Tenured Faculty Evaluation Sample Clauses

Tenured Faculty Evaluation. The tenured faculty evaluation process is designed to improve the teaching/ learning process and delivery of student services, to provide a basis for professional growth and development, and to comply with California State Community College laws and regulations.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (11)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Tenured Faculty Evaluation. The evaluation process will be conducted with all professors who are tenured or in a non-tenure track. After a professor is no longer in a probationary status, they will move into the professor evaluation cycle starting with the first year subsequent to being awarded tenure. If a professor is not in a tenure track, the evaluation cycle will begin with the first year of full-time employment. Full-time Tenured Professors who choose to teach additional courses as an overload assignment will have the assignment included as part of the tenure appraisal process. Evaluations are based on multiple indices and include administrative, student, peer, and self-evaluations. In keeping with the mission of the College, the goal of the evaluation process is to improve the abilities and skills of professors through immediate feedback, support and recommendation. To achieve this goal the evaluation process will do the following: maintain a positive learning environment for students; insure professors remain competent/knowledgeable in their fields; retain faculty through intervention, assistance and guidance; acknowledge effective forms of instructional delivery; and provide immediate feedback to professors.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
Tenured Faculty Evaluation. Tenured Faculty Evaluation The Post-Tenure Reflection Process provides a faculty-driven, institutionally- supported, critical reflection framework for faculty to assess their teaching and understand their impact on student learning. By engaging in the process of reflection, faculty increase their self-awareness, learn from the past to inform the future, and set professional growth and development goals related to teaching excellence and student success. The College shall not use the Post-Tenure Reflection Process to discipline a faculty member. Faculty members will not be evaluated on the results of course and/or program and/or college learning outcomes assessment.
Sample 1Sample 2
Tenured Faculty Evaluation. 1. At the end of each consecutive five years following a tenure appointment, a Tenure Review Committee (whose membership is described in Xxxxxxx X,X,0,x) shall be appointed as appropriate for each tenured faculty member.
Sample 1
Tenured Faculty Evaluation. The tenured faculty evaluation process is designed to improve the teaching and learning process and delivery of student services, to provide a basis for professional growth and development, and to comply with California State Community College laws and regulations. Tenured faculty who are assigned teaching hours in addition to their roles as 2772 2773 2774 2775 2776 2777 2778 2779 2780 2781 2782 2783 2784 2785 2786 2787 2788 2789 2790 2791 2792 2793 2794 2795 2796 2797 2798 2799 2800 2801 2802 2803 2804 2805 2806 2807 2808 2809 2810 2811 2812 2813 2814 2815 2816 counselors, librarians, and learning disability specialists shall be evaluated in both their teaching and student service roles.
Sample 1

Related to Tenured Faculty Evaluation

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Re-evaluation a) When a job has moved to a higher group as a result of re-evaluation, the resulting rate shall be retroactive from the date that Management or the employee has applied to the Plant Job Review Committee for re-evaluation.

  • 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.

  • 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. No response 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. Yes - No 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?

  • Using Student feedback in Educator Evaluation ESE will provide model contract language, direction and guidance on using student feedback in Educator Evaluation by June 30, 2013. Upon receiving this model contract language, direction and guidance, the parties agree to bargain with respect to this matter.

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