1. Following are descriptions of the different methods of evaluating faculty members:
    1. Course Evaluations – Faculty should be evaluated by the students in each course with an enrollment of five (5) or more students using the evaluation form and methods adopted for University-wide use. This evaluation is done primarily so that a faculty member may assess and then improve the efficacy of his/her teaching. Results of the evaluation are available to faculty. Faculty are responsible for maintaining a personal copy for their files. A copy of the course evaluation is also kept in the office of the Provost.
    2. Self-Evaluation: By January 31 of each year, each faculty member will provide his/her department chairperson/unit director with a narrative self-assessment of his/her activities and performance during the prior calendar year. It should include assessment of such aspects as teaching effectiveness and effective librarianship as outlined below, professional development efforts, and contributions to the University and surrounding community during the academic year. The department chair/unit director will meet with each faculty member to review self-assessment and course evaluations or library instruction assessment, where applicable. Based on these documents the faculty member in conjunction with the department chair/unit director will develop a plan of corrective action (if needed) and continued self-improvement. A copy of the self-assessment and corrective action/self-improvement plan will be a part of the annual report of the department chairperson.
    3. Classroom Evaluation: All faculty will be evaluated by the appropriate department chairperson or designee. Each department chairperson or designee shall share his/her written evaluation of a given faculty member with that faculty member. The chairperson will send a copy of the evaluation to the Provost to be retained in the faculty member’s official personnel file.
    4. Evaluation of Faculty: The following criteria are considered most important for evaluation and salary increases:
      1. Teaching effectiveness, as reflected by department chairperson, course evaluations, and self-evaluations; knowledge of subject matter; academic rigor and standards; supervision of student teachers, practicum students, and interns; reasonable and supportive attitude in dealing with students; accessibility to students via office hours, email, and telephone; and reliability in fulfilling teaching obligations. For Library Faculty, Effective Librarianship, as reflected by the Director of the Library, and self-evaluations; demonstrated knowledge and/or ability that may take the form of, but not limited to, performing a teaching role in instructing students on methods of library research, formally and informally, selecting, developing or gathering resources to support students in their courses and/or developing online tutorials and other materials that support courses across the university curriculum and enhance learning across the university in support of information literacy and student and faculty research, creation of bibliographic records for library collections, management and implementation of library online resources and other digital tools; preservation and management of Archives and special collections, leadership in the implementation and administration of innovative, collaborative and user-centered library programs and services, management of library personnel, the library budget and library operations. This criterion is considered to be 70 percent of an undergraduate faculty member’s responsibility, 60 percent of a graduate faculty member’s responsibility.
      2. Service to the University which may include but is not limited to, participation in and leadership of University committees; collaborative, cooperative, and collegial relationships with faculty, staff, and administrators; student recruitment and retention efforts; participation in special programs or events; advisement of students; and efforts to increase the University’s visibility. This criterion is considered to be 20 percent of an undergraduate faculty member’s responsibility, 15 percent of a graduate faculty member’s responsibility.
      3. Professional activity, as reflected by publications, exhibits, and performance attendance at and participation in professional meetings, seminars, and workshops. This criterion is considered to be 10 percent of an undergraduate faculty member’s responsibility, 25 percent of graduate faculty member’s responsibility.
    5. The following procedures should be followed for the evaluation of library faculty:
      1. In place of Course Evaluations, demonstrated knowledge and/or ability within the faculty member’s primary area of responsibility that may take the form of, but not limited to:
      2. Library and information literacy instruction, instruction on the methods of library research, and use of library and other resources; evolving knowledge in the design and application of teaching and assessment; knowledge and application of pedagogical strategies and techniques
      3. Acquisition, management, bibliographic records creation, and/or maintenance of library collections, including physical, online and/or special collections
      4. Management and implementation of library online resources and services
      5. Reference and research assistance to the university community
      6. Development and implementation of innovative, user-centered and/or collaborative library services, programs and resources, openness to new ideas, problem-solving and decision-making abilities; ability to set objectives, outline and plan their completion
      7. Management of library personnel, the library budget and library operations.
  2. Procedure for Evaluation of Faculty: All Limestone University faculty members, regardless of rank, will be evaluated periodically. Following are the evaluation criteria by faculty category:
    1. Tenured Faculty: Evaluated using course evaluations, or criteria above that replaces course evaluations for Library faculty, and self-evaluation. In addition, every three years tenured faculty will be evaluated using a classroom evaluation and the evaluation of faculty form (this does not apply to library faculty).
    2. Tenure-Track Faculty: Evaluated using course evaluations, annual classroom evaluations or criteria above that replaces course evaluations for Library faculty, self-evaluation, and annual evaluation of faculty (this does not apply to library faculty).
    3. Probationary Tenure Track Faculty: During their first year, probationary faculty will be evaluated in the classroom each semester. The following two years, the classroom evaluation will be conducted annually (not applicable for Library faculty). Course evaluations or criteria above that replaces course evaluations for Library faculty, self-evaluations, and evaluation of faculty will be conducted annually during the probationary period. In addition, the department chair and Dean/unit director will hold an annual meeting to review the performance of the faculty member. Following the meeting, the Department Chair will communicate the results of the meeting to the faculty member.
    4. Lecturers: Evaluated using course evaluations, annual classroom evaluations, self-evaluation, and annual evaluation of faculty.
    5. Adjuncts: Evaluated using course evaluations and annual classroom evaluations.

