3.7 Contents

• 3.7.0 Evaluation of Teaching Faculty
  • Evaluation System
• Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives
• Reward and Recognition Plan
• Faculty Evaluation Plan Appendices
  • Appendix A: Yearly Calendar of Events
  • Appendix B: Faculty Evaluation Form - Probationary First-Year Appointment
  • Appendix C: Faculty Evaluation Form - SECOND/THIRD-Year Appointment
  • Appendix D: Faculty Evaluation Form - SENIOR FACULTY Appointments
  • Appendix E: Student Survey of Instruction
  • Appendix F: Class Observation Assessment Form
  • Appendix G: APPDO Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form
  • Appendix H: First-Year Faculty Performance and Professional Development Objectives
  • Appendix I: Reward and Recognition Nomination Forms
  • Appendix J: Application Forms for Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence
• 3.7.1 Evaluation of Administrative Faculty
  • Purpose
  • Areas of Evaluation
  • Evaluators and Weighing of Areas
  • Criteria
  • Administration of Evaluation
  • Promotion Procedures
  • Action Plan
  • Timetable
• 3.7.2 Adjunct Faculty
  • Part time Faculty Responsibilities
  • Teaching Load
  • Orientation
  • Professional Development
  • Office Space
• 3.7.3 Distance Education
• 3.7.4 Other Information
• 3.7.5 Documentation
•  3.7.6 Contingency Promotions
• 3.7.7 Appointment Proposal and Rank and Salary Proposal
• 3.7.8 Changes of Status of Faculty Personnel
• 3.7.9 Normal Minimum Criteria for Faculty Rank
• 3.7.10 Procedures for Reallocation of Administrative and Professional Faculty Positions 

3.7.0 Evaluation of Teaching Faculty

The spirit and intent of the Faculty Development and Evaluation System for Virginia’s Community Colleges is to provide a mechanism for investing in the professional growth, development, and performance of each faculty member. Faculty are expected to pursue high standards, challenging goals, and teaching excellence. They can expect that their dean/supervisor will provide them with guidance, support, encouragement, due recognition, and a fair assessment of their contributions to the college’s mission. As a community, we honor those who have chosen to serve others, who share their passion and commitment for learning with others, and who lead the way by demonstrating their beliefs through continuous learning and improvement.

3.7.0.0 Evaluation System

3.7.0.0.1 Evaluation Schedule

The evaluation cycles for faculty on different appointments (first-year, second/third-year, and senior faculty appointments) are delineated below. A calendar of annual evaluation activities can be found in Appendix A.

• Probationary faculty members will be evaluated in both the fall and spring semesters of their first one-year appointment. For probationary teaching faculty members who are in their first one-year appointment, the summative rating will be assigned each semester, the second-semester evaluation to be assigned by March 15th of their first year of employment.
• Individuals working under their second-year or third-year appointment will receive summative ratings by March 15th for work performed during the previous calendar year (January-December).
• Senior faculty members (those beyond the first three continuous appointment years, whether on one-year or multi-year appointments) will receive their summative ratings by December 15th of the last year of the appointment. Evaluations will encompass all work performed during each of the calendar years (January-December) of the appointment.
• For all years, including the final year of a multi-year appointment, the faculty member will work with the dean/supervisor to develop individual Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives.
• During the intervening years of a multi-year appointment, faculty members will be deemed to have met expectations if their previous rating was "Meets Expectations." Therefore, they will be eligible to participate in the college Reward and Recognition plan - unless they overtly fail to maintain acceptable college standards, including satisfactory performance on Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives, as documented by the dean/supervisor.

3.7.0.0.2 Evaluation Ratings

Teaching faculty members will receive a summative evaluation rating of either "Meets Expectations" or "Does Not Meet Expectations" at the conclusion of the evaluation cycle appropriate to their appointment term as described in the Evaluation Schedule above and in Appendix A.

3.7.0.0.3 Evaluation Domains and Weights

In order to receive a summative evaluative rating of "Meets Expectations," each teaching faculty member is expected to demonstrate mastery of a significant majority of the individual criteria and satisfactory progress toward mastery of those criteria where improvement is needed for each of the four evaluation domains: Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service (see Tables 1.1 and 1.2). The evaluation will include all aspects of the teaching faculty job description as well as temporary assigned administrative/professional duties, whether or not release time was granted. While percentages are given in Table 1 for the weighting of each of the four domains, the Model Plan uses a holistic, qualitative approach to evaluation. Therefore, the weights express the relative importance of each domain; they do not represent a numerical approach to evaluation.

All faculty will be held to the minimum weights described below, except in cases where the faculty member is reassigned for more than 50% of their teaching load to other administrative/professional duties for a time period not to exceed two years.

Faculty with more than 50% of normal teaching load reassigned to other administrative/professional duties will consult with their dean/supervisor to adjust the relative domain weights as necessary with the following stipulations: (1) teaching should always comprise the maximum percentage weighting allowed by the reduction in teaching duties (i.e. if the faculty member is teaching 40% of a regular load, teaching must be weighted at 40%), and (2) the supervisor will make the final determination of the domain weights and the expectations in each domain that the faculty member will be held to.

Table 1.1:   Domain weightings based on faculty member's appointment

Table 1.2:  Domain definitions used for establishing college standard criteria.

 

DOMAIN	DEFINITION
Teaching	Creating a learning environment that facilitates students’ acquisition of knowledge and skills in a subject (i.e. instructional design, instructional delivery, instructional effectiveness, and instructional expertise).
Scholarly and Creative Engagement	Activities specifically associated with the faculty member's formally recognized area of expertise.
Service	Quality participation and commitment to students, college and/or community organizations. Participation in these activities is not done for extra compensation, but is an expectation of one’s activities as a professional educator. Service activities are divided into three categories: College Representation: Service activities that involve a direct connection between the faculty member who engages in the specific activity and his/her position at the college. College Citizenship: Service activities that are in support of college or VCCS initiatives in which the participant is not in a leadership role for the activity. Community Citizenship: Service activities that are indirect in which the employee is acting as a community resident who also happens to be a college employee.
Institutional Responsibility	Performing assigned or presumed duties according to one's role at the college. These activities support and advance both the mission of the VCCS and the college to enhance the effective functioning of the college-including the business processes (i.e. advising students, adherence to college and VCCS policy, collegiality, administrative duties, departmental supervision or assigned college community leadership duties, additional duties as assigned). If an activity does not otherwise fit into Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, or Service, and the activity is job related, then it should be counted in the Institutional Responsibility domain.

3.7.0.0.4 Criteria for Achieving the "Meets Expectations" Standard for Each Domain Component

The criteria used for determining the rating of "Meets Expectations" for each domain component are included in the Faculty Evaluation Forms: Appendix B (Probationary First-Year Appointment), Appendix C (Second/Third-Year Appointment), and Appendix D (Senior Faculty Appointments).

3.7.0.0.5 Data Sources

The three required data source categories of self-evaluation, student ratings, and supervisor evaluation will be utilized to contribute to the summative rating for each domain as shown in Table 2. The burden of providing documentation to support a summative rating of "Meets Expectations" rests on the faculty member. The dean/supervisor will utilize all available data and evidence to prepare a narrative report that supports the assignment of each individual domain rating used in the determination of the summative rating of "Meets Expectations" or "Does Not Meet Expectations."

