The Board of Trustees and the University are responsible for evaluating the performance of employees. The purposes of evaluation are to maintain the highest quality of education through input and feedback, to retain the highest quality faculty, to assess the degree of effectiveness of an employee's performance, to identify areas of strength and weakness, to improve employee performance, and to determine roster placement.
By January 31, Department Chairs will conduct a meeting of all Instructors within their departments to discuss the required and optional materials to be used for the annual evaluation of performance during the calendar year. The procedures to be employed in obtaining optional information and materials shall be determined jointly by the Department Chair and the Instructors within the department. Relative weights given to evaluation materials and expectations of performance shall also be discussed at the meeting. A written memorandum summarizing procedural matters will be sent by the Department Chair to all Instructors within the department. The Chair shall provide a copy of this memorandum to any new Instructors hired into the department after the annual meeting has been conducted.
Chairs shall conduct annual evaluations of all Instructors within their departments. Annual evaluations shall include a review of the Instructor’s performance during the previous calendar year (Spring; Summer if applicable; and Fall semesters) while appropriately reflecting the proportions of all assigned duties and responsibilities. Evaluations for new employees will be performed in a comparable manner for the semesters that they worked. Annual evaluations shall also include a summary assessment of the employee's performance during the past calendar year. This summary assessment shall be numerically designated as (1) unacceptable, (2) needs improvement/below average, (3) satisfactory/average, (4) highly satisfactory/above average, or (5) outstanding. Fractional values for ratings as described above are not to be used.
Instructors should receive annual evaluations from their Department Chair no later than March 15 of the year following the evaluation period. One copy of the evaluation shall be signed by the employee and placed in the personnel file of the employee with a second copy of the evaluation to be given to the employee. At the employee's request, the Chair will provide time to discuss the annual evaluation.
a. Classroom Teaching
In conducting annual evaluations of Instructors who provide classroom teaching, Department Chairs shall take into account:
(1) Annual Service Reports (see Appendix);
(2) Quantitative Student Evaluations obtained under standardized procedures;
(3) Course-related materials (e.g., syllabi, handouts, reading lists, exams, quizzes) for which the employee is responsible;
(4) Unsolicited written and signed student comments;
(5) Other performance criteria jointly developed at the annual meeting.
b. Laboratory Support
In conducting annual evaluations of Instructors who provide laboratory support, Department Chairs shall take into account the following:
(1) Annual Service Reports (see Appendix);
(2) Course-related materials (e.g., syllabi, handouts, reading lists, exams, quizzes) for which the employee is responsible;
(3) Other performance criteria jointly developed at the annual meeting;
(4) Supervisory evaluations obtained in accordance with procedures established by the department.
c. Field Supervision
In conducting annual evaluations of Instructors who provide student-nurse or student-teacher supervision, Department Chairs shall take into account the following:
(1) Annual Service Reports (see Appendix);
(2) Quantitative Student Evaluations obtained under standardized procedures;
(3) Course-related materials (e.g., syllabi, handouts, project assignments, evaluation protocols, reading lists, exams, quizzes) for which the employee is responsible;
(4) Unsolicited written and signed student comments;
(5) Evaluations or written comments of supervision that are supplied by agency, school, or hospital personnel as requested by the Department Chair;
(6) Other performance criteria jointly developed at the annual meeting.
d. Studio Instruction
In conducting annual evaluations of Instructors who provide applied/studio instruction, Department Chairs shall take into account the following:
(1) Annual Service Reports (see Appendix);
(2) Quantitative Student Evaluations obtained under standardized procedures;
(3) Course-related materials (e.g., syllabi, handouts, reading lists, exams, quizzes) for which the employee is responsible;
(4) Unsolicited written and signed student comments;
(5) Assessment of progress by students in the major as determined by juried performances or other methods appropriate to the discipline;
(6) Other performance criteria jointly developed at the annual meeting.
e. On-Campus Supervision
In conducting annual evaluations of Instructors who provide on-campus supervision of graduate interns or student Instructors, Department Chairs shall take into account the following:
(1) Annual Service Reports (see Appendix);
(2)Course-related materials (e.g., syllabi, handouts, reading lists, exams, quizzes) for which the employee is responsible;
(3) Other performance criteria jointly developed at the annual meeting;
(4) Supervisory evaluations obtained in accordance with procedures established by the department.
f. Mixed Assignments
In conducting annual evaluations of Instructors who provide clinical supervision other than student-nurse and student-teacher supervision or who perform a combination of classroom instruction, laboratory support, field supervision, or other appropriate duties, Department Chairs shall take into account the elements in Section 6.2 as relevant.
