Welcome to the Northern Virginia Community College Website

Accessibility Navigation:

Faculty Evaluations

3.6 Faculty Evaluations

3.6.0 Teaching Faculty Development, Evaluation and Recognition Policy (SB)

3.6.0.1 Purpose

To create an environment for teaching faculty that promotes high performance and continuous improvement resulting in world class faculty and increased student success.

3.6.0.2 Application

This section of the policy applies to all regular full-time teaching faculty.

3.6.0.3 Overview

The VCCS teaching faculty development and evaluation process provides a mechanism for appraising teaching faculty performance with the expressed aim of working on continuous faculty improvement and professional development. A faculty development and evaluation plan that is meaningful for both faculty members and their supervisors requires strong agreement on the domains of faculty performance to be evaluated, the component areas to be included in the assessment, and the specific elements within these areas to include in the plan. Four domains of faculty performance are included in the VCCS Teaching Faculty Development and Evaluation process: (a) teaching, (b) scholarly and creative engagement, (c) institutional responsibility, and (d) service. Based on the results of the appraisal of faculty performance, individualized personal and professional development plans will be developed through a collaborative effort between each faculty member and his/her supervisor.

3.6.0.4 Performance and Professional Development

Faculty will develop performance and development goals.

  1. Performance Evaluation
    1. Performance evaluation plans will include standards and expectations in each of four performance domains: teaching, scholarly and creative engagement, institutional responsibility, and service.
    2. The performance domains will be weighted according to each college’s evaluation plan, however the minimum weighting will be 50% for teaching, and 10% each for scholarly and creative engagement, institutional responsibility, and service.
      1. The weighting of evaluation domains outlines the focus of effort and the articulation of standards and expectations for performance and does not denote the quantification of time for the purpose of establishing a rating.
      2. 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).
      3. Service: For the service domain, service is the quality participation and commitment to students, college and/or community organizations. Participation in these activities is not done for extra compensation, but is an expectation of one’s activities as a professional educator. Service activities are divided into three categories: college representation, college citizenship, and community citizenship. Activities in this domain are differentiated as follows:
        • College Representation – Service activities that involve a direct connection between the faculty member who engages in the specific activity, and his/her position at the college.
        • College Citizenship - Service activities that are in support of college or VCCS initiatives in which the participant is not in a leadership role for the activity.
        • Community Citizenship - Service activities that are indirect in which the employee is acting as a community resident who also happens to be a college employee.
      4. Scholarly and Creative Engagement: Activities specifically associated with the faculty member’s formally recognized area of expertise.
      5. Institutional Responsibility: Performing assigned or presumed duties according to one's role at the college. These activities support and advance both the mission of the VCCS and the college to enhance the effective functioning of the college – including the business processes (i.e. advising students, adherence to college and VCCS policy, collegiality, administrative duties, departmental supervision or assigned college community leadership duties, additional duties as assigned). If an activity does not otherwise fit into Teaching, Scholarly and Creative Engagement, or Service, and the activity is job related, then it should be counted in the Institutional Responsibility domain.
      6. The minimum teaching weighting for first-year faculty will be 70%, and 60% for second-year faculty.
  2. Development - The intent of the Annual Performance and Development Objectives is to provide a quality enhancement initiative for each faculty member.
    1. All faculty members are required to establish annual goals in consultation with their respective dean/supervisor. These objectives will be related to one or more of the four performance domains.
    2. Each faculty member and supervisor will have an annual discussion on the progress and completion of agreed upon performance and professional development objectives.
    3. Progress on objectives will be used in evaluations at the time of contract renewal.

3.6.0.5 Reward and Recognition

Rewards and recognition are based on educational excellence in the four performance domain areas: teaching, service, institutional responsibility, and scholarly and creative engagement. It is expected that approximately 10 – 25% of teaching faculty would receive a monetary award each year as a part of the Reward and Recognition component of the Faculty Development and Evaluation System, assuming availability of resources. Recognition activities would be in addition to rewards and are expected to be given in greater number than rewards.