Table 2:  Required data sources that contribute to domain summative ratings

 

DOMAIN	DATA SOURCE
Teaching	Self-Evaluation Student Ratings Supervisor Evaluation
Scholarly and Creative Engagement	Self-Evaluation Supervisor Evaluation
Service	Self-Evaluation Supervisor Evaluation
Institutional Responsibility	Self-Evaluation Supervisor Evaluation

3.7.0.0.5.0 Self-evaluation

Faculty members shall prepare and submit a written report that includes a personal assessment of their performance in each of the required domain categories from Table 1 (including student outcomes and/or written statements provided to the faculty member that are pertinent to the faculty member's teaching self-rating). This report should align with the expectations detailed in the Faculty Evaluation Form (Appendix B, D, or E, as appropriate to the faculty member's appointment status) and should also include

• A professional and college activities report that is detailed enough to support the self- assignment of individual ratings of either "Meets Expectations" or "Does Not Meet Expectations" for each of the four domains (Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service)
• A review of goals met/unmet from each Annual Performance and Professional Development Objective (see the Model Plan section of this name) pertinent to the current evaluation cycle (i.e. since the last full evaluation process)
• Any other factors as appropriate (e.g. reassigned time, temporary duties, or additional administrative or professional duties).

3.7.0.0.5.1 Student Ratings

Students in all class sections in all semesters will be given the opportunity to complete Student Ratings of Instruction. Student Rating of Instruction responses from all class sections taught by the faculty member each semester (Appendix E) will be summarized by the dean/supervisor in a report, with attachments as necessary to support the report, and will be taken into account when determining the summative evaluation rating. When available and pertinent to the faculty member's performance, written statements from students provided to the faculty member and/or the dean/supervisor should also be included in the faculty member's self-evaluation and/or the supervisor's evaluation as appropriate.

3.7.0.0.5.2 Supervisor Evaluation

The dean/supervisor will use available evidence from the faculty member's self-evaluation, student data, and the supervisor's own assessment of the faculty member's performance to evaluate each individual domain on the appropriate Faculty Evaluation Form (Appendix B, D, or E, as appropriate to the faculty member's appointment status). In addition to the data sources detailed above, the supervisor will also incorporate the following information:

• An assessment of the faculty member's progress in meeting goals set in the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives (see the Model Plan section of this name) pertinent to the current evaluation cycle (i.e. since the last full evaluation process).
• Notes from class observations, periodic meetings, and/or other evidence of the faculty member's classroom performance (other than Student Survey of Instruction responses). Supervisors will conduct class observations (and complete a Class Observation Assessment Form, Appendix F) with the following minimum frequency:
  • Each semester for faculty under a one-semester or under a probationary, first-year appointment
  • Once per year for faculty under any other one-year (non-probationary) appointment
  • Once within the final three (3) semesters of a multi-year appointment.
• An independent assessment of the faculty member's adherence to college policies.
• Sources of evidence related to the faculty member's performance of any other assigned duties as appropriate (e.g. reassigned time, temporary duties, or additional administrative or professional duties).

3.7.0.0.6 Supervisor's Summative Evaluation Rating

The dean/supervisor will determine each faculty member's summative rating of "Meets Expectations" or "Does Not Meet Expectations" utilizing a preponderance of evidence from all of the above data sources. In order to receive a summative evaluative rating of "Meets Expectations," each teaching faculty member is expected to demonstrate mastery of a significant majority of the individual criteria and satisfactory progress toward mastery of those criteria where improvement is needed for each of the four evaluation domains. The faculty member must achieve a "Meets Expectations" rating in each of the four domains to receive a summative rating of "Meets Expectations."

3.7.0.0.7 The Faculty-Supervisor Evaluation Conference

Following completion of the summative evaluation process, the dean/supervisor will schedule a meeting with each faculty member to discuss the summative rating and the implications for continued employment as specified in VCCS Policy 3.6.

• Evaluation summary meetings for faculty members in the first three appointment years will be scheduled in advance of the March 15th deadline for non-reappointment.
• Evaluation summary meetings for senior faculty members (those beyond the first three continuous appointment years, whether on one-year or multi-year appointments) will be scheduled in advance of the January 15th deadline for non-reappointment.

3.7.0.0.8 Implications for "Meets/Does Not Meet Expectations" Summative Ratings

Faculty members who receive a "Meet Expectations" summative rating will be eligible to receive a one-year or multi-year appointment, subject to other provisions of the appointment process as defined in VCCS Policy sections 3.4 and 3.6. Reappointed faculty will work with the dean/supervisor to develop Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives (see the Model Plan section of this name) for the next year. The Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives will include specific projects, goals, and anticipated outcomes/deliverables within one or more of the four domains of Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service.

Faculty members who meet all of the other eligibility requirements of VCCS Policy 3.7 must receive a "Meets Expectations" rating to be considered for promotion.

Faculty members who achieve a "Meets Expectations" rating are also eligible to participate in the college's Reward and Recognition Plan (see the Model Plan section of this name).

However, probationary first-year faculty members are only eligible to participate in the Recognition program - they are not eligible to receive a Reward.

Depending on a faculty member's appointment status, a rating of "Does Not Meet Expectations" has differing implications as detailed in VCCS Policy 3.6.

• First-year faculty who receive a "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating in either semester will not be reappointed for the following year. They shall continue to teach or be reassigned at the discretion of the president for the spring semester but must be notified by March 15th that they will not be reappointed for the following academic year.
• Second and third-year faculty who receive a "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating will not be reappointed for the following year and must be notified of that fact by March 15th.
• Senior faculty (those beyond the first three continuous appointment years, whether they are on a multi-year appointment or on a one-year appointment by choice or by action of the president based, in part, on a previous "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating) who receive a "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating will have their evaluation documents further reviewed by the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee, consistent with policy 3.4.0.4. The president will consider the input of the dean/supervisor, the input of the supervising vice president, and the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee when determining whether to non-reappoint or to grant a one-year or a multi-year appointment.
• Senior faculty who receive a "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating and are reappointed will participate in the setting and assessment of Performance and Professional Development Objectives during each semester of the appointment. The supervisor will take primary responsibility for setting these objectives, which should focus on areas of deficiency in the faculty member’s performance.

3.7.0.0.9 Evaluation Appeals

Teaching faculty may appeal their evaluation through the Faculty Grievance Procedure; however, appeals reaching Level III of the Faculty Grievance Procedure must be heard by peers through an Ad Hoc Hearing Committee. Throughout the appeals process, it will be incumbent upon the dean/supervisor to provide documentary evidence for the evaluation given to the faculty member.

3.7.0.1 Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives

The Annual Performance and Professional Objectives component of the Faculty Development and Evaluation System focuses on faculty development. The goal is to provide structural and institutional support for the continuous improvement and professional growth of full-time teaching faculty. Setting objectives, conferring with the dean/supervisor, identifying resources, establishing timelines, and assessing achievement are key elements of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives.

3.7.0.1.0 Setting Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives

At the beginning of the calendar year, each full-time teaching faculty member will meet with the dean/supervisor to establish Performance and Professional Development Objectives for the remainder of the calendar year, set a completion date for each objective, identify supporting resources needed to meet each objective, and agree upon measures for assessing achievement of the established objectives. The faculty member should formulate approximately three to five objectives in one or more of the four domains of faculty activity established by VCCS Policy: (1) Teaching, (2) Scholarly and Creative Engagement, (3) Institutional Responsibility, and (4) Service. Performance and Professional Development Objectives are to be documented on the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives - Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form (Appendix G), which is then signed by the faculty member and the supervisor.

Performance and Professional Development Objectives should be consistent with the professional goals of the faculty member as well as the strategic goals of the faculty member's department, program, division, college, and the VCCS. Objectives may be included related to specific professional interests of the faculty member. Faculty should also include objectives which address any areas of performance in need of improvement as noted in the previous year's assessment of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives and/or as noted in the faculty member's most recently completed comprehensive evaluation.