Any of the following optional information/materials may be requested by the bargaining unit member being evaluated and/or the Department Chair:
a. Observation
(1) Observation by a faculty member of NIU selected by the bargaining unit member.
(2) Direct observation by the Department Chair or a faculty member of NIU designated by the Chair. The time and date for such observation shall be agreed upon by the bargaining unit member and the observer in advance.
b. Signed student comments
c. Evaluations or written comments of supervision that are supplied by agency, school, or hospital personnel
d. Supervisory evaluations, if applicable
e. Unsigned qualitative student comments obtained pursuant to section 6.4.
The Instructors and Chair may jointly agree at the annual meeting to allow the use of unsigned student comments as part of the optional evaluation materials, provided that:
a. Instructors are involved in developing the procedures and/or questions to be used in gathering the student comments;
b. Copies of the comments are provided to the Instructor prior to the due date for the Annual Service Report (if the copies are to be returned to the Department, a return date shall be specified);
c. The comments shall be kept confidential;
d. The Chair shall not refer to any particular comments in the annual evaluation without also noting how those comments compare to the total number of comments received for the course.
The Chair shall retain the right to investigate any allegations of inappropriate behavior made in student comments pursuant to Section 6.11. If qualitative student comments are not included in the Department's agreed-upon optional materials, they shall not be included in the evaluation portfolio except in those individual cases in which the Union and University agree that the provisions of Section 6.11 make it appropriate to do so. However, observations made by the Chair or his/her designee pursuant to Section 6.11 may become part of the evaluation portfolio, subject to the Instructor's right to respond (Section 5.4). Materials excluded from the evaluation portfolio shall not be made available to any Reconsideration Committee.
If an Instructor disagrees with his/her annual evaluation, that Instructor should first meet with the Department Chair in an attempt to reconcile their differences. Such meetings shall not extend the deadlines set forth in Section 6.4 of this Article unless the Instructor and Department Chair jointly agree, in writing, to such an extension.
If this attempt at reconciliation should fail and the employee still disagrees with the annual evaluation, the employee may then initiate a reconsideration process as outlined in Section 6.6 of this Article. The decision of the Reconsideration Committee in this process shall be final. This reconsideration process is afforded as an attempt to provide a third party professional evaluation of an Instructor’s performance based upon guidelines outlined in this Article.
b.On or before March 22, an Instructor who disagrees with his/her annual evaluation and is unable to reconcile the difference with the Department Chair shall file a written request for reconsideration with their respective College Dean. This request shall include:
1)a copy of the Chair’s written assessment,
2)a written summary of the specific aspects of the Chair’s assessment with which the Instructor disagrees,
3)the Instructor’s summary assessment of their own performance on the 5-point scale described in Section 6.2, and
4)any evidence specified in Section 6.2 as well as any evidence specified in Section 6.3 that was previously approved by both the Chair and Instructors at the annual meeting that set the evaluative criteria for the period under dispute.
c.On or before March 29, a Reconsideration Committee shall be established to hear the case. This committee shall have three members: one member selected by the employee, one member selected by the Department Chair, and one member selected by the other two. If the two designated members cannot agree on a third member by April 5, they shall so inform the respective University and Union grievance administrators. The grievance administrators shall select the third member of the reconsideration committee from a pre-determined list of eligible individuals (the list and procedures for selection will be outlined in an annual memorandum of understanding). In making appointments to Reconsideration Committees, all parties should seek to avoid identifiable conflicts of interest and promote an impartial evaluation of performance.
d.The Reconsideration Committee shall make every reasonable effort to meet and render a final decision by April 14. The Committee shall determine the appropriate rating as outlined in Section 6.2 of this Article. The appropriate Departmental Chair, College Dean, and Instructor shall each be provided a copy of the Committee’s decision.
