National Electrical Engineering Department Heads Association
1997 Annual Meeting
Breakout Session III Summary
NEEDHA Breakout Session on Faculty Evaluations and Rewards
EVALUATION OF FACULTY
A number of techniques are used and several are listed below. In
most cases the faculty report to the head via a formal report at
the end of a one year period. In some cases this period is the
calendar year in others the academic or the fiscal year. The
reports are then read by the department head and the faculty
evaluation process begins.
In most cases the teaching, research, and service are evaluated
separately. Some heads break this down further, such as teaching
quality, external financial support, scholarly activity, university
service, and national prominence.
Many heads (85%) do the evaluation and faculty rating or ranking on
their own. Some departments have committees (15%) and in some
cases the dean interferes. Most evaluations end at the department
level and the results are sent to the dean.
Most departments do not evaluate by rank, but some departments rate
the research by rank, with Professors expected to do more than
Associate Professors, etc. In many cases the evaluation is done by
assignment, that is if a faculty member is assigned to 25% teaching
that faculty member is expected to produce more measurable research
than someone assigned to 50% teaching. Many heads have a formula
and after the analysis use their judgement based on experience to
"adjust" the results of the numbers, if necessary.
In most cases the results of the evaluation are reported back to
the faculty member via a written form. In our case, the form is
signed by the department chair and faculty member. The signature
of the faculty member is just a statement that he or she has read
the evaluation. They are free to add comments and/or corrections
which are attached to the report before being sent to the dean.
REWARDS
Of course, when available, merit increases are based on merit and
the best performers receive the greater raises. Some heads base
the raises strictly on percent, some strictly on a dollar amount,
and some use some sort of combination.
As is currently the case almost everywhere, merit increases are
zero or so small so that other methods must be used to reward
faculty. In our case the College has awards for Teaching,
Research, and Service at each rank. I make sure that someone from
our department gets nominated for each award, one year we won eight
of the nine awards. Even if the nominee does not get the award,
the fact that they were nominated is a boost to their esteem.
Some schools return, to the generator of research funds, all or
part of the overhead return to the department and some return a
portion of the "release time" funds generated from grants and
contracts to pay part of their salary.
When special praise is due, some heads email the praise to that
person on the department email list so that everyone gets the
message.
In some cases bonuses are allowed and given, but not by very many
schools, this is probably equivalent to an award.
Certain department heads have a fixed amount of travel money per
faculty, but increase this for travel to ASEE, FIE, etc. if they
deliver a talk on innovative educational methods or courses.
Those departments which print periodic newsletters always praise
deserving faculty members in the letters.
We all agreed that non-monetary rewards must be sincere (not
contrived) and sustained.
Related pages: 1996-97 Archives
|
1997 Meeting Program and Presentations
URL of this page:
http://www.needha.org/1996-97/summary-III.html
Author: Rodney J. Soukup
|
Created: Apr 14, 1997
|
Modified: Aug 10, 1997
Site map
|
To NEEDHA home page
|
Your comments
are welcome. map Lexikon Lebensversicherung Rechtsschutzversicherung Krankenversicherungsvergleiche Test Wasserbett komplett gesucht? Wasserbetten Onlineshop, ob bodytone, hardside, softside Vergleich Versicherung Websuche Erotik Rechtsschutz Lexikon Haftpflicht Lexikon Viking Direkt Büromöbel Büromaterial Bürobedarf & Büromöbel