Evaluation Procedure. The procedural requirements set forth in this agreement which conform with and provide specificity to the statutory obligations established by Ohio Rev. Code § 3319.111 and § 3319.112.
Evaluation Procedure. There shall be only one (1) evaluation procedure leading to recommendations regarding promotion, tenure and renewal of full-time members as follows: in accordance with procedures developed by the Senate and approved by the President in an expeditious manner, evaluations of teaching members shall be conducted by the Department Evaluation Committee (DEC) of which the Department Chairperson may be a member, ex-officio, and by the University-wide Promotion and Tenure Committee. Department chairpersons who are not members of the DEC shall submit a separate evaluation which may either be submitted to the DEC for its deliberations or, if so determined by the Senate, submitted as a separate document added to the DEC’s evaluation forwarded to the appropriate Xxxx, with a copy issued simultaneously to the member. In no case, however, shall a department Chairperson being considered for promotion participate in the promotion evaluation process; being considered for tenure participate in the tenure evaluation process; or being considered for renewal participate in the renewal evaluation process. A copy of any DEC evaluation and recommendation with supporting reasons shall be given to the member upon issuance. Senate procedures developed pursuant to this article shall satisfy each of the minimum standards set forth in Article 4.11 and may not be inconsistent with this Agreement. Copies of such procedures shall be given to the CSU-AAUP, the administration and all full-time members. Annually the Chief Human Resources Officer shall provide computer generated reports to assist department evaluation committees in determination of member eligibility for renewal, promotion, tenure and related personnel actions.
Evaluation Procedure. 14.3.1 A permanent unit member who receives a needs improvement rating in one or more domains will be provided assistance with an improvement plan. The administrator and the unit member who recognize the need for improvement will establish goals and objectives toward developing the appropriate skills necessary to remediate the deficiency. The District will provide the unit member with staff development options, the opportunity to take advantage of PAR’s Consulting Teacher or Program Consultant programs, or any other appropriate assistance available to the District.
Evaluation Procedure. 1. Each department, division or other appropriate unit shall conduct annual evaluations of each unit member except: a) those unit members whose service will cease at the end of the current academic or fiscal year need not be evaluated; and b) any unit member having the rank of Professor with tenure and any unit member having the rank of Extension Educator with continuing contract shall be evaluated by the department, division or other appropriate unit every four (4) years, or more frequently upon written request of the unit member. Any unit member having the rank of Associate Professor with tenure, any unit member having the rank of Associate Extension Educator with continuing contract and any Lecturer or Instructor with over six (6) years of continuous service in the same department, division or other appropriate unit shall be evaluated by the department, division or other appropriate unit every four (4) years, or more frequently upon written request of the unit member. c) Evaluations shall be scheduled to insure that promotion, tenure, continuing contract status, and reappointment schedules and/or deadlines will be met. At the written request of an appropriate administrator, the peer committee shall determine whether to conduct peer evaluations on a more frequent basis than provided for above. Under normal circumstances, a faculty member will be evaluated only once during an academic year. In the event a second evaluation takes place within the same academic year, the faculty member may add items to their previous documentation.
Evaluation Procedure. During the evaluation period, each unit member shall annually receive at least one (1) observation and/or observation of employee work product by the unit member’s immediate supervisor for which the unit member receives written feedback. Evaluations shall be completed on an appropriate evaluation form agreed to by the District and the Association and signed by both the unit member and the unit member’s immediate supervisor. Signature by the unit member shall indicate receipt only, and not agreement with the content of the evaluation. The evaluation shall consider the unit member’s performance over the entire evaluation period and shall not contain any material that the unit member has not been made aware of by prior notification and/or through discussion with immediate supervisor. The unit member’s immediate supervisor shall schedule a conference with the unit member to discuss and review the evaluation. This conference shall take place in a private setting and be kept confidential. All evaluation conferences shall be completed by February 28 of each school year. Upon completion of the evaluation conference, the unit member shall receive a copy of the evaluation and the evaluation shall be delivered to the Human Resources Department for placement in the unit member’s personnel file. Unit members shall have the right to attach a written response to the evaluation, and the written response shall be placed in the unit member’s personnel files with the evaluation. Unit members may seek a written appeal of one or more content areas of the unit member’s evaluation with the Human Resources Department. The Human Resources Department, upon receipt of the written request for appeal, shall schedule a meeting, within ten (10) working days, between the unit member and the unit member’s immediate supervisor. During this meeting, the Human Resources Department shall listen to both parties and determine if there is reasonable justification to warrant the disputed content areas within the evaluation. Unit members that receive an unsatisfactory rating in one or more categories on an approved evaluation form, shall be given a written improvement plan that states, at a minimum, the area(s) where specific improvements are needed, suggestions for improvement, resources to be utilized to assist the unit member’s improvement and the means by which the improvement will be measured. The immediate supervisor of a unit member is the Management Supervisor that has had the unit member ...
Evaluation Procedure. A. Evaluations will be conducted in accordance with section 2.9 of the Resident Agreement
Evaluation Procedure. The evaluation procedure will be conducted per Xxxxxxxx School Board Policy, Idaho State Board Rule, and Idaho Code. Revisions in the evaluation process will be recommended to the Xxxxxxxx Board of Trustees by a teacher evaluation committee comprised of teachers and administrators. All certificated employees will have two documented observations with the first completed by January 1. In addition, certificated employees will be given one formative evaluation and one summative evaluation and the summative will be completed by June 1. Discipline Short of Dismissal The District and the Association recognize the value of remedial action as a means of correcting problems of performance and assisting the employee.
Evaluation Procedure. 1. Evaluations shall be reviewed with the employee. Both the evaluator and the employee will sign the evaluation form, whether or not the employee agrees with the evaluation.
Evaluation Procedure. These provisions constitute the procedures to be utilized for the performance evaluation and assessment of certificated employees as set forth in the California Education Code (E.C. 44660, et seq.). The intent of the evaluation process shall be to maintain and improve the quality of the instructional program.
Evaluation Procedure. 33.6.1 The District retains sole responsibility for the evaluation and assessment of performance of each Adult School unit member, subject only to the following procedural requirements: Should an Adult School unit member believe an evaluation to be derogatory, the unit member will be given an opportunity to comment thereon as provided for by law. Accordingly, no grievance arising under this Article shall challenge the substantive objectives, standards, or criteria determined by the District, nor shall the grievance contest the judgment of the evaluator; any grievance shall be limited to a claim that the following procedures have been violated.