In conducting its evaluation, the Reconsideration Committee shall follow the procedures set forth in this Article and the annual memorandum governing the evaluations of Instructors in the given department, as described in Section 6.1 of this Article. The Committee shall base its judgment on those materials specified in Section 6.6 of this Article. The Committee may also consider relevant materials placed in the Instructor’s personnel file by the Chair along with the Instructor’s written response to those materials, as prescribed in Article 5 of this Agreement. The Committee shall not consider any additional materials which are not in the personnel file or which are not referenced in those materials specified in section 6.6 of this Article.
e. If the Reconsideration Committee fails to render a final decision before April 14, the employee shall be temporarily placed on the highest roster for which his/her other evaluations and years of service qualify him/her to be placed, using the average of the previous two evaluations as a temporary evaluation in place of the current disputed evaluation. Once the Reconsideration Committee issues a final decision, the employee shall be placed on that roster for which his/her evaluations and years of service entitle him/her to be placed.
Evaluation and/or reconsideration decisions are not subject to the grievance procedure; however, any and all procedural violations are subject to the grievance procedure as provided for in this Agreement. If an employee does not receive an evaluation by March 15, his/her rating shall be considered to be a 4 (highly satisfactory/above average) for rehiring purposes until a final evaluation is issued. If the belated issuance of a final evaluation results in the inability of the Instructor to comply with the deadlines described in Section 6.6, the employee’s right to reconsideration shall remain intact and the deadlines extended appropriately.
All final evaluations of 2 (below average), shall require remediation. At the completion of the annual evaluation process, the Chair shall, in consultation with the affected Instructor, develop a Remediation Plan to address the specific deficiencies identified in the evaluation. The Plan shall describe actions to be taken to achieve satisfactory performance and will detail how progress will be measured (student evaluations shall not be the only measurement tool). Institutional resources, such as the Faculty Development Office, may be consulted to assist with the development of the Remediation Plan. The plan will be reduced to writing, completed by May 15, and signed by both the Chair and the Instructor.
The Instructor is entitled to Union representation during development of the Plan. The expectations and goals set forth in the Remediation Plan, the Instructor’s participation in the Plan, other evaluative criteria articulated in this Agreement will be part of the evaluation and reconsideration process for the next applicable evaluation. The Plan may be subject to review by the Union and/or the appropriate College Dean, but is otherwise confidential to the extent possible consistent with the effective implementation of the Plan.
If the Chair has failed to perform an observation or to obtain evaluation materials as agreed in the annual meeting per Section 6.1 of this Article, neither the Chair nor a Reconsideration Committee may make an inference unfavorable to the employee regarding such omission by the Chair.
In the event that an Instructor is appointed to more than one academic department, then separate evaluations shall be completed by the respective Department Chairs. Only the evaluation specific to a given department shall be applicable to the Instructor’s roster placement or reemployment status for that department under Article 3 of this Agreement.
Unannounced visits to the classroom by the Chair or his/her designee shall be permitted in instances such as allegations of starting late, early dismissal, inappropriate behavior, and lack of organization or preparedness.
Furthermore, if student comments suggest to a Department Chair or his/her designee that there might be a serious problem with an Instructor's behavior or performance, the Chair shall submit these concerns to appropriate administrative review, which may result in further action. Details of these procedures will be outlined in a Memorandum of Understanding (see Appendix).
The annual evaluation is the primary tool for personnel decisions. Both parties recognize that continuous feedback and communications are helpful in maintaining optimal performance. Ongoing discussions regarding performance issues and instructional objectives are recommended and encouraged by both parties as it relates to the individual evaluation process. Specifically, Chairs are encouraged to discuss any concerns they may have with an Instructor promptly in order to develop solutions (including possible remediation efforts) to problems that may arise throughout the year.
| Return to Contract | Personnel | Transfer |