3.7.0.1.1 Technology Professional Development Objective for Non-Probationary Faculty

All faculty members, except probationary first-year faculty, who teach or plan to teach hybrid and/or online classes should establish a professional development objective to complete TOP, IDOL, MODEL, TOTAL, Qualityâ„¢ or equivalent coursework or certification in online instruction in the initial set of their Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives for the calendar year which begins January 1, 2014. Faculty who begin teaching hybrid and/or online courses in subsequent years should establish a professional development objective to complete coursework or earn certification in online instruction no later than one year after beginning to teach in hybrid and/or online formats. Faculty who have already completed such coursework or certification are exempt from the Technology Performance and Professional Development Objective requirement, although they are encouraged to set objectives that contribute to continuous improvement in teaching with technology on an as-needed basis or as-desired. The dean/supervisor will have final approval on what coursework or certification meets this professional development objective. Faculty members who teach only on-campus classes are encouraged to set Objectives for professional development in teaching with technology.

3.7.0.1.2 Resolving Differences between Objectives Proposed by the Faculty Member and the Supervisor

On occasion the faculty member and the dean/supervisor may identify differing priorities for the faculty member's Performance and Professional Development Objectives. The faculty member and supervisor should identify those priorities, whatever differences exist, and the reasons for those differences. They should negotiate to resolve those differences, referring especially to the individual evaluation criteria in the domains of Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service (Appendices C-E); to the assessment of the faculty member's most recent Performance and Professional Development Objectives and/or most recent performance evaluation; to the faculty member's areas of interest and/or identified need; to division, college, and/or VCCS strategic goals; and to other information that has a bearing on faculty performance and institutional priorities. The supervisor will make the final decision about which Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives to authorize.

3.7.0.1.3 College Support for Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives

The college is committed to supporting the professional growth and development of its full-time teaching faculty. Each year, as a part of its budget development process, the college will provide funding from a variety of sources, in compliance with budgetary regulations of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Community College System, to assist faculty in the pursuit of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives. In particular, as a component of this funding support, the college will allocate a specified dollar amount per faculty member, within budgetary constraints, to subsidize the professional development of its faculty. These funds will be pooled and may be accessed by faculty upon request and approval in accordance with college policy and procedures.

The college, and the VCCS more broadly, also demonstrates its support for the professional growth and development of its full-time teaching faculty by providing free training opportunities, reassigned time, grant-writing assistance, sabbatical leave, educational leave, and other assistance which advances the college mission, its strategic plan, and the success of its students.

Financial or other college resources needed to accomplish a faculty member's annual objectives must be documented on the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives - Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form (Appendix G). By signature, the faculty member and the dean/supervisor acknowledge that provision of resources thus identified is expected and that in the event this support is not available it may not be possible for the faculty member to achieve the objective.

3.7.0.1.4 Revision and Assessment of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives

Throughout the year, at the request of either party, the faculty member and dean/supervisor may meet to discuss progress toward attainment of the faculty member's objectives. In addition, within reasonable and ethical constraints of time, the faculty member's Performance and Professional Development Objectives may be renegotiated during the evaluation cycle at the request of the faculty member or supervisor. Moreover, since faculty members are encouraged to establish objectives that are challenging, ambitious, innovative, and/or long-term in nature, it is expected and acceptable that some objectives may not be achieved, in all or in part, due to changes in personal or institutional priorities, changes in faculty duties and responsibilities, availability of resources, or other circumstances which affect or impede achievement of one or more objectives. Any revisions to objectives necessitated by factors such as those described above must be documented on an updated Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives - Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form (Appendix G). At the end of the calendar year, the faculty member and dean/supervisor will meet in conference to assess and document attainment of established Performance and Professional Development Objectives, noting objectives met, objectives not met, objectives partially met, and any circumstances or information that provides relevant context for the assessment of the objectives. Assessment findings are to be documented on the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives - Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form (Appendix G) and are included in the Evaluation component when assessing the Annual Performance and Professional Development criterion in the Institutional Responsibility domain. The faculty member should propose Performance and Professional Development Objectives for the following calendar year. Those objectives should give due consideration to any objectives not met during the current calendar year. The supervisor has final approval over the setting of Performance and Professional Development Objectives and may set one or more specific objectives for the faculty member, particularly in circumstances where the supervisor judges that improvement is needed in one or more of the four performance domains. The supervisor's judgment should be based upon the assessment of the faculty member's achievement of the current year's Performance and Professional Development Objectives and/or other documentable information available to the dean/supervisor.

3.7.0.1.5 First-Year Faculty Performance and Professional Development Objectives

Performance and Professional Development Objectives for newly hired faculty are pre-established for the first year of employment (Appendix H). At the beginning of the first semester of employment, the newly hired faculty member will meet with the dean/supervisor to review these Performance and Professional Development Objectives and the methodology for assessing the achievement of each objective. The supervisor and the faculty member may agree to modify the prescribed objectives where appropriate; however, all first-year faculty must complete the technology professional development objective by the end of their third semester of full-time teaching. Specifically, for faculty currently teaching or anticipated to teach at least one online or hybrid course: Earn certification or course credit through TOP, IDOL, MODEL, TOTAL, Quality Mattersâ„¢, or other education in online instruction. For faculty anticipated to teach only on-campus courses: Earn certification or course credit in teaching with technology. Faculty who have already completed such coursework or certification are exempt from the Technology Performance and Professional Development Objective requirement, although they are encouraged to set objectives on an as-needed or as-desired basis that contribute to continuous improvement in teaching with technology. The dean/supervisor will have final approval on what coursework or certification meets this professional development objective.

At the end of the first semester of full-time employment, the faculty member and supervisor will meet in conference to assess and document attainment of established Performance and Professional Development Objectives, noting objectives met, objectives not met, objectives partially met, and any circumstances or information that provides relevant context for the assessment of the objectives. Assessment findings are to be documented on the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives - Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form (Appendix G) and will serve to inform the first of two required comprehensive evaluations of the faculty member's performance during the first year of employment. Before the second semester of full-time employment or with two weeks of the start of that semester, the faculty member and the supervisor will review the pre-established, second-semester Performance and Professional Development Objectives for first-year faculty (Appendix H) and reach agreement on any modifications to those objectives where appropriate.

Prior to the end of the second semester of full-time employment, the faculty member, in consultation with the supervisor, will meet to reassess and document the status of established Performance and Professional Development Objectives. These updated assessment findings are to be documented on the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives - Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form (Appendix G) and will serve to inform the second of two required comprehensive evaluations of the faculty member's performance during the first year of employment.

If as a result of the second-semester assessment of Performance and Professional Development Objectives and the second-semester comprehensive evaluation the faculty member "Meets Expectations," the faculty member will establish Performance and Professional Development Objectives by following the process described in the subsection of the Model Plan titled "Setting Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives." In the third and subsequent semesters, objectives are set through the end of the calendar year. All other relevant policies and procedures covered in the Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives section of the Model Plan will apply to the faculty member in proposing, consulting with the supervisor about, and assessing Performance and Professional Development Objectives.

3.7.0.1.6 Objectives for Senior Faculty Who Receive a "Does Not Meet Expectations" Rating

Senior faculty who receive a "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating and are reappointed will participate in the setting and assessment of Performance and Professional Development Objectives during each semester of the appointment. The supervisor will take primary responsibility for setting these objectives, which should focus on areas of deficiency in the faculty member's performance.

3.7.0.2 Reward and Recognition Plan

3.7.0.2.0 Purpose and Philosophy

The Reward and Recognition Plan is intended to honor full-time teaching faculty whose exceptional professional accomplishments, contributions, and activities support the mission of the college and the Virginia Community College System, promote a vigorous learning environment, and demonstrate extraordinary talent and potential in one or more performance domains: Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service.