  1. Definitions
    1. Recognition is defined as non-monetary or de minimis awards such as certificates, gift certificate to the college bookstore, or preferred parking spaces for a semester, etc.
    2. Rewards are defined as 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.
  2. Eligibility Requirements
    1. First year faculty are ineligible for reward but are eligible for recognition.
    2. Multi-year faculty who receive a ‘does not meet expectations’ rating will be ineligible for reward and recognition that year.
    3. Reward and recognition will require additional justification through a clear narrative that contains evidence, a portfolio, or a body of work.
  3. 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. Reward and Recognition award recipients will be recommended by a committee comprised of a majority of full-time teaching faculty.

3.6.0.6 College Plan

  1. Preparation of Plan -- Each college shall prepare a Development and Evaluation plan. The plan will include the following components:
    1. The four domains for faculty performance expectations (Teaching, Scholarly & Creative Engagement, Institutional Responsibility, and Service);
    2. Development of annual performance and professional development objectives;
    3. Weighting of the domains for faculty performance expectations;
    4. Data source contributors to evaluation;
    5. Representative examples of the component areas to be included in the assessment of each performance domain;
    6. Faculty member supervisor conference;
    7. Provisions for a reward and recognition component;
    8. Time frames, summary ratings, eligibility requirements that comply with the provisions of this policy;
    9. Inclusion of provisions to provide for the collaborative development of goals, the assessment of evaluation and development goals and the provision of a written summary of the evaluation.
  2. Approval of Plan -- All full-time faculty will have the opportunity to be involved in the development of the plan. The plan shall be approved by a majority of faculty who participate in the vote, either in person or by absentee ballot and by the college president, then certified by the Chancellor. If the majority of teaching faculty vote to adopt a development and evaluation plan and the president does not approve the policy within two years, the plan would be reviewed by the Chancellor. Initial and subsequent evaluation and development plans must be submitted to the Chancellor for certification prior to their implementation. During periods when colleges do not have a plan certified by the Chancellor, the college shall use the VCCS’ model evaluation plan.
  3. Publication of Plan -- The college evaluation plan shall be widely disseminated including placement in the college's Faculty Handbook.

3.6.0.7 Summary Ratings

Performance evaluations shall include a summary rating of ‘meets expectations’ or ‘does not meet expectations.’

  1. A faculty member shall meet expectations in all four performance domains over the span of the contract period to receive a ‘meets expectations’ rating;
  2. The faculty member shall present information and evidence to validate a ‘meets expectations' rating;
  3. If the rating is appealed, the Dean or Supervisor shall provide information to support a 'does not meet expectations' rating;
  4. Faculty who do not ‘meet expectations’ will be ineligible for promotion, or reward and recognition, and ineligible for multi-year contracts, subject to the review of the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee.

3.6.0.8 Timetable

  1. The evaluation process will operate on an annual, calendar year cycle
  2. Decisions regarding continued appointments will be made by March 15th for faculty members who are on probationary-year, second-year, and third-year contracts, and January 15th for faculty members on multi-year contracts and other faculty. To meet the provisions of this policy, all first, second, and third-year faculty must receive their pay on a 24-pay disbursement cycle.
  3. Frequency of Evaluations
    1. First-year faculty will be evaluated during each of the first two semesters of employment (exclusive of summer term).
    2. Second and third-year faculty members (and any other faculty members operating under a one-year appointment) will be evaluated once per year, near the end of the calendar year.
    3. Faculty working under a multi-year appointment will only participate in the full evaluation process in the final year of their multi-year appointment. During the intervening years of a multi-year appointment, faculty members will develop annual personal and professional development plans in collaboration with their supervisors. The results of the annual personal and professional development plan and all performance over the multi-year appointment will be considered in the multi-year renewal evaluation.
  4. Continuation Decisions
    1. First-year faculty who receive a ‘does not meet expectations’ rating in either semester will not be continued, however they may be allowed to complete their employment contract period. They may continue to teach or be reassigned at the discretion of the president for the spring semester but must be notified by March 15th that they would not be reappointed for the following academic
    2. Second and third-year faculty who receive a ‘does not meet expectations’ rating will not be continued.
    3. Multi-year faculty who receive a ‘does not meet expectations’ rating will have their evaluation documents further reviewed by the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee, consistent with policy 3.4.0.4. The President will consider the input of the supervisor, the input of the supervising Vice President, and the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee when determining whether or not to grant a multi-year appointment.

