1 APPENDIX G: EVALUATION PROCEDURES Table of Contents I

APPENDIX G: EVALUATION PROCEDURES

Table of Contents

I. General Considerations ......................................................................................................... 3

II. Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 3

III. Evaluation Criteria for Faculty ............................................................................................. 3

IV. Evaluation Ratings ................................................................................................................ 5

V. Evaluation Procedures—Tenured Faculty ............................................................................ 6

VI. Evaluation Procedures—Tenure-Track Faculty .................................................................... 11

VII. Evaluation Procedures—Adjunct and Grant-Funded



Faculty .............................................. 20

VIII. Evaluation Procedures—Coordinators, Nurses, and Healthcare Providers .......................... 26

IX. Evaluation Forms .................................................................................................................. 27

A. Tenured, Tenure-Track, and Adjunct Faculty

1. Classroom Observation Form

2. Online Class Observation Form

3. Instructions for Administering Student Questionnaire (Classroom)

4. Instructions for Administering Student Questionnaire (Online)

5. Student Questionnaire (Classroom/Online)

6. Portfolio Review Form

7. Mandatory Self-Assessment Form

8. Dean/Responsible Administrator’s Assessment of Non-Teaching Responsibilities

B. Faculty Coordinator

1. Evaluation Form

2. Portfolio Review Form

3. Mandatory Self-Assessment Form.

C. Counselor

1. Observation Form

2. Student Questionnaire (Academic Counselor)

3. Student Questionnaire (Psychological Services Counselor)

4. Portfolio Review Form

5. Mandatory Self-Assessment Form

6. Dean/Responsible Administrator’s Assessment of Professional Responsibilities



Throughout this document, procedures and forms used for adjunct faculty also will be used for grant-

funded faculty.

D. Evaluation Forms—Librarian

1. Faculty Questionnaire—Instruction

2. Observation Form—Reference or Other Public Service

3. Student Questionnaire—Reference Librarian

4. Student Questionnaire—Library Instruction

5. Portfolio Review Form.

6. Mandatory Self-Assessment Form

7. Dean/Responsible Administrator’s Assessment of Professional Responsibilities

E. Evaluation Forms—Nurse or Other Healthcare Provider

1. Observation Form

2. Student Questionnaire

3. Portfolio Review Form.

4. Mandatory Self-Assessment

F. Evaluation Summary Forms

1. Evaluation Summary for Tenured Faculty

2. Evaluation Summary for Tenure-Track Faculty

3. Evaluation Summary for Adjunct and Grant-Funded Faculty

G. Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) Form

H. Faculty Evaluation Committee Orientation Document

I. General Considerations

A. The Board of Trustees, faculty, and administration share a responsibility for the process of

evaluating the work performance of all faculty and for awarding tenure.

B. The evaluation process upholds the principles of inclusivity, equal access, and opportunity,

promotes diversity, and is fair and unbiased.

C. The evaluation process is an affirmative means for evaluating the work performance of all

faculty and for renewal of employment and awarding of tenure.

D. The evaluation process fosters open communication among participants in order to assure

fairness and opportunity for success.

II. Purpose

A. The evaluation process should assist faculty in understanding the expectations for

employment and tenure; developing skills and acquiring the experience to participate

successfully in the educational process; and using the District’s and other resources for

professional growth.

B. The evaluation process should assure that students have access to the most knowledgeable,

talented, creative, and student-oriented faculty available. Therefore, periodic performance

evaluations are conducted for all tenured, tenure track, and adjunct faculty. A four-year

probationary period is provided for tenure-track employees.

C. The evaluation process safeguards and assures the principles and practices of academic

freedom as defined in District Policies and Procedures. Academic freedom applies equally

to all tenured, probationary, adjunct, and grant-funded faculty.

D. The evaluation process should assure quality of work performance and professional

growth/development by providing a useful assessment of performance.

III. Evaluation Criteria for Faculty

A. General Criteria. The following criteria will be used to assess all faculty.

1. Student Relations

In the performance of her/his professional duties, the faculty member:

a. responds to the educational needs of students by

1) communicating effectively, answering questions clearly, and assessing

student learning consistently; and

2) avoiding stereotypes and giving equal access and treatment to students

regardless of national origin, religion, age, gender, gender identity,

gender expression, race or ethnicity, color, medical condition, genetic

information, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital status, physical or

mental disability, or pregnancy or because they are perceived to have one

or more of the foregoing characteristics, or based on association with a

person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived

characteristics;

b. demonstrates respect for the right of the student to hold and to express divergent

opinions and handles student concerns appropriately; and

c. shows concern for student educational welfare by being available during on-site

and online office hours, answering questions with courtesy, and responding to

phone calls and emails in a timely manner.

