Selection of Peer Evaluators Sample Clauses

Selection of Peer Evaluators. Evaluation teams will include two (2) peer evaluators for Contract and Tenured faculty, and one (1) peer evaluator for Adjunct faculty, selected according to the processes detailed in the Faculty Peer Review Handbook.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Selection of Peer Evaluators. 1. For probationary faculty, two peer evaluators will be selected by mutual agreement of AHE and Vice President of Instruction. One evaluator shall be the chair; if there is no chair, a tenured, full-time faculty member of the instructional area may be assigned. The second evaluator shall be an instructor from any other area of the college. 2. If tenured or annual special funding faculty, two peer evaluators will be recommended by AHE and the Vice President of Instruction, and then mutually agreed to by the instructor. One evaluator shall be a full-time faculty member qualified to evaluate the discipline-related course content, and the second evaluator shall be a full-time instructor from any other area of the college.
Selection of Peer Evaluators. Peer evaluators will be selected by mutual agreement between the person to be 35 evaluated and the supervising administrator. Absent mutual agreement, the Academic Senate 36 Executive Board shall have final determination as to the selection of a peer evaluator.
Selection of Peer Evaluators. 44 45 5.6.1.1 Peer evaluators will be selected by mutual agreement between the person to be 46 evaluated and the supervising administrator. Absent mutual agreement, the Academic Senate 47 Executive Board shall have final determination as to the selection of a peer evaluator. 49 5.6.1.2 An evaluator must be a tenured full-time member of the Shasta College faculty from 50 the member’s Division, if available. 1 5.6.1.3 An evaluator may elect to do no more than two tenured faculty evaluations per year.

Related to Selection of Peer Evaluators

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • Purpose; Incorporation by Reference of Auction Procedures and Settlement Procedures (a) The Statement for each series of MuniPreferred will provide that the Applicable Rate for such series for each Subsequent Rate Period thereof shall, except under certain conditions, be the rate per annum that a bank or trust company appointed by the Fund advises results from implementation of the Auction Procedures for such series. The Board of Directors or Board of Trustees, as the case may be, of the Fund has adopted a resolution appointing the Auction Agent as auction agent for purposes of the Auction Procedures for each series of MuniPreferred. The Auction Agent accepts such appointment and agrees to follow the procedures set forth in this Section 2 and the Auction Procedures for the purpose of determining the Applicable Rate for each series of MuniPreferred for each Subsequent Rate Period thereof for which the Applicable Rate is to be determined by an Auction. Each periodic implementation of such procedures is hereinafter referred to as an "Auction." (b) All of the provisions contained in the Auction Procedures and the Settlement Procedures are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety and shall be deemed to be a part hereof to the same extent as if such provisions were fully set forth herein.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • Purpose of Evaluation 10.1.1 It is recognized that a system of evaluation is essential to assist Unit Members in developing competency and realizing their potential. It is further recognized that information gathered through such a system will enable decisions that measure a Unit Member’s performance in a just and equitable manner. 10.1.2 The evaluation procedure is a cooperative process designed to: a. Promote the achievement of goals and objectives of the County Office and its programs through the assessment and evaluation of the staff that perform within that program; b. Provide a formal method of recognizing staff achievement and growth; c. Identify abilities and specific indicators most critical to support job performance; d. Develop suggestions and direction regarding desired performance and improvement based on standards for like positions; e. Increase the employee’s understanding of performance from the supervisor’s viewpoint; and f. Provide a process of two-way communication to evaluate job performance.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. The administration will be evaluating the teacher’s performance within the time of formal responsibility. The evaluation process and form will be shared with the Association Building Representatives at the beginning of each school year. (a) Probationary teachers shall be evaluated at least two (2) times a year. The first evaluation will be completed prior to December 1st and the second prior to April 15th. Each evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations, on the performance of other duties and responsibilities and the goals developed in the Individualized Development Plan (IDP). The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at anytime prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the probationary teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. (b) Tenured teachers will be evaluated on a rotating schedule, but no less than once every three- (3) years. The administration reserves the right to evaluate a tenured teacher more often. The evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations and on the performance of other duties and responsibilities. The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at any time prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the tenured teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. 2. The administrator shall prepare and submit a written evaluation and recommendations to the teacher prior to May 30th of the year they are evaluated. The administrator shall hold a conference with the teacher to discuss the written evaluation and recommendations. 3. Upon receipt of the evaluation the teacher will sign the form indicating his/her receipt of the report. The signature on the form does not constitute his/her approval unless specifically noted. 4. Teachers involved with the instruction of Advanced Placement courses will be evaluated. This evaluation in the first year will be made part of the formal evaluation only at the request of the teacher. B. A teacher who disagrees with the content or procedure of evaluation may submit a written answer which shall be attached to the file copy of the evaluation in question and/or submit any complaints through Level 4 of the grievance procedure. C. If an administrator believes a teacher is doing unacceptable work, the reasons shall be set forth in specific terms. Included will be examples of specific ways in which the teacher is to improve and assistance may be given by the administrator and other staff members. In subsequent conferences it shall be the responsibility of the individual teacher to inquire whether adequate improvement has taken place. D. Monitoring and observation of the work performance of the teacher shall be conducted openly. The public address or audio system or similar types of communications will not be used for the purpose of evaluation. E. The Board and the Association recognize that the ability of pupils to progress and mature academically is a combined result of the school, home, economic and social environment and that teachers alone cannot be held accountable for all aspects of the academic achievement of the pupil in the classroom. Test results of academic progress of students shall not be used as the sole determinant or in isolated instances to evaluate the quality of a teacher's service or fitness for retention. F. All communications, including evaluations by Milan Administrators, commendations, and documented complaints directed toward the teacher which are to be included in the personnel file shall be made available for review of the teacher prior to placement in the file; a copy of any such communication will be provided to the teacher at this time. Pre-placement information such as confidential credentials, letters of reference from universities, individuals, or previous employers are exempt from such review. A written statement for inclusion in the personnel file may then be made by the teacher in regard to materials that were not signed by the teacher. A representative of the Association may accompany the teacher. G. Ordinarily, observations of teachers shall not be for less than a full class period or for the duration of a particular teaching lesson.

  • 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.

  • Performance Evaluations The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.

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