Department of Health Studies

Departmental Application of Criteria

September 1, 2006- August 30, 2010

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMITTEE:

The Department of   Health Studies has opted to form a unit for evaluating its faculty members. This unit is formally known as the Health Studies Personnel Committee (HSPC).

MEMBERSHIP IN THE HSPC:

All full-time members of bargaining units A and B are members in the HSPC. This composition will remain in effect for the duration of the current UPI Agreement.

ESTABLISHMENT OF EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The establishment of evaluation criteria is the responsibility of the faculty in collaboration with the department Chair. Faculty members of the program will be evaluated by the HSPC based on the criteria established for the Department of Health Studies. Materials used in the process of evaluation shall include: the evaluation portfolio, materials referred to in the employee’s supporting materials, and materials in the employee’s personnel file except confidential materials submitted in connection with the employee’s initial appointment. All parties who are required to review the candidate’s portfolio may seek clarification or additional materials from the candidate.

Tenured senior faculty members (Associate professors) seeking promotion to full professorship are to be evaluated by members of HSPC of higher ranking.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIR OF THE HSPC.

The chair of the HSPC will be elected by the members of the HSPC. The chair will schedule a meeting of the HSPC to evaluate members of bargaining unit A according to the schedule published by the university.  The chair will designate a member of the HSPC to submit a written report of the HSPC’s recommendations for each candidate who is evaluated. The HSPC will submit a copy of this recommendation to the department chair and a copy to the candidate within the time limits established by the university.

RESPONSIBLITIES OF THE FACULTY MEMBER BEING EVALUATED:

The faculty member being evaluated must provide a portfolio of materials, which must include the following:

• A current, signed and dated curriculum vitae.

• Evidence of academic and current professional credentials.

• Documentation of original materials representative of the following categories: Teaching/Primary Duties, Research/Creative Activity and Service.

The materials and activities listed in these categories are only illustrative of the types of materials and activities, which may be included. The lists are not intended to be all-inclusive.

I. CATEGORIES OF MATERIALS AND ACTIVITIES CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE BY PERFORMANCE AREA

2. TEACHING/ PERFORMANCE OF PRIMARY DUTIES –

Applies to both Unit A and Unit B

A. CATEGORIES OF MATERIALS AND ACTIVITIES TO BE SUBMITTED:

1. Evaluations of Teaching Performance

i. Chairperson’s report of class visitation (one per academic year)

The candidate will invite the program director to visit one class (lecture and/ or laboratory) per academic year, the class to be mutually agreed upon. The program chair will complete the appropriate course visitation form and submit a copy to the candidate. The program chair has the option to request subsequent visits of any course at a time mutually agreed upon. All completed course visitation forms completed by the chair will be included in the portfolio.

ii. Peer reports of class visitations (One per semester)

Candidates are expected to invite one full time faculty member from the College of Health Sciences to observe a class at least once each semester. The candidate may choose peer reviewers. The candidate may not be reviewed by the same peer for two consecutive semesters. A member of   Health Studies  faculty must complete at least one review within each academic year. The peer evaluators shall complete a written evaluation of the class visitations on the appropriate form. The evaluation shall be submitted to the chairperson of the department with a copy to the candidate.

iii. Summary of student evaluations (one per semester)

Candidates are expected to submit a summary of student course evaluations and comments for at least one course in each semester in which a course is taught. Faculty who teach a course shall insure that at least one-half of his or her students have the opportunity to evaluate his or her teaching effectiveness. In the case of first year retention, candidates are expected to provide only one evaluation.

Student evaluation forms will be distributed, collected, and returned to the department office by a designated person other than the candidate. The candidate may opt to submit additional evaluations. Only summaries and student comments (not computer printouts) should be included in the candidate's portfolio. Summaries shall be reviewed and signed by the department chair.

2. Teaching Materials:

i. Syllabi (required from all courses taught)

Candidates are expected to provide a course syllabus for each course taught during the evaluation period.

ii. Original supplemental materials, and examinations

(samples are required from all courses taught)

Evidence should include original materials for courses taught during the evaluation period. Materials that are the outcome of team collaboration should be clearly designated as such.

iii. Evidence of course revisions and or development.