2. Professional Responsibilities

The faculty member

a. is knowledgeable about subject matter/assignment area/duties;

b. is aware of recent, general developments/research in field/assigned area/duties;

c. meets classes as set forth in the contract;

d. performs assigned duties;

e. participates in department, college, or other professional activities;

f. maintains ethical standards as outlined in the SMCCCD Academic Senate

Statement of Professional Standards;

g. demonstrates commitment to the profession;

h. participates in professional growth activities; and

i. maintains and submits appropriate records in accordance with the collective

bargaining agreement between the District and AFT 1493 and District Policies

and Procedures.

B. Criteria Specific to Faculty Who Teach in the Classroom/Online:

The faculty member:

1. provides students with a clear statement of grading, attendance, examination policies, and

other course requirements;

2. uses effective teaching methods appropriate to the subject matter;

3. uses appropriate testing and assessment techniques to measure students’ progress;

4. uses the District-designated course management system for online classes, hybrid classes,

and face-to-face class support or links any non-District-designated course management

system for online classes to the District-designated course management system for online

classes

5. shows evidence of meeting course objectives and following the course outline of record.

C. Criteria Specific to Counselors, Faculty Coordinators, Librarians, Nurses, and other

Student Services Faculty

The faculty member:

1. uses effective methods appropriate to the assignment area/duties; and

2. shows evidence of following and adhering to the appropriate duties and responsibilities

assigned to the position.

D. During the first year of employment, tenure-track faculty will be evaluated only on

criteria related to their primary assignment.

IV. Evaluation Ratings

A. Exceeds Expectations: This rating should be used for faculty whose performance far

exceeds expectations due to exceptionally high quality of work in all essential areas of

responsibility, resulting in an overall quality of work that is superior.

B. Meets Expectations: This rating should be used for faculty who perform assigned

responsibilities well, consistently throughout the review period.

C. Needs Improvement: This rating should be used for faculty who make a sincere effort to

meet the Evaluation Criteria enumerated herein but need additional guidance to meet

them successfully. Steps must be taken to further develop targeted areas, which will

improve overall performance.

D. Is Unsatisfactory: This rating should be used for faculty whose performance was below

standard with regard to the Evaluation Criteria enumerated herein. Steps must be taken to

improve overall performance.

V. Evaluation Procedures—Tenured Faculty

The following process will be used for the evaluation of all tenured, classroom faculty.

A. It is the responsibility of the appropriate Vice President, District Academic Senate President,

and AFT President or their designees to guide the evaluation process of the College and to

resolve issues that arise during the evaluation process. When needed, these individuals will

meet and be referred to as the Evaluation Guidance Committee. The Evaluation Guidance

Committee’s decisions are considered final, except that individual faculty members and the

Union may grieve its decisions as allowed by the AFT/District grievance procedure and

consistent with the grievance limitations set forth in this policy. At any time, any one of the

participants in the process (Evaluation Committee member, evaluator, Dean/Responsible

Administrator, evaluee) can seek assistance from the campus Evaluation Guidance

Committee.

It is also the responsibility of the Evaluation Guidance Committee to provide orientation to

all participants (including evaluees) and specific training to Evaluation Committees,

evaluators, Deans/Responsible Administrators, and Vice Presidents. These orientation and

training activities will occur by Week 2 of the fall (for tenure-track and adjunct evaluations)

and spring (for tenured evaluations) semesters and will be coordinated throughout the

District so as to be consistent from campus to campus. Orientation and training will be an

ongoing activity, and all those conducting evaluations will participate in orientations that

coincide with their service.

B. Evaluation Committee for Each Division

1. Purpose: To conduct evaluations and make recommendations for all tenured, full-time

faculty in the division who are scheduled for evaluation.

2. Composition: Three to five tenured faculty members (number depends on size of division

and number of evaluations, diversity among group) are recommended by division faculty

and approved by the Division Dean/Responsible Administrator; the Evaluation Committee

will be reasonably representative of academic disciplines in the division. The composition of

the group will reflect consideration of gender and ethnic diversity. The Committee will

select a faculty member as chair; she or he will be responsible for scheduling and conducting

meetings and communicating with others in the process. All tenured full-time faculty

members are encouraged to participate in the evaluation of their colleagues.

