ANNUAL FACULTY ASSESSMENT
FULL-TIME, NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
YEAR: 2012
NAME:____________________
RANK:____________________
In all sections of this report faculty members may
supplement their comments with additional
information in a pdf format. Please submit an
electronic version to Timothy Gilfoyle by January 3,
2013.
History Department Annual Full-Time, Non-Tenure Track Faculty Assessment Criteria
As you fill out your faculty assessment, please use the following criteria to guide your comments and the
way in which you calculate your level of ranking. Please keep in mind that the Department of History
expects its faculty members to produce excellent articles that are published in peer-reviewed journals and
books that are released by noteworthy publishers. Such research results complement our emphasis on
high-quality teaching and dedicated service.
Numbers 1 through 5 correspond to a range of Poor to Outstanding.
Teaching
1 Problematic performance in the delivery of course instruction, in grading, advising and treating
students in a disrespectful and derisive manner, as documented by peer, departmental, and/or
student evaluation or the generation of a number of student complaints; or unwillingness or
inability to meet departmental curricular goals in development of courses.
2 Carries out all teaching responsibilities to a level of quality that minimally satisfies basic departmental
expectations for effective teaching by meeting classes on time, providing organized syllabi,
grading in a timely fashion, and using standard scholarship; provides acceptable and accurate
academic advising; and behaves toward students in ways that show respect for them as persons
and learners.
3 Consistently renders solid and effective work in the classroom as documented in the teaching portfolio
by student evaluations as well as peer evaluations for non-tenured faculty; stays up to date in the
discipline so that course content reflects new scholarship and/or utilizes new resources; engages
in curricular or pedagogical development to improve classes; provides reliable, accurate, and
effective student advising and mentoring; develops useful instructional materials for courses and
students; personifies for students a commitment to disciplined and rigorous inquiry and concern
respect for others.
4 Excellent teaching as documented by teaching portfolio; development of new courses; provision of
instruction that is not credited to individual faculty such as independent studies and service on
dissertation and examination committees; successful engagement of students in research or other
appropriate professional activities; contributions that enrich the culture of learning on campus and
in the city;.
5 Excellent teaching combined with exceptional service well over and above classroom teaching, e.g.,
supervision of three or more Ph.D dissertations or five or more Masters Essays during the year; or
recipient of internal or external awards for superior teaching or being named graduate or
university Faculty Member of the Year, teaching in a NEH or similar seminar, or providing
leadership in regional or national efforts to develop and/or increase access to history teaching at
any level.
Service and Professional Development (if applicable)
1 Lack of initiative, dedication, or effective effort; behavior that impedes the achievement of departmental
and institutional goals; or failure to perform one’s assigned duties to a minimally acceptable level
of quality; lack of productive scholarly activity or coherent program of research, whether of
discovery of knowledge or for application and integration.
2 Minimally useful activity, relative to rank and seniority, in service to the department, school, and
university; no active participation in professional organizations; no coherent program of research
(whether for discovery of knowledge or for application and integration), but publication of one or
more reviews (including book, article, and MS reviews); and/or one or more papers delivered or
published in local or regional venues.
3 Useful contributions, relative to rank and position, toward the achievement of departmental, school, or
university goals and priorities. Examples include active service on committees, representing the
department and/or university at internal and/or external events, and/or active participation in one
or more professional organizations, through service on panels, juries, and/or committees; one or
more ongoing, coherent research program(s) (whether for discovery of knowledge or for
application and integration) that result(s) in archival research and/or evidence of ongoing writing,
such as drafts of at least one of the following: chapter(s), paper(s) and/or article(s) (delivered or
published); review(s) (including book, article, MS reviews); application(s) for externally funded
fellowships or research grants.
4 Useful service plus production of valuable results on projects of importance to the institution and/or the
profession, and/or the uncompensated contribution of one’s time and professional expertise for
the benefit of society; one or more coherent, ongoing research programs (whether for discovery
of knowledge or for application and integration), which result(s) in one or more of the following:
paper(s) and article(s) (delivered or published in nationally recognized venues and peer reviewed
journals); substantial review(s) or historiographical essay(s) published in peer-reviewed
publications; exhibit(s) in local museum/historical society or on websites; receipt of externally
funded research grant(s) or fellowship(s); editing a scholarly journal or book series.
5 Excellent service combined with consistently effective leadership within the university or at the national
level. This service might include serving as president of a national organization, leadership of
Academic or Faculty Council or a University Policy Committee, or Director of an area studies
program; one or more coherent research programs (whether for discovery of knowledge or for
application and integration), which result(s) in one of the following: several papers and articles
delivered or published in nationally or internationally recognized venues of the highest caliber;
book(s) published by academic or commercial press; major exhibit at nationally-recognized
venue, receipt of prestigious external research grant; award for published scholarship.
Teaching
List the courses taught during spring and fall semesters of the calendar year (do NOT include summer session
courses), enrollments, TCE instructor rating and course rating, the number of evaluations submitted, and final grade
point average for all students in the course. Then other possible subjects for comment include competence as a
teacher (e.g. honors earned, honors nominated for, other recognitions); new courses prepared/taught; academic
student counseling; availability to students; peer evaluations; involvement with teaching development activities;
additional work with students (e.g. independent studies courses, graduate exam committees, M.A. or dissertation
committees, graduate student advisement).
Course
(# of evaluations submitted)
Enrollment
TCE Instructor
TCE Course
Final GPA
Rating (Mean)
Rating (Mean)
(based on 4.0 scale)
Chairperson’s summary. Subjects will include salient areas of the faculty member’s comments (above).
Faculty Member’s assessment of performance:
below expectations
meets expectations
exceeds expectations
/__________/__________/__________/__________/
1
2
3
4
5
Chairperson’s assessment of performance:
below expectations
meets expectations
exceeds expectations
/__________/__________/__________/__________/
1
2
3
4
5
Service and Professional Development
Faculty member’s summary. Possible subjects for comment include profession-related outside activities that
enhance the university’s reputation; membership on departmental, school, and university committees;
administrative work; university offices held (elected or appointed); participation in student activities; responsible
conduct in meeting professional obligations.
Chairperson’s summary. Subjects will include salient areas of the faculty member’s comments (above).
Faculty Member’s assessment of performance:
below expectations
meets expectations
exceeds expectations
/__________/__________/__________/__________/
1
2
3
4
5
Chairperson’s assessment of performance:
below expectations
meets expectations
exceeds expectations
/__________/__________/__________/__________/
1
2
3
4
5
Faculty Member’s Summary Assessment (overall self-evaluation with respect to departmental standards
in both areas):
Faculty Member’s assessment of performance:
below expectations
meets expectations
exceeds expectations
/__________/__________/__________/__________/
1
2
3
4
5
Chairperson’s Summary Assessment (based on evaluation of faculty member’s performance with respect
to departmental standards in both areas):
Chairperson’s assessment of overall performance:
below expectations
meets expectations
exceeds expectations
/__________/__________/__________/__________/
1
2
3
4
5
Faculty member’s response:
______________________________________________________________________________
Signatures:
Faculty member_________________________________
My signature means that I have read and discussed the Chairperson’s comments and
recommendations, not that I necessarily agree with all of them.
Chairperson________________________________
Date____________
******************************************************************************
Comments by dean:
CAS Dean__________________________________
Date____________
Graduate School Dean______________________________
Date____________