What to Expect in your First Year and Beyond

Stephen T. (Ty) Corbin, Ph.D.

VCCS New Faculty Seminar November 14, 2014

Purpose – To create an environment for teaching faculty that promotes high performance and

continuous improvement resulting in a world-class faculty and increased student success.

3 COMPONENTS

• The Evaluation Component

• The APPDO (Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives) Component

• The Reward & Recognition Component

Frequency of Evaluation Twice in first one-year

appointment Annually thereafter for faculty

on one-year appointment Last year of multi-year

appointment

Two-Tiered Rating System

Meets Expectations

Does Not Meet Expectations

Evaluation Cycle: Calendar Year

Four Performance Domains

Teaching

Scholarly & Creative Engagement

Service

Institutional Responsibility

Weighting the Performance Domains

First-Year Faculty:

70% Teaching

10% Scholarly & Creative Engagement

10% Service

10% Institutional Responsibility

•Pre-established expectations in each domain commensurate with contractual status

•Overall “Meets Expectations” rating requires “Meets Expectations” rating in all four performance domains

…faculty mustDemonstrate mastery of a significant majority of the individual criteria in each domainDemonstrate satisfactory progress toward mastery of those criteria where improvement is needed

Mastery – fully proficient; demonstrates exemplary skill, ability, or behavior consistent with contractual status

Satisfactory Progress – generally proficient; demonstrates acceptable skill, ability, or behavior consistent with contractual status; potential for improvement is evident

Consequences of “Does Not Meet Expectations” Rating – first-year faculty who receive a DNME rating in either semester of the first one-year appointment will not be reappointed.

Additional Guidelines for College Plans• Student Surveys

All classes

“All” semesters

• Classroom ObservationFirst-year faculty: Once each semester

• Distance Learning/Instructional Technology Certification

Preparing for your First-Year Evaluations

• Review the pre-established expectations for first-year faculty

• Review the performance “standards” established by your college’s plan (mastery, satisfactory progress, significant majority of the criteria, etc.)

• Ascertain what evidence your dean will examine to evaluate your performance

• Develop a strategy for addressing the performance domains “weighting” concept

Preparing for your First-Year Evaluations

• Review submission deadlines

• Build your evaluation “portfolio”

• Prepare your self-evaluation narrative (if applicable)

• Prepare for your evaluation conference with your dean

Your Evaluation “Portfolio”

• Student survey results • Classroom observation(s)• APPDO assessments • Special assignments (whether or not release time provided)• Supporting documentation required by your plan/your dean

Preparing for your Evaluation Conference

• Prepare notes in advance of the conference to serve as reminders of key points you wish to address

• Take notes during the conference• Include discussion of domain “weightings”• Request/offer suggestions for APPDOs for ensuing semester/year• The conference should be conducted as collaborative conversation;

however, both parties should remain respectful of the supervisory role of the dean.

“Student ratings are just a popularity contest”• Research has shown the students can be reliable

judges of instructor effectiveness if the survey instrument is well-designed

• “Instructor Approachability” questions can be legitimate, but should be accompanied by other items unrelated to “rapport with students”

“Students are not experienced , serious, or mature enough to provide consistent evaluation of instruction”

• Research has shown stability of student ratings of same instructors from year-to-year, confirmed by correlational analysis

“Instructors can assure good student ratings by giving good grades”

• Enormous body of research shows no significant correlation between grades and student ratings

“If I teach higher-level courses, my student ratings will be lower”

• Research has shown that freshmen are harsher raters than sophomores, etc.

“The time of day my class is taught affects by student ratings”

• Unsubstantiated by research. Studies are limited but seem to indicate no relationship.

Some “truths”:

• Most colleges use “home-grown” student survey instruments which have not been subjected to validity and reliability testing.

• Student ratings in required courses tend to be lower than in elective courses.

• Student ratings in math and science courses tend to be lower than in other disciplines.

• Used properly, student ratings can be very helpful in improving instructor performance

Understanding numerical averages: The “positive-response bias”

• If comparative data is provided by the reporting functionality, use it to determine if your overall ratings fall below the mean

• When feasible, compare yourself to other faculty teaching same/similar courses or disciplines

• Use item analysis to diagnose specific behaviors in need of improvement

• To make this an annual review, incorporate into APPDO.

“The intent of the Annual Performance and Development Objectives is to provide a quality enhancement initiative for each faculty member.”

Objectives should be an extension of your expectations and should address…

•Specific areas for improvement relative to evaluation expectations, or•Activities associated with strategic goals of unit, college, and/or VCCS, or•Areas for personal professional growth and development

Most college plans pre-establish APPDOs for first-year faculty.

Thereafter, all faculty participate in the APPDO process each year…• APPDO conference with dean each December• 3 to 5 objectives per year• Each objective is associated with one or more

performance domains

Each objective should be S.M.A.R.T. …

Specific

Measurable

Achievable

Relevant

Time-bound

Purpose: To provide meaningful and timely acknowledgement of exceptional performance, accomplishments, and contributions in one or more areas of faculty responsibility (Teaching, Scholarly & Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility and Service) and which support the mission of the college and the Virginia Community College System.

Rewards - significant annual monetary awards—bonus, percentage pay increase, or professional development stipend—that are available on a competitive basis to a limited percentage of faculty each year. • 10% to 25% of faculty expected to receive Rewards each year• Nominations accepted only from college employees• First-year faculty not eligible

Recognition – non-monetary or de minimis awards such as certificates, gift certificate to the college bookstore, or preferred parking spaces, etc. • Recognition awards to be given in addition to rewards and

are expected to be given in greater number than rewards. • Nominations accepted from any college stakeholder• All full-time teaching faculty are eligible

Getting involved –• Acquaint yourself with your college’s R&R Plan• Calls for Nomination

• Getting yourself nominated• Nominate colleagues

• Serve on Reward & Recognition Committee

tcorbin@reynolds.edu