C. The Evaluation Process

Tenured faculty will be evaluated at least once every three years. The type of evaluation will

alternate between Comprehensive and Standard as described below. A newly tenured

faculty member will start with a Comprehensive evaluation three years after completing

tenure review. The evaluation process will consist of the following:

1. Standard Evaluation:

a. A member of the faculty Evaluation Committee will conduct a Student

Questionnaire, following the Instructions for Administering Student Questionnaire

(Classroom or Online as appropriate). Student Questionnaires will be completed in

each course that represents a separate preparation for the evaluee, with a minimum

of three sections total; for example, if the faculty member is teaching five sections

of the same course, student questionnaires must be administered in at least three.

b. The Dean/Responsible Administrator will complete the Dean/Responsible

Administrator’s Assessment of Non-Teaching Responsibilities form.

c. The evaluee will complete the Mandatory Self-Assessment form.

2. Comprehensive Evaluation:

a. This evaluation will be conducted by a single tenured faculty member selected

jointly by the evaluee and Dean/Responsible Administrator. If the evaluee and

Dean/Responsible Administrator cannot agree on a mutually acceptable evaluator,

the selection will be made by the Evaluation Committee.

b. All of the components of the Standard Evaluation described above will be

conducted, plus: (1) a classroom, online, or other performance observation and the

completion of an observation form; (2) a review of evaluee’s portfolio and

completion of the Portfolio Review form; and (3) completion of the Evaluation

Summary form with commendations and recommendations as appropriate.

1) Observation:

a) The evaluator shall observe and evaluate as many classes as necessary to

cover all teaching modalities represented by the tenured faculty

member’s assignment. For example, if a tenured faculty member is

teaching online, hybrid, and face-to-face classes, the evaluator shall

observe all three. If the tenured faculty member is teaching only face-to-

face or only online classes, the evaluator will observe at least one.

b) In order to enable evaluation of online classes, the evaluator will be

given the role of “Non-editing teacher” for the evaluee’s online class(es)

through the District-sanctioned online course management system and

provided with any necessary passcodes by Week 4. The evaluator will

have access to the evaluee’s online class(es) during Weeks 4-12, but will

be able to evaluate materials for Weeks 1-3 if necessary. If desired by

either party, the evaluator may meet with the evaluee prior to the

observation.

c) Additional observations may be requested by the evaluee, evaluator, or

Dean/Responsible Administrator; however, approval by the Evaluation

Committee is required for additional observations. The evaluee will

provide class dates that are inappropriate for observation (e.g., exams,

student presentations, field trips, guest speakers, films), on which the

evaluator will not visit the class. The evaluator will not participate in

class activity.

b) The evaluator will make only limited comments immediately after an

observation (e.g., “I enjoyed sitting in on your class” or “Thanks for letting

me observe”) and will wait for all of the observations (if more than one) to

be completed before making commendations and possible suggestions for

improvement. However, an evaluator may ask the evaluee to explain or

clarify why she/he did certain things in class, or to clarify the subject matter

presented (e.g., “Is it correct to assume that most of what you were doing

today was review?”; “I noticed that several students came in late. What are

the expectations about attendance and what have you told your students

about the consequences about being absent or late?”).

c) Within ten days after the observation(s), the evaluator will meet with the

evaluee to discuss the observation(s) before submitting her/his findings to

the chair of the Evaluation Committee. The evaluee may record any

unresolved disagreement with the evaluation in the “Evaluee’s Comments”

section of the Observation form; this allows the Evaluation Committee as a

whole to consider both the evaluator’s and evaluee’s points of view.

2) Faculty Portfolio

a) The faculty member shall supply a well-organized, comprehensible, and

succinct faculty portfolio in hard copy or as a PDF. See appropriate form

for list of required items depending on assignment.

b) The intent of the Faculty Portfolio is to assist the evaluator in understanding

the instructional methodologies being employed in the courses currently

taught by the evaluee.

c) The evaluator uses the Portfolio Review form to record her/his findings.

When the form is completed, the evaluator will forward the form to the

chair of the Evaluation Committee (along with any written response

received from the evaluee).

3. Follow-up Evaluation and Performance Improvement Plan

a. If either a Standard or Comprehensive evaluation results in a rating of “Needs

Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory,” the Committee develops with the evaluee a

Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) and schedules a Comprehensive evaluation

for the next academic year. The intent of having the second evaluation one year

after the initial evaluation is to allow the evaluee sufficient time to receive coaching

from the Dean/Responsible Administrator or mentoring from a peer and to initiate

improvements.