(If completed during the period of review)

Content of syllabi or other course materials that the faculty member  revised or developed during the evaluation period should be clearly indicated.

iv.Teaching Awards(If awarded during the course of review)

3. Faculty Development Plan

The candidate’s faculty development plan must include goals to improve teaching effectiveness and/or currency that reflect an analysis of evaluation results  that support the strategic plan of the department.

4. Evidence of Faculty Development

Candidates are expected to provide documentation of activities related to enhancement of knowledge and skills pertaining to effective teaching performance and maintenance of currency in areas of practice related to assigned duties. This evidence must include, but is not limited to evidence of progress on goals described in the faculty development plan related to teaching, participation in lectures, workshops, institutes and seminars, or enrollment in courses related to teaching duties. The candidate’s narrative for teaching should include a description of progress toward goals on previous faculty development plans.

5. Performance of Other Assigned Primary Duties,

Other primary duties may include: professional and/or pre-professional student advisement, departmental program assessment, fieldwork supervision, fieldwork site development and other assigned duties.

2. METHODS OF EVALUATION FOR TEACHING AND OTHER PRIMARY DUTIES

Relative Importance

Evaluations of Teaching Performance, Teaching Materials, and Faculty Development (Plan and evidence of development) will be considered to be of equal weight. Other assigned primary duties will be considered important in proportion to the quantity of these duties that are assigned (except in emergency situations such as program accreditation). Point values of student, faculty and peer evaluations will be considered as guidelines. Extenuating circumstances and specific plans for improvement may be considered if scores in one of the evaluation areas is below these guidelines.

Evaluation of Teaching and Other Primary Duties

The HSPC will evaluate the effectiveness of the candidate’s performance using the following standards:

Satisfactory

(Necessary for retention in years one and two and lectures)

Student evaluations For “Instruction Items” should have an average score of  ≥ 2.1

Peer Evaluation should have an average score between ≥ 2.25.

Chair Evaluation should have an average score between ≥ 2.25.

(Student, Peer and Chair evaluations are scored on a 4-point scale with 1 being high and 4 being low)

No ratings for “Verbal Communication Skills” from Peer or Chair that is below “satisfactory.”

Submitted materials demonstrate:

• Knowledge of the field of health studies, and in areas of practice, specialization and expertise.
• How new and current knowledge has been incorporated into teaching.
• An ability to organize, analyze and present knowledge or material in a logical or developmental sequence.

Faculty development experiences should support-teaching assignments and professional development.

Satisfactory performance  of primary duties other than teaching.

Effective-

(Necessary for retention in year three.)

Student Evaluations should have an average score between 2.2 and 2.5

Peer Evaluation should have an average score between 2.3 and 3.0

Chair Evaluation should have an average score between 2.3 and 3.0

(Student, Peer and Chair evaluations are scored on a 4-point scale with 4 being high and 1 being low)

No ratings for “Verbal Communication Skills” from Peer or Chair that  are below “satisfactory.”

Submitted materials demonstrate:

• Knowledge of the field of Health Studies and areas of practice, specialization and expertise.
• An ability to organize, analyze and present knowledge or material through a variety of teaching methods.
• The ability to develop creative and interactive learning activities.
• How new and current knowledge has been incorporated into teaching.

Faculty Development experiences should support-teaching assignments and professional development and the candidate should submit evidence on the progress toward Faculty Development Plan goals.

Satisfactory performance  of primary duties other than teaching.

Highly Effective-

(Necessary for retention in year four, and for extended contract for lecturers)

Student Evaluations should have an average score between 2.6 and 2.9.

Peer Evaluation should have an average score between 3.1 and 3.45.

Chair Evaluation should have an average score between 3.1 and 3.45.

(Student, Peer and Chair evaluations are scored on a 4-point scale with 4 being high and 1 being low)

No ratings for “Verbal Communication Skills” from Peer or Chair that are below “Satisfactory.”

Submitted materials demonstrate:

• Knowledge of the field of Health Studies and areas of practice, specialization and expertise
• An ability to organize, analyze and present knowledge or material through a variety of teaching methods.
• Revision of course model or series of classes within a course in response to curriculum evaluation.
• The ability to develop creative and interactive learning activities.
• How new and current knowledge has been incorporated into teaching.

Faculty Development experiences should support-teaching assignments and professional development. Submitted evidence of progress toward Faculty Development  Plans goals.  Consistent and timely performance of primary duties other than teaching.

