Policy Number: I-23
Last Reviewed: August 17, 2012
Responsible Dept.: Vice President of Academic & Student Affairs
The annual evaluation of faculty holding faculty rank is consistent with policies and procedures of the Virginia Community College System. Each academic school of the college conducts an annual evaluation of full-time faculty. Deans conduct the evaluations and discuss the results with each faculty member on a confidential basis. The faculty member and dean shall discuss the evaluation results in the interest of improving faculty performance.
The primary purposes for evaluation of faculty:
Merit recognition at Virginia Western consists of three components:
Faculty evaluation, as expressed by performance evaluations, is essential to the merit components of multi-year appointment, promotion and merit pay award. Recommendations for faculty to receive merit components follow a sequence of several steps:
Recommendation of a one-year or multiple-year appointment is initiated by the dean to the vice president of academic and student affairs for those faculty who receive a merit performance evaluation rating of "Excellent," "Very Good" or "Good."
Recommendation by the vice president is provided to a standing committee of the college: the Ad Hoc Committee for Appointments and Hearings (see Appendix II). The recommendation of this committee is made to the president for final action. This committee is formed pursuant to VCCS Policy 3.4.0, Original and Continuing Appointment Policy.
Consistent with "Normal Minimum Criteria for Each Faculty Rank" (VCCS-29) approved by the Virginia Community College System, a recommendation of promotion for a faculty member is initiated by the dean to the vice president of academic and student affairs. The vice president in turn provides a second recommendation to the president for his action, which is final.
The State Board for Community Colleges approves guidelines on an annual basis for the development of college faculty salary plans. Plans are developed by the college and merit pay awards are applied as they may be funded through the state and system budget allocation processes and according to the college and VCCS guidelines. Once the college plan is developed, the president approves the final plan regarding merit pay awards for each eligible faculty member. The action of the president is submitted to the Virginia Community College System for review and final approval. Upon VCCS approval, the college generates "Faculty Employment Agreements" according to the provisions of the faculty salary plan. The amount of merit pay award for each faculty member is determined by that faculty member's performance evaluation rating. To receive a merit salary award, a faculty member must receive an evaluation result of "Excellent," "Very Good" or "Good."
Merit salary increases are distributed to academic divisions by a "3-5-6" distribution plan. Under this plan, faculty who receive a "Very Good" evaluation will be awarded a merit salary percentage increase equivalent to five-sixths (5/6) of the percentage increase that is awarded faculty with "Excellent" evaluations. Faculty with "Good" evaluations will be awarded a percentage pay increase equivalent to three-sixths (3/6) of the percentage increase that is awarded faculty with "Excellent" evaluations. A faculty member with an "Excellent" evaluation may not be able to receive all of the prescribed merit award increase because the increase would cause the person’s salary to exceed the maximum allowed for the person’s rank. In this case, the portion of merit pay increase that exceeds the maximum salary limitation will be awarded as a one-time, non-cumulative merit bonus. The college may provide salary increases or non-cumulative merit bonuses to redress salary inequities, to provide extra compensation for faculty who are assigned temporary, extraordinary duties that are above and beyond the normal expectations for their positions, and to award extraordinary accomplishments. No salary increases will be given for cost of living.
Faculty who do not have a performance evaluation for the preceding year because they are returning from a one-year leave of absence will return in August at the same salary they had when they took leave. Their last evaluation will be used to determine their salary for the following calendar year.
New faculty will be given an interim evaluation in October and a mid-year evaluation after the end of the fall semester. The mid-year evaluation will be used to determine their salary for the following calendar year.
The college plan shall require evaluation no less often than the following: (a) at least two times during the first year of employment and (b) at least one time during the second and each subsequent year of employment.
Teaching and administrative faculty, counselors, and librarians may appeal the results of their evaluation through the Faculty Grievance Procedure (VCCS Policy 3.13).
The college plan of evaluation shall be reviewed periodically. The review process shall provide for the involvement of all college personnel holding faculty rank. Recommendations for change shall be approved by a majority of the college personnel holding faculty rank and submitted to the president of the college for final approval and implementation. If the recommended changes are not approved, the president must submit recommended modifications to the proposed plan back to the college personnel holding faculty rank for further consideration and resubmission. In the meantime, the existing plan would remain in effect.