All full-time teaching faculty in the Virginia Community College System (VCCS) are expected to meet high standards of performance expectations as prescribed elsewhere in this Faculty Development and Evaluation Model Plan. However, for faculty who substantially exceed those expectations in one or more domains of faculty activity, the college has designed this Reward and Recognition Plan to provide meaningful and timely recognition of professional excellence.

The Reward and Recognition Program is designed to acknowledge and laud exceptional faculty accomplishments, contributions, and activities that support the mission of the college. Because such instances of professional excellence among faculty may be observed by students, adjunct faculty, full-time teaching faculty, staff, or administrators, the Reward and Recognition Plan provides many opportunities for award nomination. Nominations for Recognition may come from the faculty member or their dean/supervisor or any other stakeholder.

Nominations for Reward will come from a faculty member, dean/supervisor, or other employees of the college or VCCS. In addition, the Reward and Recognition Plan offers sufficient flexibility to honor a variety of extraordinary accomplishments, contributions, and activities that are relevant to teaching faculty.

The Reward and Recognition Plan adheres to a culture of evidence, in the belief that a faculty member's documentary record of exceptional performance should be sufficient to establish the nature and extent of the faculty member's participation, effectiveness, and achievement for which the reward or recognition is bestowed.

3.7.0.2.1 Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee

At the beginning of each academic year, the president of the college will appoint members of the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee. Full-time teaching faculty members shall constitute a majority of the membership of the committee. The committee membership will also include at least one academic dean or higher-level academic administrator, at least one Student Services representative, and at least one Human Resources representative.

The term of appointments to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee shall extend to the end of the academic year for which members were appointed. Members may be reappointed to multiple and/or successive terms of service on the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee.

A faculty representative to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee is eligible to be nominated to receive Reward and/or Recognition awards pursuant to the Reward and Recognition Plan during the member's term of service on the committee. Committee members who are nominated for Reward or Recognition shall recuse themselves from reviewing their own applications.

The Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee will meet as necessary to properly administer the Reward and Recognition Plan.

3.7.0.2.2 Faculty Recognition Program

The Faculty Recognition Program recognizes exemplary achievement by faculty. The Recognition program consists of two awards systems: The Learning Environment Awards Program and the Annual Faculty Recognition Awards Program.

3.7.0.2.2.0 Eligibility (Recognition Awards)

In order to eligible to receive an award in the Faculty Recognition Program, an individual must

• Be a member of the full-time teaching faculty
• Have received an evaluative rating of "Meets Expectations" as of the most recently completed comprehensive faculty evaluation
• Be current in the establishment, assessment, and satisfactory progress on Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives.

Each year, a faculty member may receive multiple Learning Environment Awards as well as no more than one (1) Annual Faculty Recognition Award.

3.7.0.2.2.1 Learning Environment Awards

The college is committed to providing an invigorating learning environment for its students, faculty, and staff. To this end, the college has established the Learning Environment Awards Program as a means of recognizing, on an ongoing basis, extraordinary and exemplary contributions to the learning environment by full-time teaching faculty in one or more of the following areas: Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service.

In order to acknowledge such behaviors and contributions by full-time teaching faculty, the Learning Environment Awards Program provides continuous opportunities for fellow faculty members, administrators, staff, students, and members of the community to identify full-time teaching faculty who should be considered for a Learning Environment Award. It is expected that Learning Environment Awards will be announced throughout the year and that these awards will be more numerous than the Annual Recognition Awards or the awards in the Reward program.

3.7.0.2.2.1.0 Nomination Process (Learning Environment Awards)

Those who wish to recommend a faculty member for a Learning Environment Award may do so at any time by submitting a completed Learning Environment Award Form (Appendix I) to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee.

The Learning Environment Award Form (Appendix I) includes the name of the faculty member recommended for the award, the teaching discipline or academic school with which the faculty member is associated, a brief description of the behavior or contribution being recognized, the approximate date(s) that the behavior or contribution was observed, the name of the individual submitting the form, and the date of submission.

3.7.0.2.2.1.1 Review and Selection (Learning Environment Awards)

The Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee will review nominations for Learning Environment Awards in a timely manner, determine if the activity or contribution described is consistent with the intent and standards of the Learning Environment Awards Program, and notify nominees if they are to receive a Learning Environment Award. The committee shall also make award recipients aware of any further steps necessary to take delivery of the award.

The nature and value of Learning Environment Awards may vary and are to be determined by the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee. In general, however, recipients of the Learning Environment Awards receive a certificate of recognition, recognition in the college newsletter and/or on the college website, a commemorative keepsake, and a certificate that allows the faculty member to receive a specific item of personal property that is minimal in value.

3.7.0.2.2.2 Annual Faculty Recognition Awards

Each year, the college presents a series of Faculty Recognition Awards to full-time teaching faculty who have been nominated and selected for exemplary achievements, contributions, or activities in the areas of Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and/or Service. Each Faculty Recognition Award is associated with a specific area of faculty responsibility as indicated by the title of the award and the criteria for selection of recipients.

1. The Faculty Teaching Effectiveness Award

Awarded to a member of the full-time teaching faculty whose performance in the classroom or other instructional environment best exemplifies effectiveness in promoting student achievement, including
• Conducting extraordinary or innovative learning activities to the benefit of students
• Designing instructional materials to improve student learning
• Developing delivery modalities that expand student access
• Demonstrating exceptional achievement of student learning outcomes.
2. The Faculty Scholarly and Creative Engagement Award

Awarded to a member of the full-time teaching faculty who has achieved a significant academic scholarly accomplishment through research, publishing and/or professional presentations, grant activity, or creative works, including
• Research in the teaching discipline, instructional pedagogy, or instructional technology
• Publication in newspapers, magazines, scholarly journals, or other recognized media
• Receipt of a major grant or significant contribution to grant development or review
• Production or public exposition of creative works in visual arts, performing arts, musical arts, literary arts, or other fine arts
• Presentation and/or major speech at professional organizations or events
• Honors, awards, or recognition from professional organizations.
3. The Faculty Institutional Responsibility Award

Awarded to a member of the full-time teaching faculty who has achieved a major accomplishment of significant or world-class quality that furthers the college's achievement of its strategic priorities, including
• Providing leadership for a major strategic initiative
• Chairing a committee or task force that leads to a significant improvement in student success, business processes, or instructional quality
• Singly or jointly achieving a major accomplishment of significant or world-class quality that supports the college's strategic plan or the strategic goals of the VCCS.
4. The Faculty Community Impact Award

Awarded to a member of the full-time teaching faculty who has greatly impacted the college's image through community service and/or involvement, including
• Involvement in a community event such as charity fund raisers, events to foster diversity awareness, or other events designed to benefit the local community
• Volunteerism at a local community agency, school, or church
• Service on the board of a local community service agency.
5. The Faculty Diversity Awareness, Inclusivity, & Multicultural Enrichment Award

Awarded to a member of the full-time teaching faculty who demonstrates a high level of enthusiasm and commitment to helping the college celebrate the richness of different cultures and diversity, including
• Conducting activities or events that are designed to enhance diversity awareness, foster inclusivity, and celebrate multiculturalism at the college
• Developing and employing innovative teaching strategies that promote an inclusive learning environment
• Challenging and motivating others to be respectful of diverse cultures, to remove barriers to inclusion, and to foster an atmosphere of acceptance and support in the classroom and throughout the college.
6. The Faculty Leadership Award

Awarded annually to a member of the full-time teaching faculty who demonstrates leadership and commitment to the college, including:
• Leadership and commitment to a strategic initiative
• Leadership and commitment to a special project
• Leadership and commitment to an organization unit
• Leadership and commitment to a college committee

3.7.0.2.2.2.0 Nomination Process (Annual Faculty Recognition Awards)

On or about March 1 of each year, the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee will solicit formal nominations for each of the Annual Faculty Recognition Awards. A faculty member may be self-nominated for an Annual Faculty Recognition Award, or may be nominated by an immediate supervisor, by a faculty colleague at the college, by an administrator at the college, by any other college employee, by a student or group of students, or by any other stakeholder.