3.6.0.9 Access to Records

Faculty members shall have the right to review all materials utilized in the development of the evaluation. All supplemental information shall become part of the record.

3.6.0.10 Appeal

Teaching faculty may appeal their evaluation through the Faculty Grievance Procedure, however appeals reaching Level III of the Faculty Grievance Procedure must be heard by peers through an Ad Hoc Hearing Committee.

3.6.0.11 Review Process

The college development and evaluation plan shall be reviewed periodically. The review process shall provide the opportunity for involvement of all 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 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. In the meantime, the existing plan would remain in effect.

3.6.0.12 Academic Freedom

Evaluation shall not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of constitutional rights or academic freedom as set forth in the Statement of Academic Freedom and Responsibility adopted by the State Board.

3.6.1 Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation and Recognition Policy

3.6.1.1 Purpose

To create an environment for administrative and professional faculty that promotes high performance and continuous improvement resulting in optimal efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of services that foster student success.

3.6.1.2 Application

This section of the policy applies to all full-time administrative and professional faculty.

3.6.1.3 Guiding Principles and Overview

The VCCS Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition System provides a mechanism for evaluating administrative and professional faculty performance while adhering to principles designed to assure that the process is meaningful and purposeful for the faculty member and the supervisor.

  1. Guiding Principles

    The spirit and intent of the Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition System for Virginia's Community Colleges is to foster a culture of engagement and accountability by investing in the professional development and performance of each faculty member. Purposeful and mutually reinforcing professional development, evaluation, and recognition aligns faculty performance with the mission, goals, and values of the VCCS, the college, campus, division, department, and the faculty member. Transparent, well-defined, and measurable performance expectations are discussed, agreed upon, and monitored in a collaborative and constructive manner. Evidence informs evaluation and professional development decisions and exemplary performance is acknowledged.

    Faculty are expected to achieve high standards of performance, to establish and pursue challenging goals, and to be results and outcomes-oriented. They can expect that their supervisor will provide them with guidance, support, encouragement, due recognition, and a fair assessment of their contributions to the college's mission.

    The guiding principles of the Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition System reflect a focus on continuous improvement with the goal of strengthening both individual and organizational performance. The administrative and professional faculty:

    1. Share a commitment to the mission of the VCCS and to the mission of individual colleges within the VCCS
    2. Cultivate a culture of high performance and collaboration; foster lifelong learning; pursue knowledge; and demonstrate a spirit of service
    3. Focus on student success
    4. Respond to the changing needs and cultural diversity of the students, faculty, staff, and the local community by creating and maintaining a diverse and inclusive learning environment
    5. Perform job responsibilities to the highest ethical and professional standards, apply best management practices; and adhere to the VCCS Code of Ethics and to the code of ethics established by their respective college.
  2. Overview

    The VCCS Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition System acknowledges the substantial differences in the function, role, level of authority, scope of work, and day-to-day tasks for which administrative and professional faculty are responsible. Therefore, the primary performance domain under which all administrative and professional faculty are to be evaluated is associated with the core job responsibilities, outcomes-based measurements, and performance expectations as outlined in the faculty member’s position description. In addition, administrative and professional faculty are evaluated based upon performance domains that reflect essential competencies of the position held and as prescribed by the college.

    The VCCS Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition System also provides a mechanism for strengthening both individual and organizational performance by requiring the establishment of annual objectives. Each year, administrative and professional faculty members, in collaboration with the supervisor, are expected to develop meaningful and purposeful objectives to serve as individualized performance and professional development initiatives.

    Finally, the VCCS Administrative and Professional faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition System includes provisions for acknowledging exemplary performance and contributions. Each college is to develop a recognition program that is customized to the culture and available resources of the college.

