access to
the written comments until after grades are recorded. A person other than the
appraisee will be designated to collect the completed appraisal forms and
return them immediately to the Division Office or appropriate collection point.
The appraisee will leave the room while students fill out the appraisal
surveys.
Non-evaluation
year. Each regular faculty member
not on reduced appraisal process (see 26A.4.1.1) will have student appraisal surveys conducted for at least
one course selected by the Division Chair/Supervisor every year. The appraisal
will follow the procedure described in the preceding paragraph between the 6th
and 13th week of instruction. The
student surveys are to be for the purpose of providing valuable feedback for
faculty members. The student surveys will be reviewed by the Division
Chair/Supervisor and the faculty member. The summarized results will be
reviewed and retained by the appropriate Vice President and forwarded to the
appraisal team leader during the next appraisal process.
26A.5.4.2 Non-classroom
Activities. Appropriate appraisal surveys will be
conducted using official ACE forms during one semester of every year. These surveys will be processed
regularly and the results reviewed by the Division Chair/Supervisor and the
faculty member. The summarized results will be reviewed and retained by the
appropriate Vice President and forwarded to the appraisal team leader during
the next appraisal process.
26A.5.5 Post-Appraisal
Conference
At the conclusion of the appraisal, there will be
a conference with the appraisee and the appraisal team to discuss the outcomes
of the appraisal and other information such as commendations, record keeping
documents, attendance, course syllabi and drop/retention rates. Performance on
professional, collegial, and institutional responsibilities will also be
discussed and comments written on the final Appraisal Summary
Conference/Recommendation form .
The
Department Chair or immediate supervisor, if not a member of the team, will be
informed by the team leader of the outcome of each appraisal and may be
included in the post-appraisal conference by request of the team leader.
If the evaluation is conducted in the Fall and
if a preliminary indication from the appraisal team is that the result of the
appraisal will be Needs-to-Improve in any of the criteria, then the faculty
member and the appropriate Vice President will be informed of that fact. The
evaluation will be continued through the following semester before the
evaluation results are finished. The appraisal team will determine which of the
criteria, if not all, will continue to be evaluated during the extended period
of the evaluation. At the conclusion of the second semester the results of the
appraisal must be finished and the summary evaluation must be submitted.
The Post-Appraisal Conference shall be completed and the summary forwarded to the appropriate Vice President prior to finals week.
26A.6 APPRAISAL
OUTCOMES
At
the discretion of the appropriate Vice President, consultation with the
appraisal team regarding the outcome may occur.
The
possible outcomes are:
a. Satisfactory: If
the recommendation is Satisfactory in all areas, the appraisal is completed.
b.
Needs-to-Improve: If the appraisal recommends that the member
needs to improve in any of the three criteria categories listed in 26A.3, and
it is approved by the appropriate Vice President, the process outlined in 26A.7
will be followed. When a Needs-to-Improve is given, the specific criteria
categories for reappraisal shall be specified.
A member may be in Needs-to-Improve status on the
basis of the Professional Criteria category (26A.3.1) and/or the Collegial
Criteria category (26A.3.2) for no more than two semesters and then needs to be
moved either up or down from Needs-to-Improve.
Needs-to-Improve status on the basis of the Institutional Criteria category
(26A3.3) may exceed two semesters. If the appraisal team is unable to document
a member’s satisfactory participation in fulfilling the Institutional
Criteria category, the team must place the member in Needs-to-Improve status
for that category (26A3.3).
While
a member is in Needs-to-Improve, she/he shall be ineligible to teach overloads
or summer school, to apply for new PG&D projects, or to apply for or take a
sabbatical leave.
The appraisal team, with the appropriate
administrator, will meet with the appraisee to review the results of the
appraisal and to inform the member of the member’s placement in
Needs-to-Improve. When a Needs-to-Improve outcome is given, all supporting
documents will be placed into the appraisee’s personnel file.
Prior to final exam week in May, the college
President will notify the Director of Human Resources of all members placed on
Needs-to-Improve status. The
Director of Human Resources will notify the appropriate grievance officer.
c. Unsatisfactory:
A member may not be placed in this outcome category without first going through
Needs-to-Improve status.
26A.7 Appraisal Process for Regular FACULTY
Members in Needs-to-Improve Status
If the appraisee’s performance is identified
as “Needs-to-Improve,” the original review team, plus the
appropriate administrator, will serve as the appraisal team. The Division Chair, in consultation
with the appropriate administrator or the Department Chair, will draft a Plan
for Corrective Action for those areas noted as
“Needs-to-Improve.”
The process will focus exclusively on the identified area or areas.
Upon
request of the appraisee or the District, the grievance officer will serve as
an observer of the process.