Those who wish to nominate a faculty member for an Annual Faculty Recognition Award may do so at any time by completing and submitting the Annual Faculty Recognition Award Nomination Form (Appendix I) corresponding to the specific award for which the nominee is being recommended. The completed form shall be submitted to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee.

Each Faculty Recognition Award Nomination Form includes the name of the faculty member who is being nominated, the teaching discipline or academic school with which the faculty member is associated, a brief summary of the rationale for the nomination, the name of and contact information for the individual submitting the nomination, and the date of submission.

3.7.0.2.2.2.1 Review and Selection (Annual Recognition Awards)

By May 1, the committee will complete its review and evaluation of all nominations and will select those nominees, subject to the approval of the president, who are to receive a Faculty Recognition Award. Recipients of Annual Faculty Recognition Awards are recognized at the year-end Employee Recognition and Awards Ceremony.

The nature and value of Annual Faculty Recognition Awards may vary and are to be determined by the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee. In general, however, recipients of an Annual Faculty Recognition Award receive a certificate of recognition, recognition in the college newsletter and on the college website, a commemorative keepsake, and a certificate that allows the faculty member to receive a specific item of personal property that is minimal in value.

3.7.0.2.2.2.2 Number, Nature, and Value of Recognition Awards

The number, nature, and value of faculty recognition awards will vary and are to be determined by the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee. In general, however, faculty recognition awards should be more frequent and numerous than awards distributed through the Faculty Reward Program. Recognition awards are to be of non-monetary or de minimis value. The Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee should give due consideration to the potential for tax implications associated with certain types of awards. Recipients of faculty recognition awards are responsible for any tax liabilities associated with acceptance of these awards. Specific information regarding de minimis benefits can be found in the De Minimis Fringe Benefits section of the IRS website.

3.7.0.2.3. Faculty Reward Program

The college's Faculty Reward Program consists of the annual Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence which are awarded each year to those faculty members who substantially and demonstrably exceed performance expectations in one or more of the following areas: Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, or Service. In order to be considered for a Faculty Award for Professional Excellence, an eligible faculty member must be nominated for the award and must submit the necessary documentation to support that nomination, in accordance with the guidelines prescribed below. In order to receive a Faculty Award for Professional Excellence, an eligible faculty member who has been nominated and for whom the necessary supporting documentation has been provided must be selected by the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee to receive the award.

3.7.0.2.3.0 Eligibility (Faculty Award for Professional Excellence)

• Be a member of the full-time teaching faculty who is not in the first year of full-time employment as full-time teaching faculty at the college
• Have received an evaluative rating of "Meets Expectations" as of the most recently completed comprehensive faculty evaluation;
• Be current in the establishment, assessment, and satisfactory progress on Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives.

A faculty member may receive no more than one (1) Faculty Award for Professional Excellence per fiscal year.

3.7.0.2.3.1 Nomination Process (Faculty Award for Professional Excellence)

An eligible faculty member may be self-nominated for a Faculty Award for Professional Excellence, or may be nominated by the immediate supervisor, by a full-time teaching faculty colleague at the college, or by any other employee of the college or VCCS.

Nominations are to be made by submitting the completed the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence Nomination Form (Appendix I) to the Office of Human Resources by March 15 each year (Table 3). The Faculty Award for Professional Excellence Nomination Form includes the name of the faculty member who is being nominated; the teaching discipline or academic school with which the faculty member is associated; a brief description of the extraordinary accomplishment, contribution, or activity for which the faculty member is being nominated; the name and signature of the individual submitting the form; the position held by the individual submitting the form; and the date of submission.

Upon receipt of a completed Faculty Award for Professional Excellence Nomination Form, the Office of Human Resources will notify the nominee and provide guidance to the nominee regarding the required supporting documentation and submission deadlines.

Table 3:  Faculty Award for Professional Excellence Timeline

3.7.0.2.3.2 The Application Portfolio (Faculty Award for Professional Excellence)

The Faculty Award for Professional Excellence is presented to full-time teaching faculty who are able to demonstrate exceptional performance in one or more areas of faculty endeavor: Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, or Service. Nominees must submit an application portfolio that includes a completed Faculty Award for Professional Excellence application form (Appendix J) which provides a summary of the accomplishment, contribution, or activity for which they were nominated and also includes supporting documentation of exceptional performance. Evidence provided in the application portfolio should be sufficient to establish that the accomplishment, contribution, or activity was innovative or otherwise distinctive, impactful, and supportive of the college's mission, vision, and values.

An application portfolio to support exceptional performance in the area of Teaching should contain clear and compelling evidence of extraordinary accomplishment in (1) instructional methodology, (2) student achievement and success, (3) student engagement, (4) learning outcomes assessment, (5) innovative use of instructional technology, and/or (6) offering a course in a new delivery modality (e.g. online).

An application portfolio to support exceptional performance in the area of Scholarly and Creative Engagement should contain clear and compelling evidence of extraordinary accomplishment in (1) continuing education, academic coursework, or degree attainment, (2) publications, presentations, or creative works, (3) activity in professional organizations, (4) scholarly research, and/or (5) grant activity.

An application portfolio to support exceptional performance in the area of Institutional Responsibility should contain clear and compelling evidence of extraordinary accomplishment in (1) special projects, (2) student advising, (3) administrative responsibilities, (4) leadership in one's academic discipline, department, or division, and/or (5) other non-teaching duties.

An application portfolio to support exceptional performance in the area of Service should contain clear and compelling evidence of extraordinary accomplishment in (1) service to the institution, (2) service to the community, and/or (3) service to the profession.

The application portfolio, including the narrative summary and all supporting documentation should be complete, yet concise. As a guideline, the application portfolio should not exceed ten (10) one-sided pages in length. The application portfolio must be submitted to the Office of Human Resources by the prescribed deadline.

3.7.0.2.3.3 Review and Selection (Faculty Award for Professional Excellence)

The Office of Human Resources will forward all nominations for the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence, along with the corresponding application portfolios, to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee by no later than March 31 each year. All nominations and portfolios will be reviewed and evaluated by the committee in accordance with a rubric specifically designed for this purpose. The committee will not review application portfolios that are incomplete or that do not conform to prescribed guidelines. Incomplete or non-conforming application portfolios may be returned to the nominee by the Office of Human Resources or by the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee, but will be considered by the committee only if corrected, resubmitted, and received by the committee by the March 31 deadline (Table 3).

By May 1, the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee will select those nominees, subject to the approval of the president, who are to receive a Faculty Award for Professional Excellence and will coordinate communications with the Office of Human Resources and other units of the college, as needed, for the purpose of notifying recipients and bestowing the awards.

3.7.0.2.3.4 Nature and Value of Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence

The nature and value of Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence may vary from year to year and are to be determined by the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee. In general, however, the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence is to be of significant monetary value and is expected to be offered in the form of a bonus or in the form of professional development support, at the discretion of the recipient. As an additional alternative, at the discretion of the college and subject to the availability of funds in any given year, Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence may be offered in the form of a base salary increment.

The Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee should give due consideration to the potential for tax implications associated with the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence. Recipients of the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence are responsible for any tax liabilities associated with acceptance of this award.

All awards presented in a given fiscal year will be of equal monetary value. The monetary value of the award each year will be no less than $400 and no more than $1000.