3.6.1.4 Performance Evaluation and Annual Objectives

  1. Performance Evaluation
    1. The evaluation plan for each college must identify the performance domains within which administrative and professional faculty are to be evaluated.
    2. All administrative and professional faculty must be evaluated in each of the following performance domains:
      • Core Job Responsibilities – Professional activities, performance expectations, measurements, and outcomes as delineated in the faculty member’s position description.
      • Non-routine and/or Strategic Responsibilities and Activities – Special projects or assignments; activities in support of the strategic plan of the organizational unit, the college, or the VCCS; other duties and responsibilities not specifically included in the faculty member’s position description.
      • College, Community, and Professional Service – Participation in college and/or community organizations or activities and/or activities in service to the profession. Participation in such activities is not done for additional compensation, but is an expectation of the faculty member’s role as a professional. Service activities are divided into three categories: college representation, college citizenship, and community citizenship. Activities in this domain are differentiated as follows:
        1. College Representation – Service activities that involve a direct connection between the faculty member who engages in the specific activity and his/her position at the college.
        2. College Citizenship – Service activities that are in support of college or VCCS initiatives in which the participant is not in a leadership role for the activity.
        3. Community Citizenship – Service activities that are not directly related to the faculty member’s employment at the college, but in which the faculty member is acting as a community resident.
      • Professional Growth and Development – Activities specifically associated with the faculty member’s continuing education, enhancement of professional knowledge, skills, and abilities, and improvement of job performance.
    3. Administrative and professional faculty who have supervisory responsibilities must also be evaluated in the Management Effectiveness performance domain:
      • Management Effectiveness – Supervisory and/or unit management activities, including but not limited to, leadership, management of faculty and staff, and resource management responsibilities.
    4. Evaluation plans may include additional performance domains as determined by the college or as applicable to the administrative and professional faculty positions being evaluated. Evaluation plans are expected to acknowledge that faculty responsibilities and priorities vary from year to year and, therefore, provide for collaboration and negotiation between faculty and supervisors at the beginning of each evaluation year in order to establish the performance domains to be evaluated. Such additional domains may include, but are not limited to:
      • Fiscal Responsibility
      • Student Success
      • Customer Service
      • Collegiality, Communication, and Collaboration
      • Ethics, Integrity, and Adherence to Policy.
    5. Evaluation Ratings: Evaluation plans must provide for an overall summary rating of either “Meets Expectations” or “Does Not Meet Expectations.” However, it is not required that there be an evaluative rating within each performance domain. Instead, within each domain, it is appropriate and sufficient to provide a narrative assessment of performance that is meaningful and purposeful and that offers actionable feedback by identifying:
      1. areas of notable success
      2. areas in need of improvement
      3. areas in which changes in faculty responsibilities are warranted.
    6. Self-Assessment: Evaluation plans must require that evaluative input be provided by the faculty member in the form of a self-assessment. The self-assessment must include analysis of activities within each performance domain as well as progress toward achievement of annual objectives.
    7. Formative Feedback: Evaluation plans must provide for solicitation and analysis of formative performance feedback from a sampling of individuals supervised by the faculty member peers, individuals to whom the faculty member provides a service, and individuals with whom the faculty member has professional interactions. Such input must be gathered at least once every three (3) years for the primary purpose of assisting the faculty member in identifying strengths and developing strategies for self-improvement. Additional formative feedback, especially from the faculty member’s supervisor, is expected to be provided by formal and informal means on an ongoing basis.
    8. Based upon available input and other evidence, the supervisor’s evaluation of the faculty member will include analysis of performance in each of the applicable performance domains, analysis of progress toward achievement of annual objectives established during the evaluation period, and other activities as appropriate.
  2. Annual Objectives – The intent of annual objectives is to identify and establish priorities that represent an extension of performance expectations.
    1. Faculty members must establish annual objectives in consultation with the supervisor. Objectives thus established should be related to the strategic goals of the organizational unit, the college, and/or the VCCS; to the professional growth and development of the faculty member; or to improvement in specific areas of the faculty member’s job performance.
    2. The faculty member and supervisor must have a mid-year feedback session to discuss the status of previously established objectives. Discussions regarding the progress and completion of annual objectives may occur more frequently at the request of the faculty member or the supervisor.
    3. Assessment of progress toward achievement of annual objectives must be included in performance evaluation.

3.6.1.5 Reward and Recognition

Administrative and professional faculty who have demonstrated exemplary performance, and whose contributions have made a significant positive impact on the unit, campus, college or the VCCS, should be acknowledged. Evaluation plans must include formal provisions for recognizing and rewarding performance that exceeds expectations.

