Full-time Teaching Faculty Development and Evaluation System Model Plan

Mr. Ty Corbin, Dean of Educational Support Services, J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College

Ms. Marian Hassell, internal advisor, Virginia Community College System

Dr. Bill Hightower, Vice President of Instruction and Student Development, Wytheville Community College

Dr. Chris Lee, Associate Vice Chancellor of Human Resource Services, Virginia Community College System

Dr. Marleen McCabe, Associate Director of Training and Professional Development, Northern Virginia Community College

Ms. Karen Petersen, internal advisor, Virginia Community College System

Ms. Vickie Ratliff, Dean of Business & Information Technology, Mountain Empire Community College

Mr. Patrick Tompkins, Associate Professor of English, John Tyler Community College

Mr. Paul Weitzel, Associate Professor of Accounting, Eastern Shore Community College

Dr. Terry Whisnant, Professor of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Southside Virginia Community College

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. 

The following are Guiding Principles that are inherent in the Faculty Development and Evaluation System.

• Virginia’s Community Colleges intend to foster a culture of high performance and a shared commitment to the mission of the VCCS and the Colleges.
• A commitment to excellence with a focus on student success should be evident in all that we do.
• Faculty efforts should encompass effective performance in Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service.
• Faculty should take ownership of their performance and professional development as an ongoing job responsibility and as a responsibility of a member of the college community.
• Professional Development, Evaluation, and Recognition should be purposefully mutually reinforcing of each other.
• Evidence should inform evaluation and professional development decisions.
• Achievement should be recognized.
• Exemplary performance should be rewarded.
• Peer involvement and collaboration should be encouraged.
• Stakeholders who use the Faculty Development and Evaluation process should be well-trained in its purpose and use. 

Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives (APPDO)

The annual goals that are required of all teaching faculty regardless of the length of their appointments.

College Plan

A set of policies, procedures, and practices that operationalize the VCCS Faculty Development and Evaluation System at the college. The college plan must be approved by a majority of full-time, nine-month teaching faculty who vote on the question, approved by the college president, and certified by the Chancellor as embodying the philosophy, matching the high standards, adhering to VCCS policy, and addressing the technical requirements of the VCCS Faculty Development and Evaluation System.

College Citizenship

Service activities that are in support of college or VCCS initiatives and that involve a direct connection between the faculty member who engages in the specific activity and the faculty member’s position at the college in which the participant is not in a leadership role for the activity. 

College Representation

Service activities that involve a direct connection between the faculty member who engages in the specific activity and the faculty member’s position at the college.

Community Citizenship

Service activities that are indirect in which the faculty member is acting as a community resident who also happens to be a college employee.

Data Sources

Information generated and used for evaluative purposes from Student, Self, Supervisor, and Peers (per college policy).

De Minimis

A non-monetary small gift or token of appreciation—such rewards are not taxable under IRS regulation due to their small or minimal nature.

Development

Structured or formal learning experiences designed to help the individual perform better or learn new knowledge and skills.

Domains (or Performance Domains)

Teaching, Service, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, and Institutional Responsibility.

Evaluation

The periodic assessment of performance that is facilitated by the dean/supervisor.

Evaluation Cycle

The evaluation cycle for all teaching faculty within the VCCS is the calendar year, January to December (See Appendices A & B).

Faculty/Faculty Member/Full-time Faculty/Teaching Faculty

For the purposes of the Faculty Development and Evaluation System and associated Model Plan, “faculty,” “faculty member,” “full-time faculty,” and “teaching faculty” refer to nine-month, full-time teaching faculty, except for those in the associate instructor category of employment.

Forms/Instruments/Devices

The actual documents or templates used to conduct an evaluation session, to set goals and objectives, to nominate a faculty member for an award, or otherwise to execute the development and evaluation system.

Goals

See Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives.

Institutional Responsibility

Performing assigned or presumed duties in accordance with applicable laws, policies, and procedures. This includes, but is not limited to, adherence to college and VCCS policy, collegiality, student advising, administrative duties, departmental supervision or other college community leadership duties, and additional duties as assigned. Activities that do not otherwise fit into Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, or Service, but which are job related, should be counted in the Institutional Responsibility domain.

Policy

VCCS Policy 3.6 which provides the principles and guidelines that outline the development and evaluation system.

Probationary Faculty

Faculty that are in their first fall/spring appointment year.

Recognition

A non-monetary or de minimis award such as certificates or preferred parking spaces for a semester.