Evaluation shall not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of constitutional rights or academic freedom as set forth in the Statement of Academic Freedom and Responsibility adopted by the State Board on January 29, 1969.
| Nov 1 - Jan 20 | Evaluation of faculty completed by deans and supervisors, performance evaluation rating for each faculty member forwarded to the vice president of academic and student affairs. |
| Jan 20 - Feb 1 | The vice president reviews dean's recommendation for each faculty member. The vice president forwards his recommendations for promotion and merit award directly to the president. The vice president’s recommendation of one-year or multiple-year appointment is forwarded to the Ad Hoc Committee for Appointments and Hearings. |
| Feb 1 - Feb 15 | The Ad Hoc Committee for Appointments and Hearings meets to consider the vice president’s recommendations with subsequent committee recommendations to the president. |
| Feb 15 - Mar 1 | The president concludes his actions for promotions, merit awards, and multiple-year appointments. The president may extend consideration of promotions and merit awards to no later than June 1 if circumstances warrant, such as, budget issues and to await final action of the State Board for Community Colleges on faculty salary planning guidelines. |
| March 1 | By this date, faculty eligible for new multi-year must receive Appointment Proposals setting forth the new appointment period. |
| Mar 1 - Apr 1 | The appeal process for any faculty member shall be concluded in March. |
Excellent = An overall average of 3.50-4.00 on 17 criteria of Student Evaluation of Instructor form = 9 points
Very Good = An overall average of 3.00-3.49 on 17 criteria of Student Evaluation of Instructor form = 7 points
Good = An overall average of 2.00-2.99 on 17 criteria of Student Evaluation of Instructor form = 5 points
Fair = An overall average of 1.00-1.99 on 17 criteria of Student Evaluation of Instructor form = 3 points
Unsatisfactory = An overall average of .99 and below on 17 criteria of Student Evaluation of Instructor form = 1 point
Excellent = Consistently and substantially excels with respect to performance in the classroom; continuous updating, improvement, and innovation in teaching materials, methods, and assignments; maintenance of office hours; and advisement of students = 3 points
Very Good = Frequently and clearly excels with respect to performance in the classroom; continuous updating, improvement, and innovation in teaching materials, methods, and assignments; maintenance of office hours; and advisement of students = 2 points
Good = Performs satisfactorily with respect to performance in the classroom; continuous updating, improvement, and innovation in teaching materials, methods, and assignments; maintenance of office hours; and advisement of students = 1 point
Fair = Needs improvement with respect to performance in the classroom; continuous updating, improvement, and innovation in teaching materials, methods, and assignments; maintenance of office hours; and advisement of students = 0 points
Unsatisfactory = Needs substantial improvement with respect to performance in the classroom; continuous updating, improvement, and innovation in teaching materials, methods, and assignments; maintenance of office hours; and advisement of students = -1 point
Extensive participation = 2 points
Examples of extensive participation (completes a course in one's program of study; delivers a paper at a professional convention; serves in a significant position of leadership in a professional organization; completes all professional certification requirements that are relevant to a particular business or technical discipline)
Moderate participation = 1 point
Examples of moderate participation (subscribes to a professional journal; attends a professional conference; attends 2 lectures or seminars in one’s field or a related field; reads 2 books about one’s field or a related field)
Needs improvement = 0 points
Example of needs improvement (participates to a lesser extent than that described in the examples listed under moderate participation)
Extensive participation = 2 points
Examples of extensive participation (has responsibility for a major college or department activity, such as program head, for which excellent results are attained; speaks to a minimum of four high school classes about a Virginia Western curricular program; serves as chair of Virginia Western’s Open House Committee; is sponsor of a student club/organization that engages in extensive extracurricular activity)
Moderate participation = 1 point
Examples of moderate participation (is a member of a standing or an ad hoc college committee; assists with College Day program; assists with Virginia Western’s Open House activities; participates in evaluations of curricular programs; participates in program or college accreditation studies; advises students)
Needs improvement = 0 points
Example of needs improvement (participates to a lesser extent than that described in the examples listed under moderate participation)
Satisfactory = 1 point
Definition of satisfactory (maintains a professional attitude in dealing with colleagues, supervisors, students, and members of the community)
Needs improvement = 0 points
Example of needs improvement (has had difficulty in two or more instances in establishing and maintaining positive professional relationships)
Satisfactory = 1 point
Definition of satisfactory (adheres to policies, procedures, and regulations of the college and the VCCS)
Needs improvement = 0 points
Example of needs improvement (has violated a policy, procedure, or regulation of the college or the VCCS)
Excellent = consistently delivers outstanding performance, exceeding minimum of 16 points
Very good = clearly exceeds performance standards; 13 – 15 points
Good = performs satisfactorily, meeting performance standards; 10 – 12 points
Fair = marginally meets performance standards; improvement required; 7 – 9 points
Unsatisfactory = fails to meet performance standards; below 7 points
We use VW Alert to immediately contact you during a major crisis or emergency.
