The University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Policy # [####]
UWO Faculty Annual Performance Evaluation
Original Issuance Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Last Revision Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Next Review Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
1. PURPOSE
2. RESPONSIBLE OFFICER
3. SCOPE
4. BACKGROUND
5. DEFINITIONS
6. POLICY STATEMENT
(FAC 6 – addition)
[Approved by Faculty Senate, November 17, 2020]
Scope
This policy applies to tenured and tenure track UWO faculty members.
Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines and a process for an annual faculty performance management process consistent with UW System Administrative Policy 1254 (Performance Management) and to establish eligibility for pay plan adjustments.
Responsible Officer
Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
Definitions
Performance evaluation: A continual process of identifying, measuring, and developing job-related employee performance.
Performance management: A continual process of establishing expectations, ongoing coaching and feedback, and measuring outcomes in formal performance evaluations of employees.
Supervisor: In this policy the individual identified as the faculty member’s supervisor by human resources (typically the department chair) is considered the “supervisor” for the purpose of submitting the e-form.
Policy Statement
1. Annual performance evaluation is separate and distinct from the renewal and tenure process and the post-tenure review process.
2. The purpose of an annual performance evaluation process is employee development of professional skills and academic excellence, and identify areas for improvement of teaching, research/scholarship and creative activity and service commensurate with a faculty position.
3. Annual performance evaluation proceeds at the unit or academic department level and is based on performance in the three categories of teaching, scholarship, and service.
4. The unit (e.g., department) annual performance evaluation policy and related criteria and procedures of each academic department/unit shall be approved by the unit faculty and reviewed at least every three years.
5. Department-level annual performance evaluation policy, and changes thereto, must be reviewed by a designated college-level committee.
6. A summary evaluation for the calendar year performance will be recorded on a university e-form (via Shared Services) by March 1st for the prior year.
7. Unit annual evaluation processes must include the following:
a. A definition of solid performance and performance expectations, including relative weights of criteria.
b. A determination of who makes the evaluation (e.g., department chair, department personnel committee, or other.)
c. Opportunity for the faculty member to provide a summary of activities and self-perceptions of performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service.
d. Evidence of teaching performance must include, but may not be limited to, student opinion survey results for courses taught during the annual evaluation period.
e. Opportunity for individuals to set goals and expectations for the following year.
f. Opportunity for a face-to-face performance conversation between the evaluator (department chair, personnel committee, or other) and the faculty member being evaluated.
g. Mechanisms to address performance levels that do not meet expectations.
h. The submission of the university e-form by the “supervisor” to Human Resources.
8. Records are retained in accordance with the UW System Records Retention policy.
Oversight, Roles, and Responsibilities
Faculty Senate is responsible for the content and revision of this policy, consistent with Article 2 of the Faculty Constitution.
The Personnel Policies Committee of the Faculty Senate shall conduct a review of this policy at least once every five years. It may do so more frequently if governing policies change, at the request of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, or at the request of 25% of sitting Senators.
The Faculty Senate approves changes to this policy by majority vote.
Related Policy Documents and Applicable Laws
Wis. Admin. Code UWS 3.05 Period Review
UW System Administrative Policy 1254: Performance Management
UW System Records Retention policy
Regent Policy Document 20-9: Periodic Post-Tenure Review
Regent Policy Document 20-2: Student Evaluation of Instruction
SYS 1278, UW System Pay Plan Distribution Framework for University Workforce
Appendix
Faculty Annual Performance Evaluation e-Form
Employee name, department name, etc. (automatically generated)
Summary evaluation:
TEACHING
Meets expectations
Meets Some Expectations
Does not meet expectations
SCHOLARSHIP
Meets expectations
Meets Some Expectations
Does not meet expectations
SERVICE
Meets expectations
Meets Some Expectations
Does not meet expectations
Overall recommendation:
Solid Performer (meets or meets some expectations in all three areas)
Not solid performer (does not meet expectations in one or more area)
*Final performance rating is pending verification of mandatory training completion and other pay plan requirements.
All University employees are expected to meet UW Oshkosh Workplace Conduct Expectations in all their working, learning, and service interactions.
Annual faculty performance evaluation is based on the three categories of teaching, scholarship, and service. The descriptions of these categories provided below are intended to inform the unit level evaluation processes outlined by the Faculty Annual Evaluation Policy.