1) One very important goal of evaluation is professional development through

feedback from peers. Mentoring is one way to accomplish this goal, and the

Division Dean/Responsible Administrator or the Evaluation Guidance

Committee may recommend a mentor (someone who is not part of the

evaluation process) to assist the evaluee in making improvements

recommended in the PIP. Mentoring is voluntary, and mentors may be

selected by the evaluee in consultation with the evaluator.

2) Most recent evaluation materials will be made available to evaluators

responsible for performing follow-up evaluations triggered by a PIP.

b. If the follow-up evaluation results in a Summary rating of “Needs Improvement” or

“Unsatisfactory,” a final follow-up evaluation will be scheduled for the next

academic year.

If the final follow-up evaluation results in a Summary rating of “Needs

Improvement,” a limited re-evaluation focusing on the specific areas in need of

improvement (per the ratings on the Observation, Portfolio Review, etc., forms) will

be scheduled for the next academic semester.

If the final follow-up evaluation results in a rating of “Unsatisfactory,” referral of

the matter will be made to the appropriate Vice President who will consult with the

Vice Chancellor of Human Resources and Employee Relations to determine what

further action, if any, is warranted..

D. Timeline for Tenured Faculty Evaluation

1. Weeks 16-18 of fall semester:

a. At the end of the fall semester, three to five tenured faculty members (number depends on size of

division and number of evaluations, diversity among group) are recommended by division

faculty and approved by the Division Dean/Responsible Administrator.

b. The Division Dean/Responsible Administrator forwards them to the Academic Senate for

approval.

2. Weeks 1-4 of spring semester:

a. The Evaluation Guidance Committee provides evaluation orientations for Evaluation

Committee members and evaluees during Weeks 1 and 2.

b. The Evaluation Committee selects a chair, establishes its schedule of work, notifies the

evaluee, arranges for conduct of student questionnaires (Division Office secures forms), and

requests assessments from the Dean/Responsible Administrator and evaluee.

c. If the evaluation is comprehensive, an evaluator for each evaluee is agreed upon by the

Dean/Responsible Administrator and the evaluee.

d. In order to enable evaluation of online classes, the evaluator will be given the role of

“Non-editing teacher” for the evaluee’s online class(es) through the District-sanctioned

online course management system and provided with any necessary passcodes by Week

4. The evaluator will have access to the evaluee’s online class(es) during Weeks 4-12, but

will be able to evaluate materials for Weeks 1-3 if necessary. If desired by either party,

the evaluator may meet with the evaluee prior to the observation.

3. Weeks 5-12 of spring semester:

a. Evaluator begins observations as early as Week 5 and completes them by Week 12.

b. If the evaluation is comprehensive, the evaluee shall provide the evaluator, prior to the

evaluation, with materials and/or documents necessary to provide a context for the class

observation.

c. If applicable, student questionnaires are administered by Week 10 and shared with the

evaluee at the last meeting of the Committee.

d. If the evaluation is comprehensive, individual committee members discuss their

observation with the evaluee and provide an overview of the student questionnaires to the

evaluee within ten workdays of the observation. The tabulated student questionnaires will

be made available to the evaluee after grades are posted.

e. If the evaluation is comprehensive, the evaluee completes and submits a portfolio to

her/his division office by Week 11.

f. The evaluee completes and submits the mandatory self-assessment to the evaluee’s

division office by Week 12.

4. Weeks 13-17 of spring semester:

a. The Dean/Responsible Administrator completes the Dean/Responsible Administrator’s

Assessment of Non-Teaching Responsibilities (if appropriate) by Week 13.

b. Prior to meeting with the evaluee, the Committee meets to review the results of the

evaluation process and reaches its recommendation.

c. The Committee meets with the evaluee to inform her/him of the Committee’s

recommendations; if the evaluee receives an overall rating of “Needs Improvement” or

“Unsatisfactory” on the evaluation summary, the Committee develops with the evaluee a

Performance Improvement Plan and schedules a follow-up evaluation for the next

academic year.

d. The Evaluation Committee prepares an evaluation summary and submits the results to the

appropriate Vice President on the Evaluation Summary form, which indicates whether or not

the evaluation is satisfactory and states any commendations and recommendations from the

Evaluation Committee to the evaluee, by Week 17 of the spring semester.

e. The appropriate Vice President reviews materials and forwards copies to the evaluee, the

evaluee’s personnel file, and the Dean/Responsible Administrator.

f. The Dean/Responsible Administrator records results, schedules the next evaluation, and

confers with the evaluee as needed.

