Evaluation Principles

• Role of the Unit Administrator.
  • Mentoring, motivating, and developing faculty and unit-wide programs.
• Every faculty member must have a current position description.
  • Descriptions shall have generic statements containing integrated extension, research, teaching, and service expectations.
  • All descriptions shall be reviewed, edited, and approved by the unit leader.
• Expectations of faculty shall be clearly communicated at the beginning of each evaluation cycle, and agreed upon by both parties.
• Documenting and evaluating the contributions a faculty member makes to the quality and impact of programs is critical. Our value and rewards system will reflect program quality and impact.
  • IMPACT:
    • It might take 3 to 4 years to have a documentable impact. Progress towards an impact should be made each year.
    • Writing impact statements is an activity that all unit leaders should help faculty do better.
  • QUALITY:
    • Impact factors of journals, learning gains by students, and skills learned by clients are examples of quality indicators.
• Be sensitive to appointments (Research, Teaching, and Extension). "Excellence" and a top level of compensation should be given to those who achieve in all aspects of their position.
• A faculty member's program should be integrated into departmental, College, and University missions. This should be evident by the innovation, collaboration, and synergy with other programs.
• Scholarly Activity, defined as a creative work that is peer reviewed and publicly disseminated, is an essential component to evaluating the performance of faculty.
  • All three missions have scholarly activity; for example, publications, CDs, curricula, web sites, and other media.
  • Scholarly activity differs from job duties. Duties include teaching a course, while scholarly activity involves obtaining a peer review of a course CD with subsequent public dissemination. Both should be evaluated and rewarded.
• A narrative of program accomplishments shall be prepared by each faculty member and included in the annual report. In < 3 pages, impacts and scholarly activity should be clearly delineated.

Mentoring, Collaboration, and Service Principles

• Reward mentoring and collaboration
  • Mentoring
    • All assistant professors shall have an official mentor, who shall review scholarly output and comment on the assistant professor's annual report.
    • Faculty based at an AREC shall have co-mentors, with one being an on-campus and the other an AREC co-mentor. This is in keeping with current VAES policy.
  • Collaboration
    • In addition to scholarly activity in assigned mission areas, we value collaboration.
    • Credit shall be given in the evaluation process to collaboration.
    • Unit leaders should explicitly reward this positive attribute.
    • Team-based evaluations are important, particularly in cluster hires and for AREC faculty.
      • Team-based evaluations shall be done jointly, with the unit leaders coming to a consensus regarding the merit evaluation of the faculty member in question.
      • The evaluation statement on Form A shall include a synopsis of input from each unit leader.
• Service
  • This shall be part of every faculty member's position and includes activities as defined in the Faculty Handbook.
    • Section 2.8.4.4 of the Faculty Handbook defines service.
  • Service is performed as part of but not in lieu of one's assigned duties. It is should not be confused with Extension/outreach, which is a separate mission area. Too much service is a conflict of commitment, according to University policy Section 2.16.3.
    • Service within a unit shall be distributed fairly and equitably by unit leaders. Unit leaders will assist faculty in striking a balance between service-related activities and mission-related expectations.

Principles for International Activities

• International activities can occur in research, teaching, or extension.
• International activities should enhance a faculty member's ability to perform his or her assigned duties.
• Keep in mind that the dissemination process for international scholarly works is sometimes non-traditional but may be as effective as traditional means in reaching clients or peers.
• Quality and impact indicators for international activities fall into three broad measures. Examples of each measure are given below:
  • Resources and abilities gained.
    • Competitive grants and project work plans.
    • No. of high quality international students mentored.
    • Foreign language training by faculty member.
  • Recognition received.
    • International presentations, boards, and committees.
    • Publications translated into foreign languages.
    • Hosting of international workshops and symposia.
    • Joint degree program involvement.
  • Outputs produced.
    • No. of refereed publications with international themes and/or data.
    • Study abroad/student exchanges led/virtual world classes led.
    • International curricula developed.