University of Memphis College of Communication and Fine Arts Faculty Annual Evaluation Guide
I. Annual evaluation information as presented in the UofM Faculty Handbook.
II. Instructions for completing your faculty annual evaluation.
III. Guide for completing the "Teaching" portion of the annual evaluation.
IV. Guide for completing the "Research, Scholarly, and Creative Work" portion of the annual evaluation.
V. Guide for completing the "Service and Outreach" portion of the annual evaluation.
VI. Guide for completing the "Planning Report".
I. Faculty Evaluations according to the UofM Faculty Handbook (2019)
Evaluation by Chairs
Department chairs evaluate the faculty in their departments annually and that the results of these evaluations should be used as a basis for decisions relating to tenure, promotion, recommendations for salary increases and other personnel actions, including decisions regarding renewal of tenure-track and non tenure-track appointments. Each department develops, and revises when appropriate, criteria to be considered in the evaluation of its faculty members' activities and responsibilities. The departmental criteria and any departmental procedures for evaluation are approved by the dean of the college and the provost. This information is distributed to all new faculty and to all current faculty whenever a revision is approved. The University's standard faculty evaluation instrument and planning document are available in the Office of the Provost or may be accessed online here.
The annual review process is conducted in the spring semester and consists of two parts: (1) a review of the faculty member's accomplishments during the prior calendar year, using the previously agreed upon plan of activities for that year as the basis of the review, and (2) establishing a plan of activities for the next year, or for a longer period when appropriate. The review will consider the faculty member's performance in all areas that further the mission of the university, including teaching and advising, research and other scholarly or creative activity, public and university service.
Part-time / adjunct faculty members must also be evaluated by their Chair/Director at the completion of their contract term, typically the end of the semester. Only one evaluation per year is required. The evaluation instrument for part -time /adjunct faculty is available in the office of the Department Chair and/or Dean.
Any review of a faculty member's professional performance should be conducted with the full knowledge of the faculty member, should allow the faculty member to be informed of the findings prior to the transmittal of the conclusions of the review, and should allow the faculty member to verify that the review has been based on full and complete information. Evaluations are stored in the office of the Department Chair and/or Dean.
During the spring semester, all faculty members submit a current curriculum vitae, a narrative of their accomplishments during the past year (i.e., faculty activity report), and their plans for the upcoming year to their department chair (or other appropriate head of their academic unit if there is no department chair). The chair receives copies of student evaluations for each course that the faculty member has taught during the evaluation period and may also obtain peer input as discussed herein. Both the faculty member and the chair should obtain and include appropriate, similar information from any other relevant department(s) whenever the faculty member is involved in interdisciplinary activities. Generally, the faculty member's accomplishments over only the prior calendar year are considered in the annual review, although a two or three year period of activities may be considered when appropriate.
The department chair reviews the material and then prepares a narrative and an evaluation in a Faculty Evaluation and Planning Report. The chair provides an overall evaluation of the faculty member's performance by assigning one of the following five performance categories: (a) exceptional performance, (b) very good performance, (c) good performance, (d) improvement needed, and (e) failure to meet responsibilities. The chair must provide written specifics for ratings of "improvement needed" and "failure to meet responsibilities." The chair's overall rating should take into account a balance of all the faculty member's activities.
The department chair uses the annual review process as the primary mechanism for evaluating faculty, for giving specific feedback to faculty on their performance, and for making recommendations on how to improve performance consistent with the department's and/or academic unit's goals in areas of teaching, scholarship, outreach, and service. It is recommended that each department and school refer to the tenure and promotion guidelines as a guide to expectations for continued faculty performance. Faculty planning, both short and long term, begins in the spring during the annual review process. This is a joint endeavor carried out by the faculty member and chair, with results acceptable to both; the plan will take into account academic freedom and the departmental or academic unit's mission. Faculty planning, begun during the annual review process in the spring, is finalized in a formal planning report and submitted at the end of the spring semester. Faculty have the option of revising their plan throughout the year as the balance of their responsibilities dictate. Informal meetings between the chair and each faculty member may be necessary to finalize the planning report. The chair's signature on the planning report indicates the appropriateness of the faculty member's plan.
II. Instructions for Submitting the Faculty Annual Evaluation
Faculty are required to submit their annual report through WORKforUM. The process for completing and submitting your faculty annual report through WORKforUM can be found at this link.
As a part of the annual evaluation, all faculty must have an updated CV using the University of Memphis format available here.
Faculty must also submit the Faculty Planning Report Form as an attachment to their annual report in WORKforUM. This report outlines the teaching, research, and service goals for the next year, which should be used as a point of comparison to the next annual report. For more information visit the Faculty Annual Evaluation website provided by the Office of the Provost.
Once these components have been uploaded and submitted, the chair will evaluate the materials and provide narrative feedback for each area (teaching, research, and service). The chair will also rate the effectiveness of the faculty member's performance for that year using a scale of 1-5 with 5 indicating high effectiveness. Scores below four indicate improvement is needed in one or more areas of faculty performance. A "Professional Improvement Plan" may be required for faculty consistently underperforming. Those scoring below a four may not be considered for merit pay when university incentive pay is available. The dean will review the annual report with the chair's evaluation and provide comments.
III. Guide to Evaluation of Teaching
Faculty members must complete a narrative summary of their teaching for the year, which should include specific courses (prefix, course number, title of class), # of credit hours, # of contact hours (if different than credit hours), enrollments, and, if appropriate, success rates for each course (i.e., 70% of the students earned a C-or above). If you co-taught a course, you will want to detail the responsibilities you had for that course. If you supervised teaching residents or interns, but were not assigned as the instructor of record, you will want to provide that information in your teaching narrative.