E. Division Dean/Responsible Administrator’s Role

1. Faculty evaluation is essentially a peer process. For that reason, the Division

Dean/Responsible Administrator’s role is somewhat limited. However, it is

expected that the Dean/Responsible Administrator will support faculty and help

them to achieve their full potential. The dean should assure that all positive results

are clearly communicated and that all negative results are constructively delivered.

2. The Dean/Responsible Administrator facilitates the process of selecting peer

evaluators and identifies those who need to be evaluated. The Dean/Responsible

Administrator assists the Evaluation Committee by ensuring that Student

Questionnaires are tabulated; Student Questionnaire results will be available

through a passcode-protected hyperlink on the District website. The

Dean/Responsible Administrator provides a written assessment of the evaluee,

focused primarily on non-teaching responsibilities such as committee work and

professional development activities.

VI. Evaluation Procedures—Tenure-Track Faculty

or all Tenure Review Committees established between 7/1/2017 and 6/30/2019, no matter how

long the committees exist, the following procedures shall apply. Prior to 7/1/2019, AFT and the

District shall mutually agree on whether to continue these procedures for any committees

established after that date.

Tenure Evaluation Committees

1. E

ach Tenure Evaluation Committee (TEC) shall be division-based and comprised of three

tenured faculty members and one Division Dean/Responsible Administrator, and shall elect it

own Chair from among the three faculty members. Each division shall determine the number of

Tenure Evaluation Committees needed for the evaluation of tenure-track faculty. All tenured

faculty members of a division constitute the initial pool of potential committee members.

2. TEC members shall be chosen from within the division, if possible, and at least one of the three

faculty members shall be a “discipline expert” chosen in a collaborative process by the Division

Dean/Responsible Administrator and the tenured faculty members appropriate to the discipline

of the evaluee. If no discipline expert is available from the Evaluee’s campus, a discipline

xpert from one of the other two colleges in the District or from another community college

district or from the community (retiree), in that order, shall be selected. In the case of unique

programs or extreme circumstances, one committee member may be a practicing professional

from the community. If a discipline expert from the above pools is not available, a tenured

aculty member from a related discipline may serve as the discipline expert. If a disciplin

pert from the above sources subsequently becomes available, the expert from the related

discipline will be the first to rotate off of the committee.

3. T

hree of the TEC members are permanent: the Chair, the discipline expert, and the Division

Dean/Responsible Administrator. If the chair also serves as the discipline expert, one other

tenured faculty member shall also be a permanent committee member. One tenured faculty

member shall rotate onto the TEC in years three and four as follows:

Years 1 and 2:

(A) Chair; (B) Discipline Expert (or tenured faculty member serving a four-year term, if the Chair

also serves as the Discipline Expert); (C) Dean/Responsible Administrator; (D) tenured faculty

member serving a two-year term for Years 1-2.

ears 3 and 4:

(A) Chair; (B) Discipline Expert (or tenured faculty member serving a four-year term, if the Chair

also serves as the Discipline Expert); (C) Dean/Responsible Administrator; (D) new tenured

faculty member serving a two- year term for Years 3-4.

4. TE

Cs should strive to have a diverse membership; moreover, committee members will b

ovided a Faculty Evaluation Committee Orientation document prepared by the Office of

Human Resources that addresses non-discrimination and diversity during the evaluati

ientation.

5. If a faculty member of the TEC is unable to complete her/his assigned term, a new member will

be selected by the remaining members of the TEC to serve the remainder of the term. If the

Dean/Responsible Administrator is unable to complete the assigned term, the Dean/Responsible

Administrator’s successor shall serve on the Committee.

B. Roles of the Tenure Evaluation Committee, Responsible Vice President, and College President

1. Tenure Evaluation Committee:

a. Members of the Tenure Evaluation Committee have an obligation to uphold the

confidentiality of the evaluation process, uphold the principles of inclusivity, promote

and respect diversity, attend all meetings, and conduct fair and unbiased evaluations for

the purpose of reaching an evaluation decision. The Evaluation Guidance Committee

will offer orientation regarding the evaluation procedures to all committee members and

evaluees.

b. The Tenure Evaluation Committee has the following responsibilities:

1) to follow the procedure outlined herein;

2) to meet with the evaluee to review criteria and methods of evaluation and the

timelines of the evaluation process;

3) to gather and review all data obtained by the various evaluation methods

employed;

4) to meet with the evaluee to discuss evaluation results and develop a plan for

professional growth;

5) to complete Observation, Portfolio Review, and Evaluation Summary forms with

commendations and recommendations as appropriate;

6) to determine an evaluation recommendation; and

7) to forward their recommendation to the responsible Vice President.

c. The chair will coordinate the above activities with the support of the Division

Dean/Responsible Administrator.