3.7.0.2.4 Funding

3.7.0.2.4.0 Funding the Reward and Recognition Plan

The college's Reward and Recognition Plan will be funded on a fiscal-year basis. For each fiscal year, contingent upon availability of resources, the college will provide funding equivalent to $150 per full-time teaching faculty position, including both filled and vacant positions, to support the Reward and Recognition Plan. Sources for the required funding are to be determined by the college president and the chief financial officer of the college in compliance with budgetary regulations of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Community College System; however, the Reward and Recognition program may not be funded from state funded salary increases.

3.7.0.2.4.1 Funding the Recognition Component

Thirty-three percent (33%) of the funds provided for the Reward and Recognition Plan, the equivalent of $50 per full-time teaching faculty position, including both filled and vacant positions, will be allocated to the Recognition component of the Reward and Recognition Plan. These funds are specifically intended to support awards of non-monetary or de minimis value, in a variety of forms throughout the fiscal year, to individual faculty members who are selected to receive such awards in accordance with the methodology prescribed in Part II above.

The number of faculty who may receive a recognition award and the number of times an individual may receive a recognition award in a given fiscal year are limited only by the funds available to support the Recognition component of the Reward and Recognition Plan. However, faculty Recognition awards should be more frequent and numerous than Rewards.

3.7.0.2.4.2 Funding the Reward Component

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the funds provided for the Reward and Recognition Plan, the equivalent of $100 per full-time teaching faculty position, including both filled and vacant positions, will be allocated to the Reward component of the Reward and Recognition Plan. These funds are specifically intended to support annual awards of significant monetary value (at least $400 but no more than $1000), in the form of a bonus or in the form of professional development support, to individual faculty members who are selected to receive such an award in accordance with the methodology prescribed in Part III above. Each faculty member selected to receive such an award may choose to receive the award in the form of a bonus or in the form of professional development support. Bonuses shall be disbursed on or about May 15 of each year. Rewards in the form of professional development funds may be awarded in the immediately subsequent fiscal year in order to optimize opportunities for their intended use.

As an additional alternative, at the discretion of the college and subject to the availability of funds in any given year, Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence may be offered in the form of a base salary increment. Base salary increments will be effective with the faculty member's next annual Appointment Proposal.

Each year, it is anticipated that 10% to 25% of the full-time teaching faculty at the college will receive an award in accordance with the Reward component of the Reward and Recognition Plan. If the number of full-time teaching faculty selected to receive an award in a given fiscal year is equivalent to or less than 10% of the full-time teaching faculty positions, both filled and vacant, that served as the basis for funding the Reward component, the monetary value of each award shall be $1000. If the number of full-time faculty selected to receive an award in a given year is greater than 10% of the full-time teaching faculty positions, both filled and vacant, that served as the basis for funding the Reward component, available funds will be divided equally among reward recipients. Table 4 provides examples for various potential distributions of awards and the corresponding monetary values.

To ensure a minimum award of $400 per recipient of the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence, the Reward and Recognition Committee is not permitted to grant awards to more than 25% of the full-time teaching faculty positions, both filled and vacant, that served as the basis for funding the Reward component unless the college allocates additional funding to the Faculty Reward Program. In no case shall the Faculty Award for Professional Excellence be less than $400.

Table 4:  Examples of potential distributions of Awards for Professional Excellence

3.7.0.2.4.3 Reallocation of Unexpended Reward and Recognition Funds

In the event that all funds allocated to support the Reward and Recognition Plan are not utilized for the prescribed purpose, remaining funds may be reallocated to other operational areas of the college as needed or returned to the original funding source if appropriate, in a timely manner and in accordance with budgetary regulations of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Community College System.

3.7.0.2.5 Assessment of Reward and Recognition Program Effectiveness

On a biannual basis, the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee will conduct an assessment of the effectiveness of the Reward and Recognition Program. The assessment may include, but not be limited to, a survey of the full-time teaching faculty. The survey will be designed to measure faculty opinion of how well all aspects of the program are understood by the faculty, how well procedural requirements and deadlines are communicated, how effectively the program is administered, how extensively and equitably rewards and recognition are distributed, how effectively the program encourages faculty to exceed performance expectations and to strive for professional excellence, and how effectively the program supports the mission of the college.

3.7.0.3 Faculty Evaluation Plan Appendices

Appendix A: Yearly Calendar of Events

Appendix B: Faculty Evaluation Form - Probationary First-Year Appointment

Appendix C: Faculty Evaluation Form - SECOND/THIRD-Year Appointment

Appendix D: Faculty Evaluation Form - SENIOR FACULTY Appointments

Appendix E: Student Survey of Instruction

Appendix F: Class Observation Assessment Form

Appendix G: APPDO Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form

Appendix H: First-Year Faculty Performance and Professional Development Objectives

Appendix I: Reward and Recognition Nomination Forms

AAppendix J: Application Forms for Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence

3.7.1 Evaluation of Administrative Faculty

3.7.1.0 Purpose

3.7.1.1 Areas of Evaluation

1. Effectiveness in completing assigned College goals and objectives
2. Performance of the tasks delineated in the appropriate job description.
3. Service to College: Committee work, support of College activities, and of other functions.
4. Professional Contributions: Upgrading of professional expertise, sharing of professional expertise, and other professional activities, including community services.
5. Ability to establish and maintain positive professional relationships.
6. Adherence to policies, procedures, and regulations.

3.7.1.2 Evaluators and Weighing of Areas

1. Administrative Faculty are evaluated according to the following:
   1. Weight of Evaluation:
   1. Self-evaluation may count 0-10%.
   2. Peer evaluation may count 0-40%.
   3. Supervisor evaluation may count 50-75% (or 50-90% by mutual consent).
   2. Criteria for Evaluation:
      
      These evaluations must include criteria for evaluation listed in the Faculty and Staff Manual (see Section 3.7.1.3). These evaluations will also include the completion of assigned goals and objectives. The total of the above three weights will be 100%.
2. Other Sources of Evaluation used for Division Deans.

Division Deans may also be evaluated as follows:

At the time of evaluation the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services shall request from the faculty working under a Dean, a signed memo or statement of evaluation for that particular Dean according to appropriate job description, goals and objectives, and criteria as stated in Section 3.7.1.3 of the Faculty and Staff Manual. This statement should be confined to areas of job performance of which the faculty member has direct knowledge. The Vice President of Instruction and Student Services shall preserve, within the limits of the law, by the use of a removable sheet, the anonymity of the faculty member. All unsigned or otherwise anonymous forms shall be discarded unread. The information thereby solicited shall be used at the discretion of the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services.

3.7.1.3 Criteria

1. Effectiveness in the performance of the tasks delineated in the appropriate position description;
2. Effectiveness in establishing and maintaining positive professional relationships with colleagues, supervisors, students, and the community;
3. Maintenance of a current competence in the particular discipline or field of specialization; and
4. Adherence to policies, procedures, and regulations of the College and the Virginia Community College System.

The following guidelines govern the use of all evaluation forms.

1. An average rating of 1.4 or better constitutes "excellent" performance.
2. An average rating of 2.0 or better at least "very good" performance.
3. An average rating of 2.5 or better at least "good" performance.
4. An average rating of 3.0 or better at least "fair" performance.
5. An average rating of greater than 3.0 constitutes "unsatisfactory" performance.

In administrative areas the evaluator will assign a number between 1 and 5. The criteria given here are meant to serve as examples and are not intended to be exhaustive. A rating of 1 may be achieved by excellent service in one area or by cumulative service in a combination of areas.