Reward

Significant annual monetary awards—bonus, percentage pay increase, or professional development stipend—that are available on a competitive basis to a limited percentage of faculty each year.

Scholarly and Creative Engagement

Publications, research, artistic, intellectual, or other presentation and sharing activities that are specifically associated with the faculty member’s formally recognized area of expertise.

Senior Faculty

Those faculty members beyond the first three continuous appointment years, whether on one-year or multi-year appointments.

Service

The quality participation and commitment to students, college and/or community organizations (See: college representation, college citizenship, and community citizenship).

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).

Weighting

The determination of how each performance domain is valued in relation to other factors. 

One of the ten “Big Ideas” put forward by the VCCS Reengineering Task Force is to “Foster a Culture of High Performance,” in part by developing “systems that fully utilize the talent and potential of our people.” To create an environment for teaching faculty which promotes high performance and continuous improvement resulting in world class faculty and increased student success, the VCCS has designed and adopted the following Full-time Teaching Faculty Development and Evaluation system.

Faculty Development and Evaluation System Summary

The new Faculty Evaluation System includes three components (Evaluation, Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives, and Reward and Recognition), each of which focuses on four domains of full-time teaching faculty activity: Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service.

Evaluation

The Full-time Teaching Faculty Development and Evaluation System improves upon previous practice by compressing five evaluation ratings into two (Meets Expectations/Does Not Meet Expectations) with an emphasis on high performance and continuous improvement in each of the four domains of faculty activity.

Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives

Each faculty member will create three to five annual objectives for continuous professional improvement that are aligned with one or more of the four domains of faculty activity. These objectives will be developed in consultation with and approved by the dean/supervisor.

Reward and Recognition

Each college shall devise a plan to provide reward and recognition of outstanding service for faculty members whose performance exemplifies the highest standards of educational excellence in one or more of the four domains of faculty activity. Faculty members who receive evaluations of “Meets Expectations” are eligible to participate in the Reward and Recognition System.

[1] The new Faculty Development and Evaluation System and associated Model Plan apply only to nine-month, full-time teaching faculty, exclusive of those in the associate instructor category of employment. Faculty in other categories of employment are covered by evaluation systems appropriate to their roles. 

The VCCS Full-time Teaching Faculty Development and Evaluation Model Plan represents the highest aspirations of the VCCS faculty evaluation system and integrates expert opinion from award-winning VCCS faculty and other internal and external experts on teaching and faculty evaluation. Colleges may adopt the Model Plan, adapt it to their local needs, or develop their own evaluation plans that conform to the philosophy, policy, and technical requirements of the VCCS Faculty Development and Evaluation System.

Implementation

The VCCS Model Plan was implemented in the Fall 2013.

Review Process

At least once every two years, the Model Plan shall be reviewed by each college that uses it as the college’s Faculty Development and Evaluation Plan. The review process shall provide the opportunity for involvement of all full-time teaching faculty. Recommendations for change shall be approved by a majority of the faculty who participate in the vote, either in person or by absentee ballot, and shall be submitted to the president for approval. If the recommended changes are not approved, the president must submit recommended modifications for further consideration and re-submission. The new plan must also be certified by the Chancellor as adhering to the philosophy, policy, and technical requirements of the VCCS Faculty Development and Evaluation System. The college’s existing plan will remain in effect unless or until a revised plan is approved by a majority vote of the faculty, approved by the college president, and certified by the Chancellor.

The VCCS System Office will initiate a system-level review process for the Model Plan at least once in the two years after first implementation and periodically thereafter when deemed necessary or appropriate by the Chancellor or the Chancellor’s designees. 

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. In Appendix B a plan for transitioning colleges and faculty from the previous faculty evaluation system to the new Faculty Development and Evaluation System can be found.

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 15thof 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. 

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.

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 

1st Year Faculty

Teaching: 70%
Scholarly and Creative Engagement: 10%
Service: 10%
Institutional Responsibility: 10%

2nd/3rd-Year Faculty

Teaching: 60%
Scholarly and Creative Engagement: 15%
Service: 10%
Institutional Responsibility: 15%

Senior Faculty 

Teaching: 50%
Scholarly and Creative Engagement: 20%
Service: 10%
Institutional Responsibility: 20%

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. 

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 H), 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. 

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, Quality™ 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. 

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. 

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 H). 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. 

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 H).

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 H) 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.

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 I). 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 Matters™, 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 H) 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 I) 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 H) 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. 

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. 

Part 1 - Introduction

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. 

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

Part 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.

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.

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.

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  to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee.

The Learning Environment Award Form  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. 