2. Responsible Vice President

a. The responsible Vice President shares the obligation to uphold the confidentiality of the

evaluation process and the principles of inclusivity and academic freedom; to promote

and respect diversity; to assure fair and unbiased evaluations for the purpose of reaching

an evaluation decision; and to maintain those educational principles that promote a

quality faculty member in her/his area of responsibility.

b. The responsible Vice President has the following responsibilities:

1) to monitor and assure compliance with evaluation procedures, due process, District

Policies and Procedures, and timelines;

2) to review the recommendation of the Tenure Evaluation Committee for both

process and substance;

3) to meet with the Tenure Evaluation Committee to discuss any difference of opinion

within the Tenure Evaluation Committee and forward her/his own recommendation

and that of the Tenure Evaluation Committee to the College President.

3. College President

a. The College President shares the obligation to uphold the confidentiality of the

evaluation process and the principles of inclusivity and academic freedom; to

promote and respect diversity; to assure fair and unbiased evaluations for the

purpose of reaching a tenure decision; and to maintain those educational principles

that promote a quality faculty member in her/his area of responsibility.

b. The College President has the following responsibilities:

1) to meet with the responsible Vice President and Tenure Evaluation Committee if

there is disagreement between the Vice President and the Committee regarding

the evaluation decision, or if the President disagrees with the Vice President and

Tenure Evaluation Committee regarding the evaluation decision;

2) to make the final recommendation via the Chancellor to the Board to award or

deny tenure or grant a subsequent contract; and

3) to notify the Committee, the Vice President, and the evaluee of his or her

recommendation via the Chancellor to the Board.

C. Procedures for Tenure Review

1. The tenure review process begins the first fall semester of employment. Tenure recommendations

shall be linked to rigorous evaluation in the first four years of employment. Tenure-track faculty

will be evaluated each of the four years even though a single contract covers the third and fourth

years. During the entire tenure review process, and, in particular, during the evaluee’s third year,

a tenured faculty member from within the division will provide mentoring to the evaluee.

2. The following methods will be required to evaluate faculty performance against the criteria

stated in Section III:

a. Faculty Who Teach in the Classroom/Online

1) Classroom/Online Observation

2) Student Questionnaire

3) Faculty Portfolio

4) Mandatory Self-Assessment

5) Division Dean/Responsible Administrator Observation

6) Division Dean/Responsible Administrator Assessment of Non-Teaching Responsibilities

b. Counselors, Faculty Coordinators, Librarians, Nurses, and other Student Services Faculty

1) Observation

2) Student Questionnaire

3) Faculty Portfolio

4) Mandatory Self-assessment

5) Division Dean/Responsible Administrator Observation (as appropriate)

6) Dean/Responsible Administrator Assessment of Non-Teaching Responsibilities

c. Observation

1) The faculty members of the Tenure Evaluation Committee will observe

and assess the performance of the evaluee. This assessment may take

place in the classroom, at the service site, or through observation of

digital recordings of actual classroom presentations, counseling sessions,

etc. They will take into consideration any of the evaluee’s comments

regarding the observation, particularly her/his explanation of how the

events observed by her/his evaluators relate to the goals and objectives of

her/his professional activities, before they formulate a written report of

their individual judgments of the evaluee’s performance.

2) In order to enable evaluation of online classes, the evaluators will be

given the role of “Non-editing teacher” for the evaluee’s online class(es)

through the District-sanctioned online course management system and

provided with any necessary passcodes by Week 4. The evaluators will

have access to the evaluee’s online class(es) during Weeks 4-12, but will

be able to evaluate materials for Weeks 1-3 if necessary. If desired by

either party, the evaluators may meet with the evaluee prior to the

observation.

3) The evaluee will provide class dates that are inappropriate for

observation (e.g., exams, student presentations, field trips, guest

speakers, films), on which the evaluators will not visit the class. The

evaluators will not participate in class activity.

4) The evaluators will make only limited comments immediately after an