      Department chairs will be evaluated using the above criteria by their respective Dean. Deans will be evaluated using the above criteria by the Provost.
  3. Failure of Performance:
     
    1. If, in light of the evaluation methods mentioned above under “Evaluation of Faculty,” it is determined that a faculty member is not performing his/her duties adequately, it will be the responsibility of the department chairperson to confer with the faculty member to discuss the nature of the problem, the reasons for the problem and what might be done to improve the faculty member’s performance.
    2. Every effort should be made to assist the faculty member in improving his/her performance to an acceptable level.
    3. The department chairs and dean of school will monitor the faculty member’s performance closely by using all available evaluative tools. If improvement is not noted in a reasonable period of time, termination may be recommended. Termination for “cause” may involve, in addition to professional incompetence, general ineptitude, insubordination, moral turpitude, criminal acts and/or actions incompatible with the ideals of the University, and/or failure to comply with a reasonable administrative directive. Immediate suspension may result from conviction for serious crimes or moral turpitude.
  4. Procedure for Evaluation of Department Chairpersons and Deans:

    Department chairpersons and deans are also administrators and the following are additional steps in evaluation: they will be evaluated on the performance of their duties as department chairpersons or deans.
    1. Every two years, the Provost will prepare an administrative evaluation of the Dean/unit director which he/she will submit to the President, with a copy to the Dean/unit director.
    2. Every two years, the Dean will prepare an administrative evaluation of the Department Chair which he/she will submit to the Provost, with a copy to the Department Chair.
  5. Procedure for Faculty Salary Increases:

    The administration will make every effort to ensure that faculty salaries are competitive with those of similar institutions to enable Limestone University to recruit and retain a well-qualified faculty. Funds available for faculty salary increases will be allocated according to the following process:
     
    1. In consultation with the department chairperson and the dean, the Provost will review course evaluations, department chair and dean’s evaluations, and self-evaluations of all faculty members. He/she may consult with individual faculty members if additional information is needed.
    2. After review of the above information, the Provost recommends to the President salary increases for individual faculty members. Other factors which may be considered include:

      1. seniority, 2. rank, 3. academic degrees, 4. the marketplace demand in each academic discipline, 5. existing salary inequities.
    3. After review of these recommendations, the final decision on salary increases is made by the President. Faculty members will be notified of salary increases in a timely manner.
Last Revision Date

06/23/2021