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. 

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. 

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.

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.

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. 

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 community 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.

The Faculty Community Engagement 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, including:

• Conducting activities or events that are designed to enhance community awareness, foster campus-wide engagement, and celebrate multiculturalism at the college
• Developing and employing innovative teaching strategies that promote universal design in teaching and learning.
• Challenging and motivating others to be respectful and to foster an atmosphere of acceptance and support in the classroom and throughout the college.

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. 

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  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.

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.

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: http://www.irs.gov/Government-Entities/Federal,-State-&-Local-Governments/De-Minimis-Fringe-Benefits 

Part 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. 

Eligibility (Faculty Award for Professional Excellence)

In order to eligible to receive a Faculty Award for Professional Excellence, an individual must

• 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.

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  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 

March 15

Nominations for Faculty Award for Professional Excellence due to the Office of Human Resources. Application portfolios in support of nominations may be submitted after this date but must be received prior to March 31.

March 31

Nominations and application portfolios forwarded from the Office of Human Resources to the Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee.

May 1

Recipients of Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence selected by Faculty Reward and Recognition Committee.

May 15

Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence presented.

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  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.

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. 

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 

Part 4—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. 

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. 

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 

Percent of Faculty Receiving Awards to Monetary Value Per Award

25% - $400

20% - $500

15% - $650

12.5% - $800

10% - $1000

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. 

Part 5 - Assessment of Reward and Recognition Program Effectiveness

Date: By Sep. 1

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Dean/supervisor communicates first semester evaluation criteria and Performance & Professional Development Objectives. 

Date: By Nov. 15

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Faculty member completes assessment of Performance and Professional Development Objectives and self-evaluation for Fall semester.

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: Faculty member submits assessment of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives and self-evaluation for current calendar year.

Senior One-Year Faculty (Beyond First Three Years): Faculty member submits assessment of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives and self-evaluation for current calendar year.

Multi-Year Faculty: Faculty member submits assessment of Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives and In last year of multi-year appointment self-evaluation for all years of the multi-year cycle. 

Date: By Dec. 1 

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Dean/supervisor completes Fall semester Performance and Professional Development Objectives assessment and summative evaluation.  

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: 

• Dean/supervisor and faculty member complete assessment of Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives for present calendar year and complete negotiations on Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives for coming year. 
• Dean/supervisor completes evaluations for current calendar year. 

Senior One-Year Faculty (Beyond First Three Years):

• Dean/supervisor and faculty member complete assessment of Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives for present calendar year and complete negotiations on Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives for coming year. 
• Dean/supervisor completes evaluations for current calendar year. 

Multi-Year Faculty:

• In every year of multi-year appointment, dean/supervisor and faculty member complete assessment of Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives for present calendar year and complete negotiations on Annual Performance & Professional Development Objectives for coming year. 
• In last year of multi-year appointment, dean/supervisor completes evaluation for all years of the multi-year cycle.  
   

Date: By Dec. 15

Probationary First-Year Faculty: For faculty member who receives a “Meets Expectations” rating, dean/supervisor communicates evaluation criteria for Spring semester.

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: 

• For faculty member who receives a “Meets Expectations” rating, dean/supervisor communicates evaluation criteria for next calendar year/evaluation cycle, as appropriate. 
• Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee meets to review documents of faculty, if applicable. 

Senior One-Year Faculty (Beyond First Three Years): 

• Dean/supervisor communicates evaluation criteria for next calendar year/evaluation cycle, as appropriate.
• Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee meets to review documents of faculty.

Multi-Year Faculty: 

• Dean/supervisor communicates evaluation criteria for next calendar year/evaluation cycle, as appropriate.
• Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee meets to review documents of faculty.

Date: By Jan. 15 

Probationary First-Year Faculty:

• Faculty and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Fall semester. 
• Dean/supervisor communicates to faculty second semester evaluation criteria and Performance & Professional Development Objectives.  

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: Faculty and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Fall semester. 

Senior One-Year Faculty (Beyond First Three Years):

• Faculty and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Fall semester. 
• Faculty notified of non-reappointment decisions when applicable. 

Multi-Year Faculty: 

• Faculty and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Fall semester. 
• Faculty notified of non-reappointment decisions when applicable. 

Date: By March 1 

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Dean/supervisor completes second semester (Spring) evaluations. 

Date: By Mar. 15

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Faculty member who receives a “Does Not Meet Expectations” rating notified of non-reappointment decision.   

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: Faculty member notified of non-reappointment decisions (when applicable).

