Common use of Teaching Evaluations Clause in Contracts

Teaching Evaluations. (a) Recognizing that the establishment of a high-quality classroom learning environment is beneficial to both parties to this Agreement, student teaching evaluations shall be conducted in all classes having enrolments of five (5) or more students. (b) The instrument used, and the information required shall be determined by the Employer. (c) In accordance with Article 8.3, any change to teaching evaluation instruments or teaching evaluation processes or both contemplated by Carleton University which may impact CUPE 4600 (Unit 2) employees will be brought to the JCAA for meaningful consultation with the Union prior to being implemented. (a) The teaching evaluation score in any course shall be determined by the Instructor score reported in column B on the Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Report produced by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (OIRP), or the Instructor score reported in the Average column on the Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Report, whichever is higher. The response rate in any course shall be determined by dividing the number reported in the “number of respondents” (# Resp) column by the number reported in the “enrolment” (Enrl.) column on the Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Report produced by the OIRP. Where the response rate in any course falls below fifteen percent (15%), the teaching evaluation score for that course shall be deemed anomalous and no further action will be required. (b) Any assessment of teaching performance will be based on the employee’s performance in a specific course. (c) When assessing the teaching performance of individual employees, the Academic department head may consider the following factors of each individual course: course outline, student assessment strategies, student teaching evaluation scores, adherence to applicable deadlines and University regulation, responsiveness to student inquiries, and other relevant factors. (i) When the Academic department head determines that there is a need to discuss the teaching performance of an employee in a particular course, the Academic department head will convene a meeting with that employee. At this meeting, the Academic Department head and the employee will discuss the latter’s teaching performance and strategies to address any issues identified. (ii) If within a period of four (4) years, the Academic department head determines that there is again a need to discuss the teaching performance of a given employee, the Academic department head will convene a meeting with that employee. The Academic department head will advise the employee of their right to Union representation at this meeting. This meeting will give the employee an opportunity to provide additional information they deem relevant to their teaching performance. After this meeting, the Academic department head shall notify the employee whether or not an action plan is warranted. When an action plan is warranted and such a plan has not been developed for that employee within the past four (4) years, an action plan shall be developed by the Academic department head in consultation with the employee. The Academic department head may require that support be put in place to assist the employee. Such support may include advice and assistance from the Educational Development Centre at no cost to the employee. The Academic department head may also require that a peer evaluation be undertaken as part of the action plan. If a member of the CUPE 4600 (Unit 2) bargaining unit is requested to undertake this peer evaluation, and agrees to do so, an honorarium of two hundred fifty dollars ($250) will be paid to that person. The action plan must be in writing and signed by the Academic department head who shall ask the employee to sign the action plan as well. A copy of the signed action plan will be sent to CUPE 4600 within two (2) working days. This may be done electronically if appropriate. It is the responsibility of the employee to provide evidence to the Academic department head that they have satisfactorily completed the action plan. All instances in which an employee fails to fulfill an action plan will be referred to the Xxxx and addressed in accordance with the application provisions of the Collective Agreement. (iii) If within a period of four (4) years of an action plan having been developed, an Academic department head decides that an action plan is again warranted in the same course for the same employee, the matter will be referred directly to the Xxxx. 18.3 The data from all courses shall be compiled to determine department, Faculty, Contract Instructor and University norms as required. 18.4 Each term (Fall, Winter, Summer), OIRP will request that employees who are teaching courses that include an in-class portion identify their evaluation format preference (either paper copies distributed in class or electronic). If an employee does not respond, an online evaluation will be undertaken.