1. Service to the College: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who:
1. Regularly attends assigned/or called meetings and all other College committees of which he or she oversees or is a member and is actively involved in the work of these groups.
2. Willingly takes on committee work and follows through with it.
3. Conceives, organizes, or implements College functions and activities.
2. Professional contributions: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who is:
1. Actively engaged in improving his or her administrative skills or expertise either informally or through taking courses in or related to his or her administrative area, or
2. Actively involved in sharing his or her expertise with others as evidenced by publication or extensive involvement in professional organizations.
3. Actively participates or provides leadership in community groups such as churches, civic organizations, and service organizations that are not necessarily related to the administrator's professional expertise, or
4. Is actively involved in community activities that are related to the administrator's professional expertise.
3. Effective in the performance of the tasks delineated in the appropriate position description: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who effectively and successfully carried out ninety percent (90%) of each of the assigned job elements constituting the individual position description.
4. Effectiveness in completing assigned goals and objectives: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who completed ninety percent of assigned goals and objectives absent mitigating circumstances.
5. Effectiveness in establishing and maintaining positive professional relationships with colleagues, supervisors, students, and the community: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who maintained positive professional relationships with the above constituent groups consistently--absent documented negative patterns or a documented and exceptional instance to the contrary.
6. Effectiveness in maintaining a current competence in the particular discipline or field of specialization: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who actively engaged in improving his or her knowledge and expertise in the discipline or field of endeavor most closely related to current position.
7. Effectiveness in adhering to policies, procedures, and regulations of the College and the Virginia Community College System: A rating of 1 would be given to the administrator who consistently followed the appropriate policies, procedures, and regulations.

3.7.1.4 Administration of Evaluation

Evaluation inputs are collected at the times specified in the timetable. The supervisor is responsible for weighing the inputs and considering them prior to the conference.

Prior to November 1 of each year the Deans or Supervisor will schedule a pre-evaluation conference with individual faculty or administrator to determine the exact procedures and weights assigned to each area.

During the evaluation conference, the faculty member or administrator will be informed of the evaluation rating for position performance being recommended by his immediate supervisor and reasons for the rating. The rating categories will be as follows: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, and Unsatisfactory. The faculty or administrator will be provided the opportunity to respond to the evaluation rating and to offer a rebuttal.

The supervisor and faculty member or administrator will review the faculty member's or administrator's eligibility for promotion. The criteria for promotion include job performance, college training, experience, professional activities, and community activities. The faculty member or administrator will be provided the opportunity to respond and offer a rebuttal.

A comprehensive written summary of the evaluation conference giving specific reasons for the evaluation will be sent to the employee. The faculty member or administrator will be provided the opportunity to respond to the supervisor's comprehensive evaluation. A final report, including the supervisor's written evaluation, promotion recommendation (where applicable), and the employee's written response (if any) will be sent to the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services (for non-administrative faculty) or to the President of the College (for administrative faculty). A faculty member who is promoted shall not be paid less than the overload rate, as determined by this policy, had no promotion occurred.

3.7.1.5 Promotion Procedures

Recommendations by supervisors of professional and administrative faculty members eligible to be promoted to the ranks of Instructor and Assistant Professor will be reviewed by the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services. Based upon the Vice President of Instruction and Students evaluation of the eligibility for promotion criteria enumerated in the Faculty and Staff Manual, the Vice President will recommend to the President those persons who the Vice President feels are eligible to be promoted to these positions. The President will review the recommendations of the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services and recommend to the State Board for Community Colleges the promotion of those whom the President determines to be eligible.

The files of teaching or administrative faculty recommended for multi-year appointment and/or to the ranks of Associate Professor and Professor will be reviewed by an ad hoc committee appointed by the President from the Hearing Committee Panel. Recommendations by the Committee will be submitted to the President. The President will review these recommendations and recommend to the State Board for Community Colleges the granting of multi-year appointments and promotion to the ranks of Associate Professor and Professor for those determined to be eligible. In making recommendations the President will be guided by budgetary considerations and applicable personnel policies.

3.7.1.6 Action Plan

To ensure that the evaluation procedure fulfills its purpose of improving job performance, the employee in consultation with the supervisor shall submit an action plan following receipt of the written summary of the evaluation conference. The action plan shall contain specific objectives and initiatives to promote job improvement or administrative performance. At the time or before the next pre-evaluation conference, the supervisor and faculty or administrator shall meet to assess the status of the action plan and determine what further effort (if any) may be indicated.

3.7.1.7 Timetable

The following timetable shall apply to the evaluation procedure.

1. Fall Semester
1. The supervisor will ask each administrative faculty employee to specify the method of evaluation, i.e., whether supervisor, peer, and self, or other combinations mutually agreeable and the weights given each. Each evaluator will function as outlined below. The pre-evaluation conference should be held prior to November 1.
2. Peer evaluators will be chosen as specified in Section 3.7.4.D
3. All evaluation materials (both peer and self) should be presented at least five (5) working days before evaluation conference.
4. Recommendations will be made for promotions and contracts for the next year (based on evaluation conferences held the preceding spring.)
2. Spring Semester
1. Peers (if chosen) and supervisors should complete their work by the end of March.
2. New administrators evaluated during the fall should submit rebuttals to the Dean and President.
3. Contracts shall be prepared for administrators based on evaluation conferences held in the previous spring or fall semesters for new administrators.
4. Contingency conditions for promotions must be submitted to the Ad Hoc Appointment Committee by March 1 of each year. See Contingency Promotions.
5. Administrators should submit reports and employee rebuttals to the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services and the President by June 1.

3.7.1.7.0 First-year Non-Teaching Faculty/Administrators

First-year faculty/administrators will be evaluated during both Fall and Spring Semesters and the following exceptions: the evaluation procedure shall be the same as that for other faculty/administrators with the following exceptions:

1. Peer evaluation: if chosen, will require that the Dean or Supervisor choose evaluators by the fifth week: peer evaluators will complete their work by the end of the second week preceding final examinations for Fall Semester for teaching faculty and December 1 for administrators.
2. The evaluation conference will take place prior to final examinations for that semester for teaching faculty and December 10 for administrators.

3.7.2 Adjunct Faculty

Adjunct faculty represent an integral component of VHCC's academic programs. The College depends upon the expertise of these individuals to broaden the scope of its academic offerings. In order to maintain a core of quality adjunct faculty, evaluation of their instruction is necessary. Adjunct faculty will be evaluated at least once a year by their respective supervisors. New adjunct faculty members should be observed during each semester of their first year of teaching, once during their second year of teaching, and once every two years thereafter. This evaluation will be based upon specific criteria including classroom instruction, personal attributes, and consideration for student/ individuals as a person. The supervisors will provide the adjuncts with written and/or oral feedback regarding their performance.

Faculty may submit reports or rebuttals to the Vice President and President. In consultation with the supervisor the faculty shall submit an action plan in accordance with Section 3.7.1.6 - Action Plan.

3.7.2.0 Part time Faculty Responsibilities

In addition to fulfilling teaching responsibilities, part time faculty are usually required to provide for student advising and related activities a minimum of one hour per week for each course credit taught.

This requirement may be met in several ways:

1. part time faculty may be available in the classroom the required number of office hours before and/or after the normal hours for the course if the classroom is available at such hours;
2. part time faculty may have space in a "gang" or group office where a desk or file drawer may be available to the part time faculty member;
3. part time faculty may share the regular office of a full time member; and/or
4. any other appropriate arrangement for part time faculty office hours. The office hours of the part time faculty members should be announced to the class, should be on record in the office of the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services, and should be posted on or near the classroom or office to be utilized by the part time faculty member for office hours.

3.7.2.1 Teaching Load

The normal teaching load for an adjunct faculty member shall be no more than 12 semester hours each fall or spring semester and no more than 8 semester hours during the summer semester. Exceptions to this policy must have prior approval in writing from the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services.

3.7.2.2 Orientation

All adjunct faculty will receive a copy of the Adjunct Faculty Brochure at their appointment or reappointment. This document is prepared by the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services and updated annually. It contains information concerning college services, faculty responsibilities, and general information.