3.6.1.6 Development and Evaluation Plan for Administrative and Professional Faculty

  1. Preparation of Plan - The Virginia Community College System shall prepare an Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition Plan. Colleges may adopt the VCCS Plan or may develop a local plan customized to the college culture and environment. College plans must be formulated in accordance with the provisions of this policy and must adhere to the Guiding Principles for Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition, as provided herein.
  2. Required Elements - Evaluation plans must include the following components:
    1. Description of the domains for faculty performance expectations
    2. Development and assessment of annual performance and professional development objectives
    3. Data source contributors to evaluation
    4. Description of evidence required to support the evaluation:
      • Where qualitative or quantitative performance measures have been agreed upon in a performance domain, evidence should be presented against which the quality and quantity of work may be weighed
      • Where output or outcome measures have been agreed upon in a performance domain, evidence should be presented against which the quantity and quality of work may be weighed
      • • Where work is done in collaboration or partnership with others, faculty members should provide, to the extent reasonable, evidence of the nature and extent of their involvement
    5. Faculty member/supervisor conference resulting in a written summary of the evaluation
    6. Provisions for a Reward and Recognition component
    7. Time frames, summary ratings, and eligibility requirements that comply with the provisions of this policy.
  3. Approval of Plan - The process for development of a local Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition Plan or a decision to adopt the VCCS Plan must provide an opportunity for input from all administrative and professional faculty at the college. The local plan, or adoption of the VCCS Plan, must be approved by the college president. In the absence of a local plan, developed and approved as prescribed above, the Virginia Community College System Plan shall be in effect.
  4. Publication of Plan - The college evaluation plan must be widely disseminated and prominently available to administrative and professional faculty and their supervisors.
  5. Review of Plan - Each college’s Administrative and Professional Faculty Development, Evaluation, and Recognition Plan must be reviewed at least every three years. The review process must provide the opportunity for involvement of all administrative and professional faculty. Recommendations for change must be approved by the president. If the recommended changes are not approved, the president must submit proposed modifications to the faculty for consideration. Ultimately, the decision to accept modifications to the college plan rests with the president. In the meantime, the existing plan shall remain in effect.

3.6.1.7 Summary Ratings

  1. Responsibility - The faculty member must present information and evidence to support an overall summary rating of "Meets Expectations." If the supervisor’s overall summary rating is appealed, the supervisor must provide information and evidence to support a "Does Not Meet Expectations" rating.
  2. Eligibility - Faculty members who receive an overall summary rating of "Does Not Meet Expectations" are ineligible for promotion, ineligible for reward or recognition, and ineligible for multi-year appointment (where applicable, subject to Review by the Ad Hoc Appointment Advisory Committee).
  3. Continuation Decisions
    1. In the event that an administrative or professional faculty member receives a summary rating of “Does Not Meet Expectations,” the supervisor will develop and document a Performance Improvement Plan. Progress toward satisfactory completion of the Performance Improvement Plan will be reviewed within six months of its establishment. Interim reviews may be conducted more frequently in accordance with the terms of the Performance Improvement Plan. Failure to comply with the provisions of the Performance Improvement Plan may result in dismissal of the faculty member.
    2. Administrative and professional faculty who receive a summary rating of “Does Not Meet Expectations” are subject to non-reappointment. If the supervisor recommends non-reappointment, a copy of the recommendation and supporting documentation shall be forwarded to the vice-president, executive vice-president, or provost, as appropriate. In cases involving a direct report of the vice-president, executive vice-president, or provost, the decision to renew or not to renew the faculty member's appointment rests with the vice-president, executive vice-president, or provost. If the faculty member is a vice-president, executive vice-president, provost, or other direct report of the president, the decision to renew or not to renew the faculty member's appointment rests with the president. The faculty member shall be notified in writing of the final decision regarding non-reappointment.
    3. For faculty who are evaluated on a calendar-year cycle, decisions regarding continued appointments will be made by March 15 for first-year faculty members and by January 15 for all other faculty. However, for administrative faculty and for professional faculty who are evaluated on a fiscal-year cycle, the college reserves the right to modify the terms of the annual appointment contract. Notification of non-reappointment decisions resulting from evaluation conducted on a fiscal-year cycle will occur at least six (6) months prior to termination of employment.