Teaching Evaluations. (a) Recognizing that the establishment of a high-quality classroom learning environment is beneficial to both parties to this Agreement, student teaching evaluations shall be conducted in all classes having enrolments of five (5) or more students. (b) The instrument used, and the information required shall be determined by the Employer. (c) In accordance with Article 8.3required, any change to teaching evaluation instruments or teaching evaluation processes or both contemplated by Carleton University which may impact CUPE 4600 (Unit 2) employees will be brought to the JCAA same as for meaningful consultation with the Union prior to being implementedfull- time academic staff. (a) The teaching evaluation score in any course shall be determined by the Instructor score reported in column B on the Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Report produced by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (OIRP), or the Instructor score reported in the Average column on the Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Report, whichever is higher. The response rate in any course shall be determined by dividing the number reported in the “number of respondents” (# Resp) column by the number reported in the “enrolment” (Enrl.) column on the Retrospective Teaching Evaluation Report produced by the OIRP. Where the response rate in any course falls below fifteen percent (15%), the teaching evaluation score for that course shall be deemed anomalous and no further action will be required. (b) Any assessment of teaching performance will be based on the employee’s performance in a specific course. (c) When assessing anomalous. Where the teaching performance evaluation score in any course falls below 4.0, or below the department average as calculated by the Office of individual employeesInstitutional Research and Planning (OIRP), whichever is lower, the Academic department head may consider shall discuss the following factors of each individual course: course outlinecircumstances with the employee, student assessment strategies, student teaching in order to determine whether the evaluation scores, adherence to applicable deadlines and University regulation, responsiveness to student inquiries, and other relevant factors. (i) When was anomalous or whether an action plan is required. Where the Academic department head determines that there is a need to discuss the teaching performance of an employee in a particular course, the Academic department head will convene a meeting with that employee. At this meeting, the Academic Department head and the employee will discuss the latter’s teaching performance and strategies to address any issues identified. (ii) If within a period of four (4) years, the Academic department head determines that there is again a need to discuss the teaching performance of a given employee, the Academic department head will convene a meeting with that employee. The Academic department head will advise the employee of their right to Union representation at this meeting. This meeting will give the employee an opportunity to provide additional information they deem relevant to their teaching performance. After this meeting, the Academic department head shall notify the employee whether or not an action plan is warranted. When an action plan is warranted and required, such a plan has not been developed for that employee within the past four (4) years, an action plan shall be developed by the Academic department head developed, in consultation with the employee. The , and the Academic department departmental head may require that support be put in place to assist the employee. Such support employee that may include include, among other things, advice and assistance from the Educational Development Centre at no cost to the employeeor from peers. The Academic department head may also require that a supplemental peer evaluation be undertaken as part of the action plan. If a member of the CUPE 4600 (Unit 2) 2 bargaining unit is requested to undertake this peer evaluation, and agrees to do so, an honorarium of two hundred fifty dollars ($250) will be paid to that person. Where an employee receives a second teaching evaluation score below 4.0 or below the department average as calculated by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning (OIRP), whichever is lower, in a course for which an action plan has been developed for that employee not more than four years previously, the evaluation may be used as evidence of unsatisfactory teaching and the employee may be disqualified from that course at the discretion of the Xxxx in consultation with the Academic department head. (b) The action plan must be in writing and signed by the Academic department head who shall ask Chair or Director and the employee to sign the action plan as well. A copy of the signed action plan will be sent to CUPE 4600 within two (2) working daysemployee. This may be done electronically if appropriate. It is the responsibility of the employee to provide evidence to the Academic department head that they have satisfactorily completed the action plan. All instances in which an employee fails to fulfill an action plan will be referred to the Xxxx and addressed in accordance with the application provisions of the Collective Agreement. (iii) If within a period of four (4) years of an action plan having been developed, an Academic department head decides that an action plan is again warranted in the same course for the same employee, the matter will be referred directly to the Xxxx. 18.3 The data from all courses shall be compiled complied to determine department, Faculty, Contract Instructor faculty and University norms as required. 18.4 Each term (Fall, Winter, Summer), OIRP will request that employees who are teaching courses that include an in-class portion identify their evaluation format preference (either paper copies distributed in class or electronic). If an employee does not respond, an online evaluation will be undertaken.