All adjuncts should thoroughly read the document and become familiar with the location of various offices and services, including admissions, counseling, security, mailboxes, and duplication. An orientation session is held at the beginning of each semester for new adjunct faculty. Special circumstances or initiatives may dictate other orientation sessions as appropriate.

Orientation sessions are used to distribute general information about VHCC and its student body. All adjuncts are oriented to the mission and philosophy of the College. Also, the importance of working with VHCC full-time faculty is stressed. Appropriate full-time faculty may be invited to these sessions to meet with adjunct faculty concerning course requirements, syllabi, assessment, equipment, and other topics relating to instruction. With the ever increasing importance of the assessment process and the continuing need to maintain SACSCOC criteria, maintenance of quality standards is important. Such orientation sessions also are especially vital when adjuncts have daytime jobs or other responsibilities which may limit their contact with full-time faculty during the regular school days. Lead teachers and other persons, also, may assist with the evening orientation.

3.7.2.3 Professional Development

Adjunct faculty may attend faculty in-service, orientation, or other such open meetings. They may be eligible for any grant or VCCS funding so designated. They may attend any college activity, committee meeting, or special event appropriate to their role or area of expertise. They may attend state or VCCS meetings where appropriate and funding is available. Adjuncts may be awarded partial funding on a pro-rated basis to attend meetings when such funds are available and such meetings or conferences meet institutional needs.

3.7.2.4 Office Space

Office space for adjunct faculty is available at various locations throughout campus. Office assignments are available in the division offices and the Workforce Development and Continuing Education office.

3.7.3 Distance Education

Each semester or summer term, Deans will ensure that all division faculty teaching Distance Learning courses distribute to students the Distance Education Evaluation of Instruction Form. This form is available on the LAN and may be distributed either as hard copies or electronically through e-mail.

To ensure student anonymity, completed student evaluation of instruction forms should be submitted directly to the respective Dean's office. For synchronous video courses, the instructor should designate a student in the class or a colleague to collect all forms and submit them to the appropriate division office. For asynchronous packaged, video telecourses, and web-based courses, the individual students should return the completed form either by delivering the hard copy in person or by submitting it through e-mail to the appropriate division office.

As with all other student evaluations, the Deans are responsible for reporting to the faculty the results of the survey. The faculty are responsible for using the results to modify and improve their distance learning courses through the completion of an action plan each year.

Once the Deans have collected all of the completed forms, analyzed and reported the results to the faculty, the Deans should then forward the forms to the Coordinator of Academic Computing and Technologies who will enter the information into a data base. The hard copies of original forms will be maintained on file by the Coordinator of Academic Computing and Technologies for three years, then discarded.

3.7.4 Other Information

Each evaluator will function as follows:

1. Students: Forms will be administered as scheduled above. A faculty member may, with permission of the Dean, withhold evaluation forms from students who missed one-half or more of the class meetings, and may arrange for students that miss evaluation to complete a questionnaire.
2. Self: Self-evaluation will employ the Evaluation of Teaching form which will be completed and submitted to the Dean at least twenty-four hours before the evaluation conference.
3. Supervisor: The supervisor will employ the responses with the faculty member at the evaluation conference.
4. Peers: Peer evaluators will be chosen as follows: The faculty member and supervisor will agree on a number of peer evaluators: this number will be three or more. The faculty member will submit to the Dean names of faculty members whom he or she believes to be qualified to conduct the evaluation. The number of proposed peer evaluators submitted will exceed those chosen by at least two. The Dean will make final selection of peers and their names will be kept confidential.

3.7.5 Documentation

All contributions specified by the faculty member and/or those considered by the Dean will be enumerated and briefly documented. The Dean will specify the faculty member's numerical rating and the rationale behind it. This record will be kept on file the three years.

3.7.6 Contingency Promotions

1. March 1 shall be the deadline for faculty to submit materials for contingency plans to the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee.
2. Any recommendations by the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee concerning faculty who have submitted contingency plans should be made to the President immediately following the adjournment of the reconvened session of the Virginia General Assembly.
3. All contingency plans for promotion must have the recommendations of the Dean and the Vice President of Instruction and Student Services prior to the submission to the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee.
4. In the event of failure to complete contingency plans no punitive conditions will be attached at this time; however, this situation should be reviewed by the Faculty Evaluation Committee annually to determine if such measures are needed.

3.7.7 Appointment Proposal And Rank And Salary Proposal

Minimum essential information and prescribed forms for notifying faculty of the length of appointment and faculty rank and salary are included in Section 3.24.

3.7.8 Change of Status of Faculty Personnel

The president or his designee shall submit the personnel forms listed below for the action designated.

Salary change only: (a) print out showing new salary and (b) appropriate VCCS 34 A.

Rank and salary change: (a) G.O. Form No. P 3, (b) appropriate VCCS 34A, and (c) VCCS l0, Faculty Evaluation Summary.

These forms should be sent to the Personnel Administrator for the Virginia Community College System for review and proper processing.

Changes in appointment status for 9 month faculty may become effective on August l6 and for l2 month faculty on July l each year.

3.7.9 Normal Minimum Criteria For Faculty Rank

Qualifications for the regular and special faculty ranks are listed on Form VCCS 29, "Normal Minimum Criteria for Each Faculty Rank," located on the following page.

The VCCS 29 gives normal minimum criteria for all faculty appointments and promotions. Meeting these criteria does not guarantee appointment at or promotion to a given rank.

If a person is transferred from an administrative position to a teaching or non teaching position or vice versa, the person must meet the VCCS 29 minimum criteria for rank in the new position.

A person who resigns, and is later reemployed by the System, will be reappointed in accordance with the current guidelines. (See VCCS 29).

3.7.10 Procedures for Reallocation of Administrative and Professional Faculty Positions

The community college president may propose the reallocation of an administrative or professional faculty position from one title and salary range to another based upon and to recognize a significant change in the duties and responsibilities assigned to a position and the individual in the position. The reallocation shall be limited to movement from counselor, librarian, assistant coordinator, and administrative officer level to coordinator level; coordinator to counselor, librarian, assistant coordinator, and administrative officer level; coordinator to director level or director to coordinator level; director to dean level or dean to director level.

The request shall include the description of the gradual and substantive differences in duties and responsibilities and the justification for changing the particular duties and responsibilities. The justification must show that the reallocation will not result in significant organizational changes and that the position has assumed the additional responsibilities as the result of business and program necessity.

The request shall only be used in cases of a justified change to a position caused by a gradual change in the scope of assigned responsibilities that are related to the primary role of the position. This reallocation request shall not be used to recognize the assignment of responsibilities on a temporary basis or for an individual to be assigned to a position in an acting capacity. The changed duties and responsibilities must be in line with the ongoing and current responsibilities of the administrative faculty position. The position must remain within the same functional area in the College.

All other requests involving reallocation of duties and responsibilities must be proposed and acted upon as the establishment of one or more positions and the abolishment of one or more existing positions. This reallocation procedure will not be used in conjunction with a reduction in force. Reallocations will not be permitted in college reorganizations that result in the establishment or abolishment of positions. Significant changes in the role and function of a position due to organizational change, even if the salary range of the position will not change, will require the establishment of a new position, which must be posted in accordance with the college affirmative action plan and equal employment opportunity guidelines.

Reallocation requests shall be reviewed by the System Office Human Resource Office and acted upon by the Chancellor. The position incumbent shall be eligible for the issuance of a new rank and salary proposal as approved by the Chancellor. The salary increase granted to a incumbent will be consistent with salary increases granted for promotions.

The president shall assure that a formal position description incorporating the approved changes is prepared and maintained.