TEACHING
Provides quality teaching and/or other instructional activities as appropriate for the position, including activities such as:
• Plans, revises, and prepares course materials
• Provides instruction and assesses student learning
• Regularly meets classes at the scheduled time
• Provides regular and timely feedback to students on learning
• Holds regular office hours and is consistently available to students
• Provides advising in the major
• Mentors students on research, career planning, or post graduate education plans
• Keeps up on changes in the academic field
• Works to improve instruction and grow professionally
• Treats students in a manner consistent with the University’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion
Examples of characteristics of someone rated as
Meets expectations
• Regularly meets and sometimes exceeds expectations and role requirements in this area
• Sets and works toward achieving goals
• Perceived by peers, students and others as collaborative, skilled and reliable
• Consistently courteous and respectful with students
Meets Some Expectations
• Inconsistently meets expectations
• Needs improvement in an identifiable area
• May be new to the role; does not yet fully perform all requirements and duties
Does not meet expectations
• Performance falls below expectations in multiple areas
• Effort does not reflect departmental expectations
• A performance improvement plan may be developed
SCHOLARSHIP and CREATIVE ACTIVITIES
Engages in meaningful generation or advancement of generalizable intellectual knowledge, empirical research, or creative outcome. Recognizing that scholarship is a varied and multi-year process, related activities include such actions as:
• Engages in original research relevant to the field
• Interacts with other researchers in the field
• Seeks out and responds to peer review of research
• Presents research results in professional venues (conferences)
• Revises work for publication
• Publishes research results in peer-reviewed academic venues appropriate to the field (journals, books, chapter contribution to an edited volume, juried exhibitions, etc.)
• Pursues extramural or intramural funding to support research efforts
• Engages students in research and/or mentors student research
• Engages in scholarship of teaching and learning
• Seeks out professional development related to the field of study
• Pursues opportunities to enhance research and scholarship skills
• Keeps abreast of developments in the academic field
Examples of characteristics of someone rated as
Meets expectations
• Regularly meets and sometimes exceeds expectations and role requirements in this area
• Sets and works toward achieving goals
• Perceived by peers, students and others as collaborative, skilled and reliable
Meets Some Expectations
• Needs improvement in some areas, but is generally on track to meet expectations
• May be new to the role; does not yet fully perform all requirements
• Has difficulty setting or meeting scholarship goals
Does not meet expectations
• Activity level falls below expectations
• Effort does not reflect departmental expectations
SERVICE
Service is essential to the functioning of the university and is an important component of a faculty member’s professional trajectory. Faculty members are expected to engage actively in meaningful service at various levels (to their profession, the university, their college and their department). Faculty service includes activities such as:
• Serves on UWO university-wide shared governance standing or ad-hoc committees
• Serves on campus and / or college specific standing or ad-hoc committees
• Engages in UW System committee service activities
• Participates in departmental service and contributes to shared tasks
• Works with student organizations (e.g., faculty leader)
• Takes on leadership roles and responsibilities
• Pursues opportunities to enhance leadership and/or professional skills
• Contributes to the campus community through presentation of work (e.g., lecture series, recitals and readings, workshops or programs)
• Takes on a leadership role in a professional organization (e.g., journal editorship, editorial board service, academic conference chair, honors society, etc.)
• Serves as a peer reviewer for a journal, book or textbook
• Shares expertise with the broader community (e.g., speaking events, or presentations to community organizations or K-12 schools, consultation or collaboration with community groups, writing for local media or guest appearance on media).
Examples of characteristics of someone rated as
Meets expectations
• Regularly meets and sometimes exceeds expectations and role requirements in this area
• Sets and works toward achieving service-related professional goals
• Completes service tasks in an effective and timely manner
• Is consistently courteous and respectful in interactions with colleagues
Meets Some Expectations
• Needs improvement in some areas, but is generally on track to meet expectations
• May be new to the role; does not yet fully perform all requirements
• Timely and effective contributions to shared work may be inconsistent
• Inconsistently contributes to a positive workplace environment
Does not meet expectations
• Performance falls below expectations in multiple areas
• Effort does not reflect departmental expectations
7. REFERENCES
8. PROCEDURES
9. REVISION HISTORY