Date: By June 1 

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Faculty member and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Spring semester. 

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: Faculty member and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Spring semester. 

Senior One-Year Faculty (Beyond First Three Years): Faculty member and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Spring semester. 

Multi-Year Faculty: Faculty member and dean/supervisor receive student evaluation results from Spring semester. 

Date: By June 30 

Probationary First-Year Faculty: Faculty member receives contract for the next academic year (if eligible). 

Second- and Third-Year Faculty: Faculty member receives contract for the next academic year (if eligible) and notification of one-year or multi-year appointment term as appropriate.

Senior One-Year Faculty (Beyond First Three Years): Faculty member receives contract for the next academic year (if eligible) and notification of one-year or multi-year appointment term as appropriate. 

Multi-Year Faculty: Faculty member receives contract for the next academic year and notification of one-year or multi-year appointment term as appropriate.

For colleges currently evaluating full-time teaching faculty on an academic/fiscal year cycle:

• Evaluations for Academic Year 2012-13 or Fiscal Year 2012-13 should be completed in accordance with previously existing plan and previously established deadlines.
• Spring-semester performance of new faculty hired in Spring 2013 is conducted in accordance with previously existing plan.
• Faculty first hired to teach full-time in Spring 2013 enter the probationary first-year evaluation cycle in the Fall 2013 semester; such faculty participate in the Faculty Development and Evaluation system in accordance with the first semester requirements of the new faculty evaluation plan for Fall 2013 semester hires; said evaluations are to be completed in a timely manner in order to comply with non-reappointment notification deadline of the following March 15.
• Continuing faculty will conduct student evaluations during Fall 2013.
• Continuing faculty will establish Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives in accordance with the new faculty evaluation plan by December 1, 2013.
• First-semester performance evaluation of faculty hired in Fall 2013 is to be conducted in accordance with the new faculty evaluation plan; said evaluations are to be completed by December 15.
• Faculty contracts/appointment proposals for 2014-15 are to be issued in Spring 2014 pursuant to results of the 2012-13 evaluations completed, as noted above, by deadlines established under previously existing plan.
• Full implementation of new faculty evaluation plan, applicable to all full-time teaching faculty, commences On January 1, 2014.  
• Unless otherwise stipulated, faculty in the midst of a multi-year appointment as of January 2014 are deemed to carry a summative rating of “Meets Expectations” until the final year of the current multi-year appointment, whereupon they will participate in a comprehensive evaluation in accordance with the new faculty evaluation plan. In the meantime, they will participate in the Annual Performance and Professional Development and the Reward and Recognition components of the Faculty Development and Evaluation System.  

For colleges currently evaluating full-time teaching faculty on a calendar year cycle:

• Evaluations of continuing faculty for Calendar Year 2013 should be completed in accordance with previously existing plan and previously existing deadlines.
• Faculty first hired to teach full-time in Spring 2013 enter the probationary first-year evaluation cycle in the Fall 2013 semester; such faculty participate in the Faculty Development and Evaluation system in accordance with the first semester requirements of the new faculty evaluation plan for Fall 2013 semester hires; said evaluations are to be completed in a timely manner in order to comply with non-reappointment notification deadline of the following March 15.
• Continuing faculty will establish Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives by December 1, 2013 in accordance with new faculty evaluation plan.
• First-semester performance evaluation of new faculty hired in Fall 2013 is to be conducted in accordance with the new faculty evaluation plan; said evaluations are to be completed by December 15, 2013.
• Faculty contracts/appointment proposals for 2014-15 are to be issued in Spring 2014 pursuant to results of Calendar Year 2013 evaluations completed, as noted above, by deadlines established under previously existing plan.
• Full implementation of new faculty evaluation plan, applicable to all full-time teaching faculty, commences On January 1, 2014.

Unless otherwise stipulated, faculty in the midst of a multi-year appointment as of January 2014 are deemed to carry a summative rating of “Meets Expectations” until the final year of the current multi-year appointment, whereupon they will participate in a comprehensive evaluation in accordance with the new faculty evaluation plan. In the meantime, they will participate in the Annual Performance and Professional Development and the Reward and Recognition components of the Faculty Development and Evaluation System

Please contact the Academic and Student Affairs Office to request the form.

Please contact the Academic and Student Affairs Office to request the form.

Please contact the Academic and Student Affairs Office to request the form.

To the Student

The college and your instructor are committed to continuous improvement. Please assist our efforts by providing ratings for the items below. Please also take a few moments to include additional feedback in the two comment boxes at the end of the survey. Thank you. 

