Appendix N
College Of Micronesia-FSM Instructional Faculty Evaluation Form

Instructor’s Name: _______________ Division:_________________________
Evaluator’s Name: ____________________
Period covered. From: ____________ To: ____________

This section is for faculty with chair responsibilities

Supervisor's Comments (attach separate pages if necessary):

_________________________________ Date: _______________
(Supervisor's signature)

Recommend for step increase: ______

Instructor's reaction or comments:

_________________________________ Date: _______________
(Instructor's signature)

_________________________________ Date: _______________
(Director's signature [Optional if Supervisor is Director])

_________________________________ Date: _______________
(Vice President for Instructional Affairs' signature)

_________________________________ Date: _______________
(Personnel Director's signature)

_________________________________ Date: _______________
(President's signature )

Other comments:

Jonathan Gourlay:

The best way to keep our courses "developing" and our teachers improving is to offer an open, friendly atmosphere where people are encouraged to talk to each other -- at least for English, where we all basically teach the same classes, at one time or another. The fact that we share assignments, strategies, etc. is a better help than some piece of paperwork where we basically have to make up some, I think, rather meaningless things in order to get a step increase.

I have been here in my department when we weren't talking and we were stressed and it was an effort just to get the classes taught. Now our "vibe" is the best staff development we have. It's all very informal, subjective, and not quantifiable as an outcome, yet I believe that a collegiate atmosphere is about the best we can do for our faculty -- and best of all, it's rather cheap.

Further, I agree with Dana that if our yearly review is going to add a lot of responsibilities, the faculty needs to get something in return like tenure, pay raise, perqs or something -- then you might get a lot of support for adding all kinds of responsibilities.

Sorry if this is off base. I did miss the meeting and will pay my penance.

Gregg Longanecker:

Two points about evaluation.

At Trident Technical College, evaluations were not suppose to effect step increases. In lean years, the president would not give a large increase, but award a bonus at the end of the year. Each level received slightly less. Though evaluation was not suppose to effect earnings, they used it that way.

Sue Moses:

On pulling of room environment: I've been meaning to pass along a concern to you as a member of the faculty evaluation subcommittee regarding one of the variables included on the form.

I forget exactly where it is located, but I have a problem with being evaluated on the physical classroom environment. When I first went into the classroom to teach almost a year ago, I was disturbed by the amount of graffiti on the wooden areas of the tables, the mismatched chairs,(all classrooms were originally provided matched sets of furniture), the furniture arrangement (lack of teacher accessibility to students, primarily), and overall dreariness of the room (lack of decoration, etc.) Harvey and I have recently teamed up to address some of these concerns. Maintenance has said they will remove the graffiti over the break. A set of matched chairs is being ordered for one of the rooms. Unfortunately, I will not be here before classes begin to work on the room arrangement. However, I will attempt to do something during the first week. Bulletin boards, decorations will have to be addressed throughout the semester.

However, the bottom line is that because several instructors share the same classroom, no one of us has control over the variables that make a room inviting for learning. Therefore, I personally don't think that such a variable should be included on an individual faculty member's evaluation and strongly suggest that it be removed from the form. If each instructor had his/her own room, then it would be valid to rate that variable. Thoughts? Sue

Richard Womack:

For openers the basic flaw of the document presented was that folks kept implying that the document was linked to step increases. Such was not the case. There is nothing about it that in anyway links the two. That needs to be fixed. The decision of the step increase should and must remain with the direct supervisor. The notion that Linda has anything what-so-ever to do with judging step increases is absurd. She simply follows what has been established and follows those marching orders. We do indeed need to know in advance what the evaluation form means in terms of step increase. So first link it up. Establish what marks get an increase or how many marks deny it.I assume this is what Dana means by he wants a "thumbs up or down type form" that says whether or not you get your step increase. This is what Dana "essentially wants" and we need this. However, the idea of improvement certainly becomes lost when one views evaluation in this manner and it is this attitude with which I raised my objections

RW: I could evaluate the education faculty and they me with all marks in the improvement needed slot. Why not? There certainly is no category in which all of us could not use a little improvement. And if all categories were marked this way it should mean absolutely nothing as far as a step increase. It only appears to mean something negative because the only choice is satisfactory. Good God improvement should never be looked at in any way like that- I mean negatively. If there was a category of not satisfactory then you can begin thinking as Dana does that this thing is linked to non-renewal or some such. As I mentioned the first purpose of evaluation should be for improvement. And this is the professional "climate" in which I enjoy working even if I am a glorified part-timer.

RW: I am also confused as to why this must be some big deal and requires staff development funds and the like. Linda's caution that there are little staff development funds should have no bearing on the issue. Building a climate of improvement is not linked strictly to going to workshops and the like. It is nice when that is available but not essential. At present if a supervisor marks any category needs improvement the issue of an improvement plan is in the hands of the supervisor together with the staff. No boss person should ask someone to improve unless they can offer some suggestions as to how to improve. We are not talking about firing someone that is using some obsolete HTML what ever they may be. I would first fire the supervisor if attempts to have this rectified was not made. This is in your Basic Supervision 101(as is the duties of the supervisor to help their folks improve). If you mark on your final exam that your job is to see whether or not people get a step increase watch out-bad grade. Better to mark assisting staff with improving-better grade in SU 101.

So any marks needing improvement we try some ways to improve that-finished. If having someone not use some old HTML requires the person to go somewhere at great expense that is another issue. If Sue Moses was using some antiquated phonics approach to teaching reading it is my responsibility to see that she informs herself of the latest methods or techniques or methods.Not doing this should reflect on me. If she refuses to search for some newer methods and update herself then I need to address that in #1.

RW: I sense too that asking for improvement is perhaps difficult for younger supervisors. This is a relative term. I am getting old but Harvey Segal has forgotten more than I know about teacher training. How do I ask Harvey for improvement? I don't have to. He would be in the satisfactory slot for everything. I will just him to tell me what he will be doing next year to improve his courses. He would NEVER tell me- nothing. If he did I guess I would do something like have him write me a little summary as to how he reached perfection and each year write something for the record as to how he maintains perfection and share it with everyone. Although Paul Gallen looks younger than I do, he isn't. He has no problem telling me his computer skills are in need of improvement. I am not measuring his improvement-I see him working at it. Here is where we are getting far to hung up. This should never be something that always requires Met goals-and if you do not there is some drastic penalty. I think we are just trying to get the idea across that improvement is not trivial and in our racket trying to improve is good enough for me. I intend to ask the satisfactory folks something like

RW: What are you planning to do to try and improve student learning outcome?? What sorts of things will you be doing t oimprove ANYTHING AT ALL atthe college? Now if the answer is nothing then as Dana says this is in the professionalism category. That one might read "adheres to the professional code of ethics AND demonstrates a willingness to improve. Demonstrating a willingness is done by telling the rest of us -this is what I will be trying to do. What kind of stick is that to hold over someone. Dana-being less scarcastic is not a trivial goal if you believe it will help improve your effectiveness even a little bit. There is nothing wrong what-so-ever to have demonstrate a willingness to improve. I do not fear faculty meeting the requiement in minimal way so what? At least we are saying IMPROVEMENT is important to the institution.