Criteria for Permanence Sample Clauses

Criteria for Permanence a. Permanence will be granted on the basis of clear promise of continuing intellectual and professional development as demonstrated primarily by: i. sustained satisfactory and effective professional practice during the probationary appointment, and secondarily by: ii. the quality of the member’s scholarly activities; and iii. evidence of service to the University, the Union, the profession, and the community. The relative weighting of these criteria in the permanence decision shall correspond to the proportionate distribution of time among these activities in the member’s workload assignment as per Article 25.01(b) (Workload for Professional Librarian Members). b. Awarding of permanence must always be based on the criteria noted in Article (a) and evidence of professional practice, scholarly activity and service noted in Article
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Criteria for Permanence

  • Criteria (1) Annual Evaluation Criteria. All performance evaluations shall be based upon assigned duties, and shall carefully consider the nature of the assignment in terms, where applicable, of: a. Teaching effectiveness, including effectiveness in presenting knowledge, information, and ideas by means or methods such as lecture, discussion, assignment and recitation, demonstration, laboratory exercise, practical experience, supervision of interns, theses, professional projects and/or dissertations, and direct consultation with students. The evaluation shall include consideration of effectiveness in imparting knowledge and skills, and effectiveness in stimulating students' critical thinking and/or creative abilities, the development or revision of curriculum and course structure, and adherence to accepted standards of professional behavior in meeting responsibilities to students. The evaluator may take into account class notes, syllabi, student exams and assignments, and any other materials relevant to the employee's teaching assignment. The teaching evaluation must take into account any relevant materials submitted by the employee, including the results of peer evaluations of teaching, and may not be based solely on student evaluations when this additional information has been made available to the evaluator. b. Contribution to the discovery of new knowledge, development of new educational techniques, and other forms of creative activity. Evidence of research and other creative activity shall include, but not be limited to, published books; articles and papers in professional journals; musical compositions, paintings, sculpture; works of performing art; papers presented at meetings of professional societies; funded grant activities; and research and creative accomplishments that have not yet resulted in publication, display, or performance. The evaluation shall include consideration of the employee's productivity, including the quality and quantity of the employee's research and other creative programs and contributions during the year, as well as recognition by the academic or professional community of what has been done. c. Public service that extends professional or discipline-related contributions to the community, the State, public schools, and/or the national and international community. This public service includes contributions to scholarly and professional organizations, governmental boards, agencies, and commissions that are beneficial to such groups and individuals. d. Participation in the governance processes of the University through significant service on committees, councils, and senates, beyond that associated with the expected responsibility to participate in the governance of the University through participation in regular departmental or college meetings. e. Other assigned University duties, such as attending University events, advising, counseling, and academic administration, or as described in a Position Description, if any, of the position held by the employee. Other assigned duties may include entrepreneurial activities that contribute to the further development of the University with an end result of creating a new venture. Evidence of entrepreneurial contributions shall include, but not be limited to, creation of self- supporting centers or institutes, development of multi- disciplinary research partnerships, and applications of research to implementations in society. To provide guidelines for the establishment, maintenance and use of employee evaluation files within the employee’s respective academic unit.

  • FLORIDA CONVICTED/SUSPENDED/DISCRIMINATORY COMPLAINTS By submission of an offer, the respondent affirms that it is not currently listed in the Florida Department of Management Services Convicted/Suspended/Discriminatory Complaint Vendor List.

  • Mileage Measurement Where required, the mileage measurement for LIS rate elements is determined in the same manner as the mileage measurement for V&H methodology as outlined in NECA Tariff No. 4.

  • Sector Sub-Sector Industry Classification Level of Government Type of Obligation Description of Measure Source of Measure All sectors : : - : Central : National Treatment Senior Management and Board of Directors : National Treatment and the Senior Management and Board of Directors obligations shall not apply to any measure relating to small and medium sized domestic market enterprise2. Foreign equity is restricted to a maximum of 40% for domestic market enterprises with paid-in equity capital of less than the equivalent of USD 200,000 Note: Members of the Board of Directors or governing body of corporation or associations shall be allowed in proportion to their allowable participation or share in the capital of such enterprises. : -1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. - Foreign Investments Act of 1991 (R.A. No. 7042, as amended by R.A. No. 8179). -Presidential and Administrative Issuances. ∞ 2 The concept of a small and medium sized domestic market enterprise is an enterprise with paid in equity capital of less than the equivalent of USD 200,000.00.

  • Claims Review Population A description of the Population subject to the Claims Review.

  • Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility For the purposes of this Agreement, the accessibility of online content and functionality will be measured according to the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the Web Accessibility Initiative Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 for web content, which are incorporated by reference.

  • Particular Methods of Procurement of Consultants’ Services 1. Quality- and Cost-based Selection. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph 2 below, consultants’ services shall be procured under contracts awarded on the basis of Quality and Cost-based Selection.

  • SPECIALIZED SERVICE REQUIREMENTS In the event that the Participating Entity requires service or specialized performance requirements not addressed in this Contract (such as e- commerce specifications, specialized delivery requirements, or other specifications and requirements), the Participating Entity and the Supplier may enter into a separate, standalone agreement, apart from this Contract. Sourcewell, including its agents and employees, will not be made a party to a claim for breach of such agreement.

  • Corrective Measures If the Participating Generator fails to meet or maintain the requirements set forth in this Agreement and/or the CAISO Tariff, the CAISO shall be permitted to take any of the measures, contained or referenced in the CAISO Tariff, which the CAISO deems to be necessary to correct the situation.

  • Classification Review Grand Valley State University and APSS shall jointly determine the review assessment survey instrument to be used at Grand Valley State University. The parties shall maintain a Joint Review Committee, composed of three members appointed by the Human Resources Office and three members appointed by the Alliance. Bargaining unit members questioning the assigned classification of their position may do so by using the following procedure: A. Meet with the Employment Manager in the Human Resources Office to discuss the review process, changes in their job responsibilities, duties and any other process questions they may have. B. PSS member will fill out the assessment survey and email to the Employment Manager along with any other documentation that supports the request. The survey instrument will be jointly administered/reviewed by the Assessment Team (consisting of the Employment Manager and an Alliance member of the Joint Review Committee). A meeting with the PSS is scheduled for a verbal review of the documentation and to answer any questions the Assessment Team may have. The supervisor or appointing officer is encouraged to attend. If the Assessment Team believes a job site visit is warranted as a result of the survey information, they will schedule a time for a joint visit. C. The completed survey instrument shall be coded. The survey results, as determined by the Assessment Team, shall be shared with the survey participant. D. After receiving the survey results, the survey participant, if they so choose shall have the opportunity to meet with the Joint Review Committee for additional input and appeal. Any additional information shall be reviewed by the Committee, and where the Committee feels it is necessary, the survey will be recoded, in a manner mutually agreeable. E. The Joint Review Committee shall then deliberate as to the merit of the upgrade requested by the participant. If the Committee is not able to reach a consensus, the University will decide on the classification. The Alliance may appeal that decision through the arbitration procedure of the collective bargaining agreement. Professional Support Staff members may engage in the review process no more than once per year. Supervisors questioning the assigned classification of a staff member’s position shall provide supporting rationale, complete an assessment survey instrument and discuss with Manager of Employment. The Manager of Employment shall notify an Alliance Representative that a Supervisor is reviewing a staff member’s classification. The review and outcome shall be completed within 45 working days unless the Alliance Representative and Manager of Employment mutually agreed to an extension. The Alliance will be provided with the scored instrument and any supporting rationale.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!