AP 3-31 Evaluation Faculty Job Performance

Arapahoe Community College
Series 3 - College Personnel
AP 3-31 - Evaluation of Faculty Job Performance

Originated: June 1996

Revised: April 2002; August 2004, March 2005; January 2006; April 2010; April 2011; April 2013; January 2015; July 2016; August 2021; March 2024

Effective: June 1996; April 2002; August 2004; retroactive September 1, 2004; July 1, 2006; April 2010; April 2011; April 2013; March 1, 2015; July 2016; August 2021; March 2024

References: BP 3-10; BP 3-20; BP 3-31; BP 3-80; SP 3-31; AP 3-20; AP 3-55; AP 3-80

Approved:

Stephanie J. Fujii, Ph.D.
President, Arapahoe Community College

This procedure incorporates the requirements established in BP 3-31 Evaluation of Job Performance and SP 3-31 Evaluation of Faculty Job Performance. If there are any discrepancies, the board policies and system procedures prevail.

All approved evaluation and observation forms referenced in this AP will be posted in the myACC employee portal.

PURPOSE

The goal of faculty evaluation is to assess faculty performance and reward contribution to the success of students and improvement of the College.

This Procedure contains pertinent information affecting faculty members, current through the date of its issuance. To the extent that any provision of this Procedure is inconsistent with State or Federal law, State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education Policies (BPs) or Colorado Community College System President’s Procedures (SPs), the law, BPs and SPs shall supersede and control. BPs and SPs are subject to change throughout the year and are effective immediately upon adoption by the Board or System President, respectively. Faculty members are expected to be familiar with and adhere to the BPs, SPs as well as College directives, including but not limited to this Procedure.

Nothing in this Procedure is intended to create (nor shall be construed as creating) an express or implied contract or to guarantee employment for any term. The College reserves the right to modify, change, delete or add to this Procedure as it deems appropriate.

SCOPE

This evaluation procedure shall apply to all faculty, as defined in Board Policy BP 3-20. Faculty shall be evaluated by their supervisors following the guidelines set forth in these procedures. Nothing in this procedure shall be construed to limit academic freedom as defined by AP 1-40 or limit due process rights as defined in BP 3-20 and AP 3-20.

DEFINITIONS

Faculty - Refer to BP 3-10 (Administration of Personnel)

Supervisor - The employee to whom faculty directly reports to, usually the Department Chair or Director, but on occasion could be the Dean, AVP or Provost. This individual has requisite training for the performance evaluation process.

Second level supervisor - The employee who the supervisor directly reports to. This individual has requisite training for the performance evaluation process.

Performance Plan - Documented agreement between faculty and supervisor on projected activities or improvements for the evaluation period. It should be based on workload and assignments unique to the individual.

Performance Plan Evaluation - Documented result of the performance plan.

PROCEDURE

Performance Plan

Faculty will be evaluated according to their documented responsibilities, job descriptions, and the ability to meet program, college and System Board goals related to their area of responsibility. (SP 3-31)

The Faculty Self-Evaluation and Performance Plan will: 

• be based on documented responsibilities and job descriptions of faculty (BP 3-21, SP3-31, AP3-31, Faculty Position Description, Faculty/Instructor Handbook);

• align to System Board goals, college strategic directions, instructional goals, including departmental goals and/or program objectives;

• include areas of focus that are measurable and able to be evaluated;

• encompass the timeline of the previous three academic semesters (Spring, Summer, Fall). For first year faculty, the first annual evaluation will cover Fall semester only;

• holistically reflect the faculty member’s teaching and service, as well as any other goals for the year (such as Professional Development, for example);

• provide narrative evaluation of the plan (from both the faculty member and the supervisor).