26A.7.1 Pre-Appraisal
Conference for Needs-to-Improve Status,
Any Category (26A.3.1, 26A.3.2, or 26A.3.3)
The
procedure for Needs-to-Improve status will be reviewed with the appraisee by
the appraisal team. The Plan for
Corrective Action developed by the appraisal team will be reviewed with the
appraisee.
26A.7.2 Appraisal
Methods for Professional Criteria Category Either Instruction/Classroom Related
or Non-Instruction/Non-Classroom Related Criteria (both under 26A3.1) and/or
for Collegial Related Criteria (26A.3.2)
26A.7.2.1 Instruction
or Classroom Related (26A.3.1)
Based
on the Plan for Corrective Action, if the area for improvement is classroom
related, appraisal methods may include, but need not be limited to, the
following:
Course
planning: The appraisee will
prepare and submit to the appraisal team a plan for each course which addresses
course content, skills to be developed, teaching methods and rationale, and
student evaluation procedures.
Observations: Each member of the team must observe each
section each semester. The team
will determine the maximum number of observations to be conducted.
Student
Surveys: Student surveys will be
conducted by the eleventh week of class in each semester. The survey shall include all students
enrolled in such sections and may include students who were enrolled but
dropped or withdrew from the sections.
26A.7.2.2 Non-Instruction/Non-Classroom
Related (26A.3.1)
The
Plan for Corrective Action, if the area of improvement falls under the
Professional Criteria category (26A.3.1) but is not instruction nor classroom
related, shall identify specific criteria that are not being met, the
expectation of the appraisal team, the actions that are expected to correct the
area, and a timeline for completion.
The appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate
the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.
26A.7.2.3 Collegial Related (26A.3.2)
Based
on the Plan for Corrective Action, if the area for improvement is related to
Collegial Criteria, the team shall identify the criteria that are not being
met, the expectation(s) of the appraisal team, the actions that are expected to
correct the area, and a timeline for completion. The appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to
evaluate the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.
26A.7.2.4 Progress
Conference For Needs-to-Improve Status (1st Semester) for Professional Related
Criteria (26A.3.1) and/or Collegial Criteria (26A.3.2)
Prior to the thirteenth week of the first semester
in Needs-to-Improve Status, the appraisal team will review the Plan for
Corrective Action, the appraisal observations, and other relevant information to
ensure compliance with the plan. A
Progress Conference will be held with the appraisal team and the appraisee
prior to the final exam week of the first semester in Needs-to-Improve status.
At
the end of the Progress Conference, the appropriate administrator will prepare
a written summary that will specify the progress made to date by the appraisee.
If the member is returned to
Satisfactory status in the Professional Related and Collegial Related
Criteria, the appraisal is complete.
If the team recommends that continued performance improvement is
necessary to correct noted deficiencies, the member will be continued in
Needs-to-Improve status for the appropriate category for one more
semester. This Progress Conference
may also serves as the pre-appraisal conference for the next semester.
26A.7.2.5 Progress
Conference for Needs-to-Improve Status
(2nd Semester) for Professional Related Criteria (26A.3.1) and/or
Collegial Criteria (26A.3.2)
Prior
to the thirteenth week of the second semester in Needs-to-Improve status, the
appraisal team will meet to review the Plan for Corrective Action, the
appraisal observations and other relevant information. A Progress Conference will be held with
the appraisal team and the appraisee prior to the final exam week of the second
semester in Needs-to-Improve status.
Following the Progress Conference, the appropriate administrator will
prepare a written summary of the finding and the outcome.
26A.8 Outcome
for Needs-to-Improve Status for Professional Related Criteria (26A.3.1) and/or
for Collegial Criteria (26A.3.2)
At the conclusion of the appraisal period (two
semesters), there are two possible outcomes:
a. Satisfactory
Status: If there has been
satisfactory improvement, the appraisee will be returned to Satisfactory status
and the appraisal is complete.
b. Unsatisfactory
Performance: If insufficient
progress has been made, a notice of Unsatisfactory performance will be issued
by the appropriate administrator and the member will be notified of being
placed in Unsatisfactory status.
26A.9 Appraisal
Methods for Institutional Related Criteria (26A.3.3)
If
the area of improvement is for performance in the Institutional Related
Criteria category (26A.3.3), the Plan for Corrective Action shall identify
specific criteria that are not being met. The Plan shall also state the
expectation of the appraisal team, the actions that are expected to correct the
area and a timeline for completion.
The appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate
the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.
Needs-to-Improve
status may be used more than one
year for 26A.3.3 Institutional Criteria only (see 26A.6.b).
