UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA LAS VEGAS
POLICY AND PROCEDURES
FOR THE EVALUATION OF
NON-ACADEMIC FACULTY MEMBERS
Index of Document
- Individual Faculty Responsibilities
- UCCSN Code
- Evaluation Calendar
- Planning for the Evaluation
- Conducting the Review
- Summarize Using the Evaluation
- Essential Functions/PDQ Review
- Disagreement with Evaluation
- Setting Up a Peer Review Committee
Forms
- Evaluation Form - MS Word - Adobe .pdf
- Related Factors Worksheet - MS Word- Adobe .pdf
- Position Description Questionnaire - MS Word
Individual Faculty Responsibilities
It is understood that non-academic faculty members shall fulfill their individual obligations :
- A. To their unit and university by carrying through with their professional responsibilities in accordance with university and unit bylaws or procedure manuals and the University and Community College System of Nevada Code;
- B. To counsel, teach and work with students;
- C. To continue their professional growth and development;
- D. To encourage and support the development of their staff and unit. 1
UCCSN Code
Faculty shall be evaluated at least once annually by department chairs, supervisors or heads of administrative units. 2 Procedures for evaluation shall be established in institutional bylaws. 3
Evaluation Calendar
In 1997 and future years, the annual evaluation period used will be defined as January 01 through December 31 of the previous year. Evaluation completion dates are set each year by the President's cabinet, please "click here"to view the current schedule.
Planning for the Evaluation
The supervisor is the key to the success or failure of the evaluation process. The process will not work well unless the supervisor takes adequate time to plan for and participate in the annual evaluation process.The supervisor must plan for the performance review discussion. Otherwise, little will be accomplished in the session. The following points will help the supervisor in the planning process:
- Review all the information pertaining to the position (i.e., the PDQ) and any notes made regarding performance.
- Schedule the review with the faculty member. Make sure the review is at a time when neither of you will be interrupted.
- Make notes on how the faculty member has exceeded or met the performance expectations. If improvement is needed in specific areas, identify ways in which the faculty member might improve performance. When scheduling the review, ask the faculty member to also be prepared to discuss these details.
- Be prepared to discuss all of your observations with the faculty member. Think of what you are going to say, concentrating on positive aspects of his/her performance. Also, be prepared to schedule a follow-up meeting if further discussion is needed.
Conducting the Review
When conducting the performance review, consider the following factors:
- Setting the climate and initiating the appraisal. This session may be stressful for the faculty member. Attempt to put him/her at ease; emphasize two-way communication; stipulate positive aspects of the faculty member's performance as well as areas in need of improvement. Avoid interruptions.
- Obtaining the non-academic faculty member's views. By having previously established performance goals (i.e., PDQ and previous evaluations), the faculty member should have a fairly good idea as to whether or not he or she has been meeting performance standards. This is especially true if you have done a good job providing feedback to the faculty member regarding their performance during the review period. The faculty member may also be aware of job accomplishments that you overlooked. Likewise, the faculty member may be aware of ways in which performance could be improved. By obtaining the faculty member's viewpoints, you are in a better position to deal with what otherwise might be unresolved job-related matters. Two-way communication should help to clarify information and create a mutual understanding of performance appraisal matters.
- Planning for the non-academic faculty member's growth and development. The appraisal review is a natural time for you and the faculty member to focus on the future. The review session provides you with a great deal of information concerning the faculty member's strengths and areas where improvement is needed. It also provide the opportunity to discuss the faculty member's career goals and interests. Together you can plan specific activities and job assignments which will develop the faculty member and increase his or her job skills and knowledge. This future orientation indicates that you have a sincere interest in and support for the personal and professional development of the faculty member. The result can be a more motivated and productive individual.
Summarize Using the Evaluation Form
The evaluation form is divided into four major sections. These sections include :
- Area 1 : Essential Functions (from PDQ) and Special Projects
- Area 2 : Goals and Objectives
- Professional Development Plan
- Related Factors (Optional; but if used, must be used for everyone within the unit.)
Any changes regarding responsibilities, goals and/or development plans should be noted in the comments section of these evaluations and incorporated into the annual evaluation.
For the current evaluation period, a rating is required for each "area" and, beginning with the 2005 calendar year, an overall rating is required. Each supervisor shall use the following ratings:
- Excellent
- Commendable
- Satisfactory
- Unsatisfactory
If an annual evaluation identifies unsatisfactory performance or finds significant need for improvement, a proposed remedial course of action and a reasonable time limit must be added to the evaluation for mutual collegial benefit, and be undertaken during the period before the next evaluation. Both the evaluee and the department will thus have on record the force and content of the shortcoming. In principle this allows a wide range of evaluations and of warnings. 4
The final evaluation shall be presented to the non-academic faculty member for review. The evaluation is to be signed by the non-academic faculty member, the supervisor and appropriate reviewing official.
Essential Functions/PDQ Review
The supervisor is to also review the PDQ and its essential functions with the non-academic faculty member. The PDQ should be revised when assignment changes or additions of a permanent nature occur.
Disagreement with Evaluation
If the faculty member disagrees with their evaluation, he or she may :
- Within thirty calendar days after notification, submit a written rejoinder to the evaluation, or
- Within fifteen calendar days after notification, request in writing to the college dean or appropriate vice president the formation of a committee of peers to conduct a separate annual evaluation. The peer review committee shall be constituted within fifteen calendar days after receipt of a request for peer review. The committee's purpose shall be to file a report which either recommends upholding the administrator's original evaluation or reversing that evaluation and recommending an alternative one. The committee shall complete its work no later than the end of B-contract period. Both the original evaluation and the recommendation of the peer review committee shall be forwarded to the appropriate dean and vice president, and both evaluations shall be placed in the faculty member's master personnel file. The appropriate vice president shall make the final decision of the evaluation to be issued to the faculty member for the year. 5
Setting Up a Peer Review Committee
Please contact the Director of Human Resources for guidelines and assistance in the creation of a Peer Review Committee.A copy of the Peer Review Policy is available here.
1 see Chapter III, Section 5.2 of UNLV Bylaws
2 see Chapter 5, Section 5.11.1 of Code
3 see Chapter 5, Section 5.11.2 of Code
4 see Chapter III, Section 8.5 of UNLV Bylaws
5 see Chapter III, Section 8.3 of UNLV Bylaws
6 see Chapter III, Section 8.4 of UNLV Bylaws
