Faculty Performance Evaluations
The College regularly evaluates the performance of its faculty. The purpose of each evaluation varies, but, in general, evaluations are designed: (1) to ensure a quality of instruction that meets the institution’s mission and goals and supports student academic achievement, and (2) to assist the Provost; the Associate Provost(s); the Deans of the Schools and Department Chairs/Directors in determining whether faculty members should be retained.
Faculty Evaluations: The appropriate School Dean and Department Chair/Director or their designee evaluates each faculty member at least once a year. Evaluations of new faculty members occur in each member’s first term at Berkeley. Results and appropriate follow-up are reviewed with the faculty member and contribute to the annual performance reviews of full-time faculty. At the sole discretion of the College, those results may also be considered in decisions regarding reappointment and salary.
Written evaluations based on teaching observations assess a faculty member’s pedagogical and technical expertise, as well as their mastery of course content. Such written evaluations are reviewed with the faculty member and acknowledged by both parties.
Student evaluations measure both faculty and course effectiveness and are designed to encourage the faculty member towards self-improvement. Student evaluations are administered each term in all courses. Each faculty member is also encouraged to conduct a mid-term evaluation in every course. Student feedback from mid-term evaluations should be reviewed by each individual faculty member. Faculty members should notify their students of any scheduled student evaluations and encourage students to participate in the evaluation process.
During the spring term, each full-time faculty member will be required to complete a faculty performance review in UltiPro for submission to their Department Chair/Director. This review includes a self-evaluation of their teaching service and professional development. First-year full-time faculty may be asked to include the student feedback from mid-term evaluations and a description of their response to the feedback in their annual performance review documentation. Continuing faculty may elect to do so as well.
Additional Requirements for MSN–FNP Faculty
Faculty evaluation criteria in teaching, research/scholarship, and service are guidelines which apply to full-time faculty teaching in the graduate nursing department. Definitions and examples of each category are provided below. These categories are not listed in order of significance nor are they all-inclusive. Meeting the standard in each category of teaching, scholarship, and service will be evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. Each faculty member is responsible for providing sufficient support and evidence for each area.
Teaching:
Teaching refers to classroom teaching and/or instruction outside of the classroom such as simulation and clinical settings. The nurse educator must continually enhance their practice to engage students and help them to achieve relevant learning outcomes. Teaching effectiveness refers to both the educator's ability and the quality of their teaching.
Suggested criteria include, but are not limited to, Student evaluations, the use of innovative assignments, assessments, mentoring/tutoring students, utilizing innovative teaching methods, review and/or creation of syllabi, keeping up to date with new pedagogical and/or clinical developments.
Scholarship:
“Scholarship in nursing can be defined as those activities that systematically advance the discipline of nursing by teaching, research, and practice through rigorous inquiry that 1) is significant to the profession, 2) is creative, 3) can be documented, 4) can be replicated or elaborated, and 5) can be peer-reviewed through various methods.” (AACN, 1999, p. 3).
Suggested sources of support include, but are not limited to, publication, poster presentations, seminars, item writing, and quality improvement policies.
Service:
Activities that are interpreted as acts of support for the Mission and Vision of the College and the Nursing Profession and its curriculum. Service includes contributions to the mission and goals of the program and College, as well as service to professional organizations and community health activities. Membership and leadership on committees both within the College and outside will be evaluated; however there is an expectation of service for faculty to serve on relevant College committees.
Suggested sources of support include relevant Berkeley Cares activities, student mentorship, committee work, relevant task force participation, new faculty mentorship, offices held in professional associations, maintenance of clinical practice and certification, as appropriate.
Performance Levels
Performance levels are categorized as Outstanding Performer, Effective Performer, Meets Minimum Standards, and Needs Improvement. The overall MSN-FNP benchmark for reappointment is Effective Performer (3). Benchmark criteria are as follows:
Teaching Effectiveness:
4 activities: Outstanding Performer = 4
3 activities: Effective Performer = 3
2 activities: Meets Minimum Standards = 2
0-1 activities: Needs Improvement = 0
Scholarship:
4 activities: Outstanding Performer = 4
3 activities: Effective Performer = 3
2 activities: Meets Minimum Standards = 2
0-1 activities: Needs Improvement = 0
Service:
3 activities: Outstanding Performer = 4
2 activities: Effective Performer = 3
1 activity: Meets Minimum Standards = 2
0 activities: Needs Improvement = 0