Evaluation of Core Faculty. 8.4.1. Core Faculty are evaluated on: Engagement in Student Learning, Institutional Citizenship, Service to the Community, and Scholarship.
Evaluation of Core Faculty Sample Clauses
Related to Evaluation of Core Faculty
Evaluation of Students Acknowledging the District’s adopted grading system, the teacher shall maintain the right and responsibility to determine grades and other evaluation of a student. No grade or evaluation shall be changed except by the teacher with the approval of the building administrator.
Faculty Selection, Supervision, and Evaluation A. Faculty for a dual credit course will be approved and employed by Hill College. The instructor must meet credential requirements of Hill College and minimum requirements as specified by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). Each faculty member assigned to teach an academic course will have a master’s degree plus 18 hours in the specific discipline. Technical course instructors will have at least an associate degree and three years of work experience in the related business or industry. B. Instructors teaching dual credit courses must meet the same standards, review, and approval procedures as full- time, regular Hill College faculty. C. Faculty for a dual credit course who are not a full-time faculty member of Hill College report directly to the appropriate Xxxx of Instruction for the pathway in which the course(s) is being taught. The college shall supervise and evaluate part-time faculty teaching dual credit courses using the same or comparable procedures used for full-time faculty employed by college. D. The performance appraisal process for dual credit instructors will be conducted by the immediate supervisor and reviewed by the second line supervisor prior to the appraisal interview with the employee. The dual credit faculty evaluation process will mirror the evaluation process used at the college for all full-time faculty members and will be done according to the college policy manual. All dual credit faculty will be periodically evaluated using the following means: 1) random classroom observation by the immediate supervisor of that discipline, 2) student evaluations and 3) self-evaluation. E. All Dual Credit faculty instructors will be supervised by the following means: i. When dual credit classes are visited during a classroom observation, supervisors will ask to see items such as the textbook, observe instruction and interaction with students, and request a class syllabus and a sample of class tests, quizzes, labs, and/or projects. ii. Dual Credit instructors are given a self-evaluation form and are asked to fill it out and return the form to their Hill College supervisor. iii. All dual credit instructors are given a master syllabus for the course. The master syllabus provides grading policy and student learning outcomes. iv. All dual credit instructors are required to participate in the assessment process. v. All dual credit instructors are required to certify rosters. vi. All dual credit instructors are required to submit final grades. F. Faculty teaching courses, which result in the award of college credit, will be regularly employed faculty members of Hill College. All faculty selected by Hill College to teach dual credit classes will be considered employees of Hill College and will be compensated by the college in accordance with Hill College policy, procedures, and guidelines. G. Applications for employment and official transcripts from each college or university attended MUST be submitted and approved prior to the start of classes. All paperwork will be kept on file at Hill College.
EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF BIDS 29.1 The Employer will evaluate and compare only the Bids determined to be substantially responsive in accordance with Clause 26. 29.2 In evaluating the Bids, the Employer will determine for each Bid the evaluated Bid Price by adjusting the Bid Price as follows: (a) Making any correction for errors pursuant to Clause 27; or (b) Making an appropriate adjustments for any other acceptable variations, deviations; and (c) Making appropriate adjustments to reflect discounts or other price modifications offered in accordance with Sub Clause 22.5. 29.3 The Employer reserves the right to accept or reject any variation, deviation, or alternative offer. Variations, deviations, and alternative offers and other factors which are in excess of the requirements of the Bidding documents or otherwise result in unsolicited benefits for the Employer shall not be taken into account in Bid evaluation. 29.4 The estimated effect of the price adjustment conditions under Clause 47 of the Conditions of Contract, during the period of implementation of the Contract, will not be taken into account in Bid evaluation. 29.5 If the Bid of the successful Bidder is seriously unbalanced in relation to the Engineer’s estimate of the cost of work to be performed under the contract, the Employer may require the Bidder to produce detailed price analyses for any or all items of the Bill of Quantities, to demonstrate the internal consistency of those prices with the construction methods and schedule proposed. After evaluation of the price analyses, the Employer may require that the amount of the performance security set forth in Clause 34 be increased at the expense of the successful Bidder to a level sufficient to protect the Employer against financial loss in the event of default of the successful Bidder under the Contract. 30. (Deleted)
Evaluation of Tenders 33.1 The Procuring Entity shall use the criteria and methodologies listed in this ITT and Section III, Evaluation and Qualification criteria. No other evaluation criteria or methodologies shall be permitted. By applying the criteria and methodologies, the Procuring Entity shall determine the Lowest Evaluated Tender. This is the Tender of the Tenderer that meets the qualification criteria and whose Tender has been determined to be: a) substantially responsive to the tender documents; and b) the lowest evaluated price. 33.2 Price evaluation will be done for Items or Lots (contracts), as specified in the TDS; and the Tender Price as quoted in accordance with ITT 14. To evaluate a Tender, the Procuring Entity shall consider the following: a) price adjustment due to unconditional discounts offered in accordance with ITT 13.4; b) converting the amount resulting from applying (a) and (b) above, if relevant, to a single currency in accordance with ITT 31; c) price adjustment due to quantifiable nonmaterial non-conformities in accordance with ITT 29.3; and d) any additional evaluation factors specified in the TDS and Section III, Evaluation and Qualification Criteria. 33.3 The estimated effect of the price adjustment provisions of the Conditions of Contract, applied over the period of execution of the Contract, shall not be considered in Tender evaluation. 33.4 Where the tender involves multiple lots or contracts, the tenderer will be allowed to tender for one or more lots (contracts). Each lot or contract will be evaluated in accordance with ITT 33.
Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.
Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)
Technical Feasibility of String While ICANN has encouraged and will continue to encourage universal acceptance of all top-‐level domain strings across the Internet, certain top-‐level domain strings may encounter difficulty in acceptance by ISPs and webhosters and/or validation by web applications. Registry Operator shall be responsible for ensuring to its satisfaction the technical feasibility of the TLD string prior to entering into this Agreement.
Presentation of Potential Target Businesses The Company shall cause each of the Initial Shareholders to agree that, in order to minimize potential conflicts of interest which may arise from multiple affiliations, the Initial Shareholders will present to the Company for its consideration, prior to presentation to any other person or company, any suitable opportunity to acquire an operating business, until the earlier of the consummation by the Company of a Business Combination or the liquidation of the Company, subject to any pre-existing fiduciary obligations the Initial Shareholders might have.
DEVELOPMENT OR ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS/ STATEMENTS OF WORK
Evaluation 1. The purposes of evaluation provisions include providing employees with feedback, and employers and employees with the opportunity and responsibility to address concerns. Where a grievance proceeds to arbitration, the arbitrator must consider these purposes, and may relieve on just and reasonable terms against breaches of time limits or other procedural requirements.