Significant-

(Necessary for retention in year 5)

Has demonstrated an ability to maintain consistently high levels of performance as evidenced by:

• Student Evaluations should have an average score between 3.0 and 3.24.
• Peer evaluations should have an average score between 3.5 and 3.74.
• Chair evaluation should have an average score between 3.5 – 3.74
• Submitted materials demonstrate breadth and dept of knowledge, specialization, expertise and ongoing faculty development.
• Has demonstrated an ability to create and develop curriculum and/or demonstrate exemplary teaching skills as evidenced by activities such as:
• Development of a new course.
• Development of fieldwork assignments/activities.
• Development of an interdisciplinary/collaborative assignment.
• A Teaching Award at the University, College, State, or National Level.
• Introduction of innovative teaching activities (i.e., service learning projects, assistive technology projects).

Faculty Development experiences should support-teaching assignments and professional development.

Submitted evidence of progress toward Faculty Development Plan goals.

Consistent and timely performance of primary duties other than teaching.

Superior-

(Necessary for tenure)

Has demonstrated an ability to maintain consistently high levels of performances as evidenced by:

• Student evaluations should have an average score > 3.24.
• Peer evaluations should have an average score > 3.75.
• Chair evaluations should have an average score > 3.75.
• Submitted materials demonstrate breadth and dept of knowledge, specialization, expertise and ongoing faculty development.
• Has demonstrated an ability to create and develop curriculum and/or demonstrate exemplary teaching skills as evidenced by activities such as:
• Revision of multiple course sections that relate to one topic which threads through the curriculum (work issues, psychosocial issues, etc.).
• Development of a new course
• A major course revision
• Course design for new fieldwork site.
• Development of an interdisciplinary/ collaborative course.
• A Teaching Award at the University, College, State or National Level.
• Development of education training materials and/or experiences for clinical educators

Faculty Development experiences should support-teaching assignments and professional development.

Submitted evidence of progress toward Faculty Development Plan goals.

Consistent and timely performance of primary duties other than teaching.

RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY- Applies to Unit A only

1. CATEGORIES OF MATERIALS AND ACTIVITIES:

a. Category I

                  i. Publications

• Published book reviews, critical essays, compositions, reviews of literature, including journals, books.
• Served as editor or co-editor for a collected volume.
• Development  of peer reviewed questions for national certification examination.

ii. Presentations

• Papers presented to professional groups, lectures, technical sessions or in-services.
• Presentation at a professional non-peer reviewed conference by request of an agent. outside the university based on the candidate’s expertise.
• Translations of professional literature.

iii. Research and Grants

• Research in progress (documentation required)
• Research and/or scholarly projects as part of fellowships, internships, or clinical practice.
• Poster session at a conference or symposium that requires peer review.

iv. Others

• Citation in published work.
• Membership on a dissertation/master thesis committee outside the department and/or outside the university.
• Obtaining copyrights/patents.
• National or regional committees to research and develop policies, procedures or practice guidelines for the profession or that influence the profession (e.g. American Public Health Association (APHA), National Environmental Health Association (NEHA) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Illinois Department of Health etc.
• Planning professional conferences/workshops of 4 hours or more duration with role as chair/co-chair.
• Completed research for the benefit of the university, college or department.
• Other forms of recognition for scholarly contribution such as editorial board, peer review committees, moderating/hosting national, regional, international conferences in area of research.
• Copyrighted distance learning materials computer programs, movies or videotapes.
• Bibliography of directed, self-guided study including a narrative describing outcomes.
• Publication of articles that do not require peer review. This may include newspapers, magazines or non-peer reviewed professional publications.

b. Category II

i. Publications

• Authored or co-authored book.
• Authored or co-authored books.
• Authored or co-authored book or articles that were accepted by  peer reviewed journal.

ii. Presentations

• Presentation or workshop at national conferences or symposia. 
• Academic presentation to a professional group for which the candidate has been invited based on expertise. This can include keynote presentations at state or national conferences, presentations within established academic lecture series or presentations associated with awards of professional merit.

iii. Grant Funding

• Research grants or study proposals and contracts written and submitted for which the candidate served as principal investigator or collaborator.
• Research grant or study proposals and contracts awarded for which the candidate served as principal investigator or co-investigator or collaborator.

