FORM D-2, DEANíS PERFORMANCE RATING Page 1 of 2
Faculty Member Academic Year
Purpose of this evaluation:
year of full-time,
continuous employment; e.g. 4th)
DEAN'S REVIEW AND PERFORMANCE RATING (see definitions on page 2):
(Written explanation required if dean does not concur with the evaluation conference summary or with recommendations of evaluation conference. Attach extra sheets as needed.)
Signature of Dean Date
(Send this form to the vice president.)
FORM D-2, DEANíS PERFORMANCE RATING Page 2 of 2
Faculty Member Academic Year
VICE PRESIDENT'S REVIEW:
not concur with
evaluation summary evaluation summary
Concur with dean's
Do not concur with
performance rating dean's performance rating
(Attach a written explanation if vice president does not concur.)
Signature of Vice President Date
The original and a copy of Form D-2 must be sent to the Central File. Copies must be sent to the ILS and Evaluatee within five working days of the vice president's review.
***DEFINITIONS OF PERFORMANCE RATINGS***
Outstanding - This rating allows for recognition of the faculty member whose performance, achievements, and contributions are outstanding in all respects (all MFRs). The instructor continuously performs all duties in an exceptional manner, consistently exceeds expectations with the highest quality and quantity of work, expands activities beyond limits normally expected of the position, and receives consistently strong recipients of service evaluations. This evaluation shall be limited to those faculty members achieving an outstanding performance level on matters of significance to the college.
Commendable - Faculty member consistently exceeds normal expected performance in the most critical MFRs and is effective or better in all other MFRs. Demonstrates excellence in primary job functions, above average recipients of service evaluations, publications and exhibits of various forms, workshop organization and implementation, state and national committee leadership. College, division, and department committee chairing may be considered.
Effective - This is the normal and expected level of performance for all faculty members. Faculty member completely and consistently meets job-related performance standards; has consistently good recipients of service evaluations; is motivated, efficient, and reliable. Consideration may be given to the development of new courses, programs, or projects, adherence to department standards, exam or workshop preparation, and collegewide committee participation. The instructor's performance may occasionally exceed requirements. A rating of effective is sufficient (but does not guarantee) promotion or tenure.
Needs Improvement - Performance improvement is required in one or more of the MFRs or in relation to motivation, efficiency, or any other job-related factor preventing achievement of a normal, reasonable, and expected level of performance. This is an advisory evaluation in that performance deficiencies are identified, specific directions for improvement are provided and documented, and a time period for prescribed improvement is specified.
Unsatisfactory - The faculty member has failed to meet performance standards specified in the position description or MFRs (e.g., inadequate recipients of service evaluations, lack of compliance with department, division, or college rules and standards). There is need for immediate and significant improvement in specific performance areas. This rating may result in initiation of termination proceedings.