1. The instructor consistently showed evidence of careful preparation for this class.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
2. The instructor effectively organized the learning activities, required course materials, and assignments for this class. 
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
3. The instructor conducted this class in accordance with the course outline and syllabus.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
4. The instructor demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the subject matter.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
5. The instructor communicated the subject matter clearly.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
6. The instructor encouraged participation, discussion, and interaction among students in this class.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
7. The instructor provided helpful answers to my questions.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
8. The instructor fully explained to students the grading system used in this class.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
9. The grading system used by this instructor was fair.
   1. Strongly Agree
   2. Agree
   3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
   4. Disagree
   5. Strongly Disagree
10. The instructor graded tests and/or other assignments in a reasonable amount of time (usually within one week).
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
11. The teaching methods used by this instructor helped me to learn.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
12. The instructor was fair and impartial when dealing with students in this class.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
13. The instructor maintained an environment of encouragement and support for students in this class.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
14. The instructor’s enthusiasm for teaching and for the subject matter was evident.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
15. The instructor was usually available to assist me during scheduled office hours.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
16. The instructor responded to my phone, email, and other communications in a timely manner (usually within one business day).
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree
17. Overall, this instructor was an effective teacher.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree 
18. I would recommend this instructor to my fellow students.
    1. Strongly Agree
    2. Agree
    3. Neither Agree nor Disagree
    4. Disagree
    5. Strongly Disagree

19. Please use the space below to comment on the most effective aspects of the instruction you received in this class:

     

20. Please use the space below to suggest ways in which the instruction you received in this class could be improved:

Please contact the Academic and Student Affairs Office to request the form.

View and Download Annual Performance and Professional Development Objectives Faculty/Supervisor Agreement Form

INTRODUCTION

The following Performance and Professional Development Objectives will be used by all teaching faculty in their first two semesters of employment at the college. The objectives are designed as a developmental process to acculturate new faculty to the full-time teaching faculty position at the college and in the Virginia Community College System. The objectives reflect the commitment of VCCS faculty to high standards of performance and to continuous improvement.

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 Matters™, 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.

The Performance and Professional Development Objectives for the third and later semesters of teaching will be developed by the faculty member in consultation with the dean/supervisor.

First Semester

Teaching

• Implement and document at least one strategy for student engagement and learning outcomes. The strategy must include learning objectives, pedagogical approach, faculty-student interaction, one or more student activities, assessment of teaching, assessment of student engagement and learning, and reflections on/revision of the strategy.

Scholarly and Creative Engagement

• Attend the VCCS New Faculty seminar, a VCCS Peer Conference, or another teaching related conference, seminar, workshop, or course approved by the supervisor; or work with a mentor to become acclimated to the college mission, vision, and goals and/or to develop one’s instructional effectiveness.

Institutional Responsibility

• Initiate collaboration with one or more colleagues, mentors, and/or counseling staff members to develop and apply knowledge of the college’s educational programs and student advising processes.

Service

• Volunteer to participate in a college or community service organization or activity.

Second Semester

Teaching

• Reflect on the first semester of teaching to identify from within the general areas of instructional design, instructional delivery, instructional effectiveness, or instructional expertise one specific target for improvement. Develop, implement, and document a strategy to address the target for improvement. The strategy must include objectives, activities, assessments, and reflections on/revision of the strategy.

Scholarly and Creative Engagement

• 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 Matters™, or other education in online instruction approved by the supervisor.
• For faculty anticipated to teach only on-campus courses: Earn certification or course credit approved by the supervisor in teaching with technology.

N.B.: (1) Faculty who have already completed relevant coursework or certification in teaching with technology are exempt from the Technology Performance and Professional Development Objective. The dean/supervisor will have final approval on what coursework or certification meets this Objective. (2) Where deemed appropriate by agreement of the faculty member and the dean the Technology Performance and Professional Development Objective may be moved to the third semester.

Institutional Responsibility

• Participate in an activity in support of the strategic goals of the college/VCCS. Documentation of this must specifically identify the strategic goal, the activity, and reflections and plans for further action.

Service

• Volunteer to participate in a college or community service organization or activity.

Third Semester

As part of the evaluation process during the second semester of employment, the faculty member will develop a total of 3-5 Performance and Professional Development Objectives in one or more of the four domains of Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service. The objectives will be developed in consultation with and approved by the dean/supervisor. 

View and Download Reward and Recognition Nomination Forms 

View and Download Application Forms for Faculty Awards for Professional Excellence