Developing a Culture of Evaluation and Support for Faculty Success

1. Developing a Culture of Evaluation and Support for Faculty Success Charlene Wolf-Hall: Assistant Dean College of Graduate and Interdisciplinary Studies Wendy Reed: Associate Dean of the College of Science and Mathematics

2. Agenda: Introduce policies 350 and 352 concerning annual faculty evaluation Describe issues involved with evaluation Activity: Making a good evaluation letter stronger Discuss hard conversations Activity: Practice a hard conversation Establish a culture of departmental mentoring Resources Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

3. Objectives: Participants will Understand and implement policies 350 and 352 in faculty evaluation. Recognize unconscious bias in the evaluation process. Implement new strategies to create a department culture that values mentoring. Create clear job descriptions and effective evaluations. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

4. Introduce Policies: 350 and 352 Be aware of Policy 350.1, which states: 350.1.5 “….The department chair or head of an academic unit will ensure that all faculty have job descriptions that are periodically reviewed and updated. Each job description will be signed by the Dean, the Chair or head of the academic unit, and the faculty member and filed in the faculty member's official personnel file. Each job description shall specify how a faculty member's assigned responsibilities will be allocated among teaching, research, and service which will determine the weight to be given to each area of responsibility for tenure, promotion, and continuing evaluations.” 350.1.6 ….“Evaluation criteria shall relate to a faculty member's duties and goals and be appropriately weighted in accordance with the terms of the faculty member's contract….” Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

5. Introduce Policies: 350 and 352 Become familiar with unit, college and NDSU Policy, especially policy 352 Promotion, Tenure, and Evaluation • 352.4 Periodic Review • 352.4.3 “All full-time faculty will be reviewed annually….” [includes tenured and non- tenured] • 352.4.5 “….Periodic reviews shall result in a written report to the faculty member being reviewed. The report shall state expectations and goals for the coming review period....” • 352.4.6 “….Annual reviews of tenured faculty shall include an evaluation of the faculty member's performance relative to the current position description. For Associate Professors, annual reviews must include specific recommendations to strengthen the case for promotion….” Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

6. Problem evaluations: Careful of these evaluations which are unsupported and not based upon criteria: I will not allow this person to breed.       Works well when under constant supervision and cornered like a rat. Got into the gene pool while the lifeguard wasn’t looking. A prime candidate for natural de-selection.       This person has delusions of adequacy If you give this person a penny for his thoughts, you will get change Since my last report this employee has reached rock bottom and has started to dig. This associate is not so much of a has been but more definitely a won’t be. Only opens mouth to change whatever foot was previously there. Got a full 6-pack but lacks the plastic thing to hold it together. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

7. Issues important to evaluation Begin with a strong letter of appointment Establish clear criteria for success (through PTE documents) Articulate a clear process for evaluation (through PTE documents, including processes for teaching and service evaluation, SROIs, as well as standards for research) Help all evaluators develop an understanding of implicit bias, what it is, how it works, and how to recognize and respond to it. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

8. Overview of unconscious bias Also called implicit bias and hidden bias Definition: Be aware of conscious and unconscious biases in evaluation and mentoring; we all have them (see Project Implicit). Avoid gendered language and its inherent bias when composing letters of evaluation (Trix and Psenka, 2003). Make sure similar criteria are used for all faculty, or for all faculty at particular ranks. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

9. Five common evaluation problems Overly positive evaluations. Overly critical evaluations. Uniformly neutral evaluations. Single event evaluations. Most recent event evaluations. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

10. Improving letters of evaluation Communicate the expectations. Observe and document performance all year. Give warnings and counseling when needed. Review all available documentation. Write your letter based upon performance criteria. Be specific. Stress the need to improve (and ways to improve). Give the employee his or her turn. Summarize the evaluation. Be candid, be constructive, be caring, and be clear. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

11. Making a good letter stronger: At your tables, please: What are the ways in which this letter is an effective annual evaluation?  What would you want a 4th year probationary faculty member to know about his or her performance? If you were the faculty member receiving this letter, what would you know about your chair’s evaluation of your performance? What would some effective revisions of this letter be? Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

12. Practicing a hard conversation: Often, we avoid face-to-face discussions if we think they will be difficult. Communicating face-to-face is assures your message is delivered and understood and is especially important if you are trying to change behavior and improve performance. Practicing a hard conversation: Describe some hard conversations you have had to have with with employees concerning performance evaluation. (Please don’t use names.) Each table choose one challenging conversation and describe on the handout. Pass to your left. At your table, read the scenario you were given and practice strategies that might help you communicate constructively. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

13. Developing a culture of mentoring: Describe NDSU mentoring-related resources—through FORWARD, peer review of teaching, Gear Up for Grants, Pedagogical luncheons. Discuss what a culture of mentoring looks like. Table discussion: ideas for no cost/low cost rewards excellent mentoring. What does your department already do to support a culture of mentoring? Share tip sheet. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

14. Cohort Mentoring Model Senior Faculty Community Connections Peers External Mentors Administrators Early-Career Faculty Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

15. The Program • Monthly meetings • Speaker/Trainers twice annually • Joey Sprague, professor of Sociology, University of Kansas. March 11, 2010. • Gender in the classroom, student biases and evaluation • Mary Deane Sorcinelli, associate provost of faculty development, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Early spring semester….. • Mentoring, career development Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

16. Common topics of interest to new faculty Getting started Research Teaching Service PTE process Work & Life: Avoiding Imbalance Maintain confidentiality Evaluate what you need from this network Your needs will grow and change over time Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

17. Share tip sheet Communicate opportunities for organized mentoring on campus. Facilitate and encourage mentoring climate. Recognize opportunity for reverse mentoring. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

18. Mentoring: table discussion Brainstorm a list of low-cost or no-cost rewards and/or recognitions for excellent mentoring. Share a list of things your department or college already does to develop and support a culture of mentoring. Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads

19. List of resources Policy checklist (for issues surrounding evaluation) Evaluation tip sheet Mentoring tip sheet Sample letters (Basic and improved) Good Practice in Tenure and Evaluation (30 page booklet from ACE and AAUP) Copy of PowerPoint from presentation Provost’s Meeting for Chairs and Heads