3.6.1.8 Evaluation Cycle and Frequency of Evaluations

  1. Evaluation Cycle - For professional faculty who are eligible for multi-year appointment, the evaluation process will operate on a calendar-year cycle. For all other professional faculty and for administrative faculty, the evaluation process must operate on a fiscal-year cycle.
  2. Frequency of Evaluations
    1. Newly-hired administrative and professional faculty will complete an interim evaluation within the first six months of employment and will complete a comprehensive evaluation at the end of the first full evaluation cycle that ends at least six months after employment. That is, newly-hired faculty who begin employment at least six months prior to the end of an evaluation cycle will complete an interim evaluation by a date to be determined by the supervisor, approximately midway between the first day of employment and the end of that evaluation cycle. In addition, the faculty member will complete a comprehensive evaluation at the end of the evaluation cycle. Newly-hired faculty who begin employment fewer than six months prior to the end of the evaluation cycle will complete an interim evaluation at the end of the evaluation cycle and will then transition to the normal evaluation cycle.
    2. Second and third-year administrative and professional faculty must participate in a comprehensive evaluation process annually.
    3. After the third year of employment, professional faculty working under a multi-year appointment must participate in a comprehensive evaluation process only in the final calendar year of that multi-year appointment. During the intervening years between comprehensive evaluations, faculty members will develop annual performance and professional development objectives in collaboration with their respective supervisors. Progress toward achievement of annual performance and professional development objectives will be assessed annually and will be included in the faculty member’s next comprehensive evaluation. Individual colleges reserve the right to require comprehensive evaluation more frequently than as prescribed above for professional faculty working under a multi-year appointment.
    4. Administrative faculty and professional faculty who are not working under a multi-year appointment must participate in a comprehensive evaluation process annually.
    5. Regardless of the nature of appointment, administrative and professional faculty should meet with their supervisor twice annually, at mid-year and at year-end, for a performance review and to discuss progress toward achievement of annual objectives.
Professional faculty eligible for multi-year appointment
Faculty Appointment Type Evaluation Cycle Frequency of Evaluation Mid-Year Review Annual Objectives Notification of Non-reappointment
First-year faculty hired before July 1 Calendar Year Twice during the evaluation cycle that ends on December 31. An interim evaluation should occur approximately mid-way between commencement of employment and the end of the calendar year; the second evaluation must occur at end of the calendar year. N/A It is recommended that first-year objectives be established upon commencement of employment. Each college evaluation plan may prescribe other options regarding establishment and assessment of first-year objectives. By March 15
First-year faculty hired after July 1 Calendar Year Once during the evaluation cycle that ends on December 31. Evaluation must occur at end of the calendar year. N/A It is recommended that first-year objectives be established upon commencement of employment. Each college evaluation plan may prescribe other options regarding establishment and assessment of first-year objectives. By March 15
Second-year faculty, third-year-faculty, and all other faculty on a one-year appointment Calendar Year Annually June Established in December for ensuing calendar year. By January 15
Faculty on a multi-year appointment Calendar Year Last full calendar year of multi-year appointment. June Established in December for ensuing calendar year. By January 15
Administrative faculty and professional faculty not eligible for multi-year appointment
Faculty Appointment Type Evaluation Cycle Frequency of Evaluation Mid-Year Review Annual Objectives Notification of Non-reappointment
First-year faculty hired before January 1 Fiscal Year Twice during the evaluation cycle that ends on June 30. An interim evaluation should occur approximately mid-way between commencement of employment and the end of the fiscal year; the second evaluation must occur at end of the fiscal year. N/A It is recommended that first-year objectives be established upon commencement of employment. Each college evaluation plan may prescribe other options regarding establishment and assessment of first-year objectives. At least six (6) months prior to termination of employment.
First-year faculty hired after January 1 Fiscal Year Once during the evaluation cycle that ends on December 31. Evaluation must occur at end of the fiscal year. N/A It is recommended that first-year objectives be established upon commencement of employment. Each college evaluation plan may prescribe other options regarding establishment and assessment of first-year objectives. At least six (6) months prior to termination of employment.
Second-year faculty and thereafter Fiscal Year Annually December Established in June for ensuing fiscal year. At least six (6) months prior to termination of employment.

3.6.1.9 Appeal

Administrative and professional faculty may appeal their evaluation through the Faculty Grievance Procedure (VCCS Policy 3-13).

Top