Each faculty member is required to provide evidence to support their annual report with respect to the quality and quantity of teaching. Quality of teaching should be evaluated by peers in the discipline or department and students as measured in peer observations and the SETE for each class. Other evidence like teaching awards or successes of students in your class may be appropriate. Innovative teaching practices may also serve as evidence of quality teaching and can be demonstrated through samples of course syllabi, project descriptions, homework assignments, unsolicited written statements from students, etc. New course proposals or course redesigns could also serve as examples of teacher effectiveness.
You will also want to address your SETE results for each course with reflection on areas where you performed well and areas that may need improvement (a SETE summary report for the year maybe uploaded as evidence). You may also attach student comments from the SETE's as qualitative data concerning your teaching.
Faculty members should also be observed by the chair or peer within the department each year using a department-approved rubric. Chairs should provide faculty members with the peer observation rubric with comments so faculty members can address the observation assessment in their teaching narrative.
IV. Guide to Annual Evaluation of Research, Scholarly, and Creative Work
Each faculty members must submit a narrative description of their research, scholarship and creative outputs for the year. Evidence of research/creative work may be refereed publications, exhibitions, performances, presentations at scholarly meetings/conferences, engaged scholarship, scholarly reviews of publications or critical reviews of art works and performances, contracts and grants aligned with research/creative output, research fellowships/awards, patents, and other acceptable scholarly output the department recognizes.
Not only should quantity be considered, but the quality of the output should also be described. For instance, you might detail the significance of the publication (via acceptance rates, readership, citations of published article) or performance/exhibit venue. Formal and informal reviews of presentations, performances, exhibitions, and publications are also acceptable evidence of quality. Grant recipients may articulate the financial significance of the project and the competitiveness of the grant. Faculty members who co-author or co-present work should indicate the nature and extent of their contribution. Research projects "in progress" should be indicated as such and delineate clearly between "in press", "forthcoming", or "under contract." If you are continuing work on a multi-year grant or longitudinal study/project, provide evidence for progress/results from that specific year.
Non-tenure track and non-tenured faculty are not required to submit this section if research and creative activity is contractually required.
V. Guide to Annual Evaluation of Service and Outreach
Service activities are an essential part of the university, college, and department. Faculty members (tenure-track and tenured) are expected to perform service in balance with excellence in teaching and research/creative activity. Service categories may include institutional service (department, college, university; administrative roles within department or college; faculty governance positions), professional service (holding office in professional organizations; editing or refereeing professional journals, textbooks, research proposals and other manuscripts; coordinating scholarly meeting/conference), advising (academic advising; thesis/dissertation advising; mentoring), and outreach (consulting and other service for groups and organizations outside the University that is related to your professional expertise and performed with University affiliation).
Faculty should describe the level of involvement for each service activity (frequency of meetings,leadership roles, outside work required) and the impact of the activity. If appropriate, evidence from a collaborator in your service activity may be collected and submitted. Relating the service activity outcomes to the department, college, and university strategic goals is recommended.
Non-tenure track and non-tenured faculty are not required to submit this section if service is not contractually required.
VI. Guide to Completing the Faculty Planning Report
The Faculty Planning Report is meant to serve as a list of objectives for the year in the areas of teaching, advising/mentoring, scholarship, external support, and service/outreach. It is recommended each category be broken down by semester with specific information. For example, under teaching, faculty might write:
In the spring 20XX semester, I plan on teaching PREF XXXX, "Sample Course Title" with projected enrollment of 25 undergraduate students in the major, PREFXXXX, "Second Course Title" with projected enrollment of 15 doctoral students, advise 25 undergraduate students and 5 graduate students, serve as dissertation chair for 2 doctoral students and serve on dissertation committees for 2 doctoral students. In the fall 20XX semester,
In the summer, I plan on developing a new course proposal "Working Title Here" to be offered to graduate students in the NAME concentration. This course would also be attractive to graduate students in the OTHER program.
Based on my SETE scores from last year, I intend on focusing more efforts on providing quality student feedback and checking in more regularly with students to be sure they are understanding the content of my lectures and feeling supported throughout the semester.
In the area of research, discuss your overall research agenda and, if appropriate, modifications to your research agenda. Plans for new projects, publication submissions, and "in press" publications should be listed. You may structure this information by semester for clarity. For example:
My overall research agenda continues to be.... This spring, I submitted three articles for publication in the top refereed journals in my field (titles of articles and journal titles). I also started a research project, "Title Here", in collaboration with graduate students in our department and faculty members in the Psychology department. We will begin collecting data this summer with anticipated results this fall.
This summer, I will apply for the "NAME HERE" grant through the ORG NAME HERE in the sum of $. This project is a collaborative research project with colleagues from two other universities. I will also complete two manuscripts for practitioner journals.
In the fall, I anticipate submitting two manuscripts (Title and Journals) and presenting at two conferences (session titles and conference names).
For the area of service and outreach, outline the committees you anticipate serving on (designating leadership roles) at the university and in the profession. Also outline the outreach projects you plan to continue work on or new activities you plan to generate this year. Summarize the goals of the service activities and anticipated hours you will need to devote to the activity each week.
My department service responsibilities include serving on the Graduate Curriculum committee and chairing the Diversity Committee. As a member of the Grad Committee, I will assist the committee in researching effective strategies for increasing retention in the program and reducing the amount of time of dissertation completion. As chair of the Diversity Committee, we will develop new strategies for recruiting a more diverse pool of potential students. These committees typically consume 2-5 hours each week.
For service to the profession, I will serve as the conference chair for the National Association for Important Organizations annual conference. As chair, I coordinate the conference schedule, work with the conference center to schedule rooms, and communicate conference details with presenters. This work should consume 10 hours a week.
My community outreach is __________.