26A.10 Outcome
for Needs-to-Improve Status for Institutional Related Criteria (26A3.3)
If
progress has been made, but further improvement is necessary, the member will
continue to work in the Needs-to-Improve status. If the member states, or the team identifies, that the
member does not wish to fulfill
expectations for category 26A3.3, the team may recommend that the appraisal
process for correction of this area cease. The appropriate Vice President, ACE Grievance Officer, and
Human Resources shall be notified.
If/when
the member wishes to return to Satisfactory status for Institutional Related
Criteria he/she must notify the appropriate Vice President and ACE Grievance
Officer so that the appraisal team can be reconvened.
See
26A.6.b for limitations when a member remains in Needs-to-Improve status.
26A.11 APPRAISAL PROCESS FOR REGULAR MEMBERS IN
UNSATISFACTORY STATUS
A new appraisal team shall be recommended to the
appropriate Vice President by the Academic Senate President and formed
consisting of:
a. a
regular faculty member in Satisfactory status;
b. a
Division Chair;
c. the
Vice President of Instruction or Vice President of Student Services
of
the college, as appropriate.
When
possible either the Division Chair or faculty member serving on the appraisal
team will have content expertise.
The
Vice President of Instruction or Vice President of Student Services will serve
as Chair of the Team. The team
will review the written summary and any additional relevant information. The team will develop a new Plan for
Corrective Action focused on the specific area(s) identified as Unsatisfactory.
Upon
request of the appraisee or the District, the grievance officer may serve as an
observer of the process.
26A.11.1 Pre-Appraisal
Conference for Unsatisfactory Status
for Professional Related Criteria (26A.3.1) and/or Collegial Related Criteria
(26A3.2)
The
procedure for Unsatisfactory status will be reviewed with the appraisee by the
appraisal team. The Plan for
Corrective Action developed by the appraisal team will be reviewed with the
appraisee.
26A.11.2 Appraisal
Methods for Unsatisfactory Status for Professional Related Criteria (26A.3.1)
and/or for Collegial Related Criteria (26A3.2)
26A.11.2.1 Instructional or
Classroom Related (26A.3.1)
Classroom
Activities - Based on the Plan
for Corrective Action, if the area for improvement is classroom related,
appraisal methods may include, but need not be limited to, the following:
Course
planning: The appraisee will
prepare and submit to the appraisal team a plan for each course which addresses
course content, skills to be developed, teaching methods and rationale, and
student evaluation procedures.
Observations:
Each member of the team must observe each section each semester. The team will determine the maximum
number of observations to be conducted.
Student
Surveys: Student surveys will be
conducted by the eleventh week of class in each semester. The survey shall include all students
enrolled in such sections and may include students who were enrolled but
dropped or withdrew from the sections.
26A.11.2.2 Non-Instruction/Non-Classroom
Related (26A.3.1)
The
Plan for Corrective Action, if the area of improvement falls under the
Professional Criteria category (26A.3.1) but is not instruction nor classroom
related, shall identify the criteria that are unsatisfactory and the
expectations of the appraisal team.
The team will establish what corrections are necessary and develop a
timeline for completion. The
appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate the response
to the Plan for Corrective Action.
26A.11.2.3 Collegial
Related (26A.3.2)
The
Plan for Corrective Action shall identify specific criteria that are not being
met and the expectations of the appraisal team. The team shall identify what
the member needs to correct and determine a timeline for completion. The appraisal team will establish the
appropriate methods that will be used to evaluate the response to the Plan for
Corrective Action.
26A.12 Outcome
for Unsatisfactory Status for Professional Related Criteria (26A.3.1) and/or
for Collegial Related Criteria (26 A.3.2)
By
the 13th week of the 2nd semester in which the faculty member is in
Unsatisfactory status the team shall make one of two possible recommendations
to the President. The team may
recommend that:
a. the faculty member be returned to
Satisfactory status; or
b. the member shall not be continued
as a faculty member.
The
President shall determine whether or not to initiate termination proceedings in
accordance with Article 27. If the decision is made to terminate, the
member’s assignment will be determined by the President during
termination proceedings.
26A.13 AUTHORIZATION
Education Code Sections 87660 et seq. set forth
the requirements for the performance appraisal of members. The legislative intent, as stated in AB
1725, provides that a member’s students, administrators, and peers should
all contribute to the appraisal, but the member should play a central role in
the appraisal process, and, together with appropriate administrators, assume
principal responsibility for the effectiveness of the process.
26A.14 NEGOTIABILITY
Any changes in the District Tenure Review or
Performance Appraisal Process shall be subject to the negotiation process. ACE shall consult with the Academic
Senate prior to engaging in collective bargaining procedures regarding this
article (Education Code Sections
87610.1 and 87663).
26A.15 GRIEVABILITY
Only
compliance with the performance appraisal process is grievable. Outcomes or results of this article are
not grievable.