Evaluation

Reflection on Student Feedback

Reflections on student feedback may include emails, conversations, in-class anecdotes, surveys, and course evaluations. Faculty should consider a full academic year (Spring, Summer, Fall) when reflecting on student feedback. For first year faculty, the first annual evaluation will cover Fall semester only. First year faculty who have previously taught as part-time Instructors, may wish to include Spring & Summer student course evaluations and/or feedback if available.

Classroom Observations

All classroom observations should use the appropriate approved Classroom Observation form. At a minimum, classroom observation should include evaluation regarding methods, teacher-student interaction, class structure, and content. Additional comments may be made relating to online courses. 

• Faculty peer classroom observations are conducted annually for all faculty. Deans will establish a procedure for coordinating peer classroom observations during the Fall School meeting. Faculty members may choose either face-to-face or online classes for observation.

• For provisional faculty, a second classroom observation will be conducted by their Department Chair/Director or Dean to be included as part of the faculty evaluation process. 

• Instructor classroom observations are conducted during the first term of employment for each new instructor. After that, instructors are observed in the classroom annually or more often as appropriate. The Department Chair/Director, Dean or designee can complete classroom observations. Instructors shall be provided with student evaluations and classroom observation information.

• Department Chairs/Directors, Deans, Provost, or designee may also conduct classroom observations as needed for supervisory purposes.

Evaluation Process

• Faculty member completes self-evaluation and performance plan narrative as well next year’s goals using the approved Faculty Self-Evaluation and Performance Plan form.

• Supervisor prepares a written performance evaluation narrative including summary feedback, and performance rating, with rationale for the rating.

• Supervisor reviews self-evaluation and evaluation recommendation and narrative with Dean and/or Provost. Responsibilities of the Dean include reading the faculty self-evaluation and performance plan, supervisors’ evaluation narrative and rating, and confirming inclusion of all necessary components and accuracy of relevant information, thus validating the performance rating. This concurrence ensures awareness and performance rating consistency across the evaluation process. The Dean provides their signature as concurrence with the performance evaluation narrative and rating. Exemplary evaluations require review by the Provost. The Provost may review all evaluations with the Chair/Director and Dean to ensure alignment across Instruction.

• Once the performance evaluation narrative, performance rating, and second level review are completed, supervisor provides faculty with full evaluation, offering three options to review the narrative and rating to complete the evaluation process: 1) meet face-to-face with supervisor, 2) meet via virtual conference with supervisor, or 3) receive the evaluation and rating via email. Faculty chooses an option, reviews the evaluation narrative and rating, and signs the evaluation document.

• Faculty member, supervisor, and secondary supervisor signatures are required. Signing the document does not indicate that a faculty member agrees with the rating.

• Faculty member shall have the opportunity to respond to the performance evaluation and performance rating for the record and/or to petition for a review by the Provost or President.

Provisional to Non-Provisional Transition Year

For Provisional faculty members in their third year, a full packet is submitted for review and consideration to move from provisional to non-provisional status. The full non-provisional review packet should include at minimum the following:

• Three years of faculty evaluations.

• Three years of Course Observations.

• Summary of reflection on student feedback.

• Recommendation letter from Chair/Director and Dean for moving forward to non-provisional status.

See AP 3-20 Due Process for faculty for Provisional to Non-Provisional process.

Appeal of Ratings

In the event faculty disagrees with the performance plan evaluation or performance rating, faculty are encouraged to discuss the discrepancy with the supervisor or second level supervisor to come to a resolution if possible.

Faculty may respond to the performance plan evaluation and/or performance rating in writing on the form making it part of the personnel record.

Faculty may formally request appeal and review of the performance rating using the following steps:

• Faculty shall have ten working days from receipt of signed performance rating to request review by the President.

• The President shall make a determination within 10 working days of receipt of request. All parties will be made aware of the final determination.

Evaluation Process Timeline

The evaluation timeline will be posted in myACC along with the link to the evaluation form.

REVISING THIS PROCEDURE

ACC reserves the right to change any provision or requirement of this procedure at any time and the change shall become effective immediately.