Section 3. Policy Statement

1. Faculty will receive an overall evaluation rating based upon their performance in several standards. Each Standard will be judged upon a predetermined set of criteria. A list of possible examples to be judged is provided for each standard.
2. Evaluation Guidelines: In conducting and using faculty evaluations, FNU embraces the following criteria:
   1. Evaluations of instructors should promote sound educational principles, fulfillment of institutional mission, and effective performance of job responsibilities, so that the educational needs of the student, community, and society are met.
   2. Evaluation criteria should be determined prior to the start of the evaluation period.
   3. Supervisors will use indices including student and/or classroom observations when evaluating a faculty member’s performance.
   4. No one index, including student evaluations, may be the sole basis for a specific evaluation rating, initiation of any disciplinary action or termination proceeding.
   5. Evaluations shall be constructive so that they help the institution develop human resources, encourage, and assist those evaluated to provide excellent service.
   6. Measurement procedures should be chosen or developed to assure reliability so that the information obtained will provide consistent indications of the performance of those evaluated.
   7. All evaluations of the instructor’s professional activities should be conducted openly with the instructor’s full knowledge and awareness.
   8. The faculty member being observed, by a peer or supervisor, should have adequate opportunity to discuss the results of the evaluation measures with the evaluator.
   9. A faculty evaluation, which indicates the need for improvement, should be supported by specific written reasons for such comments and the written response of the faculty being evaluated.
   10. Student assessments, administered at the end of each course, which indicate faculty performance below the acceptable benchmark, should be discussed with the faculty member. An improvement plan should be agreed to between the faculty and their Department or Division Head, so that the faculty member has a clear plan for remediation and improvement.
   11. With the faculty evaluation process, there should be an institutional commitment to assist the faculty improve with an ongoing professional development program.
3. Supervisors will undergo appropriate training to ensure that the evaluated faculty member’s performance or qualifications are assessed fairly and without bias. Where deficiencies in a faculty member’s performance are identified, the faculty member is responsible for remedying the deficiencies, and the institution will assist through development opportunities.
4. Evaluation indices will be held in confidence and only made available to the faculty member, the supervisor, and appropriate administrators.
5. Evaluation should address those evaluated in a professional, considerate, and courteous manner.
6. Evaluator:
   1. The faculty supervisor(s) is/are responsible for the evaluation of the faculty member.
   2. The supervisor may consult Subject Matter Expert (SME) at any stage of the evaluation process.
   3. Supervisors must complete a Faculty Evaluation Training Workshop to ensure the knowledge of the policy and procedures.