2. METHODS OF EVALUATION FOR RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITIES

Research may be substantiated through materials such as (but not limited to): copies of publications, conference programs, program announcements, title page and table of contents of book, course grades, class schedules and/or letter of acceptance to a doctoral program.

Relative Importance:

Category I is judged to be more rigorous than Category I. Materials are also judged in importance based on their relevance to Health Studies.   

The HSPC will evaluate the effectiveness of the candidate’s performance using the following standards:

Appropriate: (Necessary for retention in year one):

Good teaching, peer and administrative evaluations, with one or more items from either category I or II)

Satisfactory:  (Necessary for retention in year two)

Good teaching, peer and administrative evaluations, with two or more items from Categories I or I I.

Significant: (Necessary for retention in years three, four and five, promotion to associate professor and tenure).

Good teaching, peer and administrative evaluations with three or more items from Categories II and I.  For this category, there has to be at least, four publications within the fourth and fifth year.  Also, there should be some recorded accomplishments in category II for tenure and promotion to the rank of an associate professor.

Superior:  (Necessary for promotion to professor)

Good teaching, peer and administrative evaluations.

Four or more publications from the time  of  attaining associate professorship, including some recorded achievements in other areas of Categories I and II.

C. SERVICE – Applies to Unit A Only

1. Categories of Materials and Activities:

a. Service to the department

• Participation in standing and/or ad hoc committees i.e. curriculum, program evaluation, personnel, admissions committees.
• Advisor of student organization for professional level students.
• Program's representative to various organizations/ boards/ groups, such as a representative to a regional educational board.
• Participation in weekly faculty meetings; advisory board meetings, student-faculty meetings.
• Performance of other duties beyond the scope of the faculty member's specified teaching responsibilities that assist in the functioning of the department.

b. Service to the College

1) College standing and ad hoc and/or task forces.

2) College representative to various organizations/boards/groups such as a representative to a regional educational board.

3) Participation in College meetings, retreats and/or colloquia.

4) Participation and/or planning college workshops of seminars or other events.

5) Recognition by the college.

• Service to the University

1) University committees

2) Recognition by the University

3) Representation of the University to various organizations.

                  d. Service to Professional Organization

1) Board member for a local, state or national professional organization.

2) Member of national accreditation team or national committee.

3) Active service to a professional organization.

• Community service (professional and nonprofessional)

Relative importance

It is expected that individuals will document widely differing activities and emphases in their service contributions; the importance of such activities will be considered based on degree of participation, quality and length of service, effectiveness and leadership. Service will also be judged in terms of the relationship of the service to the employee’s assigned responsibilities, and to the University.

Evaluation of Service

The HSPC will evaluate the effectiveness of the candidate’s performance using the following standards:

Appropriate: (Necessary for retention in year one)

Service to department (at least 2 activities from 1 a. above) and one other category is represented.

Satisfactory: (Necessary for retention in year two and promotion to assistant professor)

Service to department (at least 3 activities from 1 a. above) and two other categories are represented.

Significant: (Necessary for retention in years three, four and five, and promotion to associate professor) Involvement in all categories (at least 3 activities from 1 a. above) with consideration given to duration and/or level of involvement.

Superior: (Necessary for promotion to professor)

Involvement in all categories (at least 3 activities from 1 a. above) holds leadership responsibilities with duration of involvement.

• RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF RESEARCH/ CREATIVE ACTIVITY AND SERVICE

Research/creative activity and service will be considered of equal importance. Teaching will be considered of primary importance.

ANNUAL EVALUATION OF TENURED FACULTY

The annual evaluation of tenured faculty members not being considered for promotion or professional advancement increases is a limited process to identify areas of strength and weakness and to improve performance and shall consist of the review of the following by department CHAIRPERSONS(Article 19.4):

•            The required student course evaluations;
•                any documents the faculty member submits to update his/her vita and to                                substantiate  performance in teaching/primary duties, research/creative activity        and service; and
•               Materials in the faculty members’ personnel files.

Faculty members provide chairpersons and program directors with the above mentioned supporting materials and other professionally related materials for evaluation.

Chairpersons and program directors prepare a written evaluation statement for each faculty member considered.

Copies of the written evaluation statement shall be forwarded to the dean for review. A copy is sent to the employees who attach a written response.

“After the review, the dean will forward her/his recommendation to the provost.” (Article 19.4.c.(2))