Peer Assessment Draft
1
Peer Assessment
Mission Statement
The mission of the Department is to contribute to human understanding of crime and
criminal justice. Our goal for our students is that they become creative thinkers and
leaders who will reach beyond current intellectual and cultural boundaries to become
change agents for shaping the future of criminal justice in the United States and the
world.
Goals
1. Understand the main components of the criminal justice system and critically
analyze their impact on clientele, working professionals and communities.
2. Demonstrate the ability to employ creativity to address deficiencies in the practice
of criminal justice in the United States.
3. Demonstrate an understanding of the theoretical explanations for crime, and the
needs of and challenges faced by suspects/offenders, crime victims, community
members, and employees of the criminal justice system.
4. Demonstrate a critical understanding of the impact of historical and contemporary
criminal justice policies.
5. To employ a work ethic embracing effective and compassionate leadership as
change agents with a focus on cultural competencies.
6. Apply fundamental research techniques, along with a working knowledge of
computers and a command of written and oral communication, to the
investigation of justice issues.
Peer assessments are a valuable tool for individual faculty growth, and each faculty
member of the Department of Criminal Justice craves growth as a scholar. Peer
evaluation in the Department of Criminal Justice shall seek to assure as completely as
possible that the mission and goals of the Department are adhered to in all aspects of
Department faculty work, and shall offer key insights into strengths and weaknesses for
each member of the faculty.
Teaching
Evidence of significant efforts to improve one’s teaching effectiveness (teaching
is a learnable skill), and evidence that the faculty member has addressed
potential problem areas indicated by the evaluations shall be amassed by the individual
faculty member. For example, the use of student evaluations, annual evaluation, or peer
reviews assessments (such as those offered by the Teaching and Learning Center) can be
included in order to demonstrate efforts toward improving teaching effectiveness.
Documentation of teaching in lower division, as well as in upper division and graduate
courses, as appropriate, should be offered. Evidence of revised courses and contributions
to departmental curriculum development and revision may also be provided.
Operational Definitions
Peer Assessment Draft
2
To achieve Meets Expectation faculty should succeed in the following categories:
Instructional Design /Development
Delivery of Course Content
Faculty Development/Collaboration
To Meet Expectations in Instructional Design/Development faculty should

have evidence of teaching effectiveness as measured that meet ACJS certification
requirements. Evidence sources shall include the following:
o course syllabi
o online course sites
o supplemental materials (e.g., collaborative assignments, student
assessments, grading rubrics, directed projects, test review activities).
It shall be expected that a review of the above sources shall offer evidence of the
following (as appropriate to each course):
o Coverage of the course-relevant components of the criminal justice
system, and of components in relation to the larger justice context;
o Provision of the opportunity to examine critically key course-relevant
issues, and to offer creative responses to identified problems;
o Coverage of key theoretical areas of course-relevant discourse;
o Commitment to the eradication of academic dishonesty;
o Coverage of main historical aspects of the course subject;
o Cultivation of key skills (e.g., written and oral communication, research
methods); and
o maintain a level of student performance consistent with a high-quality
undergraduate education at a four-year university.
To Meet Expectations in Delivery of Course Content faculty should be

assessed on their classroom instruction techniques to be measured by a fellow
faculty member, and through review of student evaluations
To Meet Expectations in Faculty Development/Collaboration faculty should


play an active role in departmental discussions and participate in activities
regarding program development as measured by attendance and participation at
Academic Affairs, faculty meetings, implementing assessment techniques in
existing and new courses
continued faculty development to enhance teaching skills as measured by
participation in at least one faculty development workshop through the TLC, or
provide a presentation or consultation on new methods of delivery, assessment or
evaluation.
Peer Assessment Draft
3
To Exceed Expectations, faculty should have evidence of consistently exhibiting a
leadership role in the above categories.
Instructional Design as measured by regular maintenance and updating of syllabi with
new reference information and use of state-of-the-art instructional techniques such as
embedded assessments for learning outcomes.
Delivery of Course Content as measured by exceptional incorporation and
experimentation in new and interesting ways of delivering content including using Smart
Thinking or Criterion, the development of new courses, service learning and learning
community courses.
Faculty Development/Design as measured by participation in additional TLC
workshops, providing faculty with in-services on TLC workshops, service learning,
learning community, and online learning course development.
Research on teaching and learning as measured by active participation in grant writing
and evaluation to support teaching and learning.
Need Improvement is warranted when:
 faculty do not have evidence of meeting the guidelines of the criterion for meets
expectations.
Measurement
Each criterion will be measured on an 11 point scale. The scale score for each criterion
will be averaged for a total score which will be then recorded on the chart seen in the
following example:
Instructional Design
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
Justification:
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Delivery of Course Content
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
Justification:
□ Needs Improvement
Faculty Development/Design
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Peer Assessment Draft
4
Justification will be included when faculty member either exceeds expectations or needs
improvement. Language for justifications can be taken from departmental rubrics.
Research and Scholarly Activities
Faculty members are expected to engage in active research, which includes the
creation, evaluation, dissemination and application of knowledge. Research
productivity is typically measured by the publication of articles in peer-reviewed
journals, peer-reviewed conference proceedings, and original books, authorship/coauthorship of research grants for internal or external academic research or service grants
with opportunities for evaluation research, research awards and honors.
Faculty members are expected to engage in scholarly activities which are typically
measured by the publication of articles in non-peer-review journals, book reviews,
editorial comments, edited books, book chapters, invited lectures, conference
participation such as, symposiums, paper and poster presentations, discussant, etc. on
local, regional, national, or international level.
Operational Definitions
To achieve Meets Expectation faculty should succeed in the following categories:
Research Activity
Scholarly Activity
To Meet Expectations in Research and Scholarly Activities faculty should


have evidence of productivity as measured by a focused research agenda with
yearly progress toward that end
maintain a level of performance consistent with peer institutions and
departmental and university policies regarding faculty productivity
Research Activity
To achieve Meets Expectation faculty should have evidence of recognition
among one’s peers in the field(s) inside and/or outside the university of
continued research activities of high quality. These activities are defined by the following
activities:






manuscript submission for review in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal
publication of article in peer-reviewed scholarly journal
publication in a peer-reviewed conference proceeding
ongoing development of an original book
publication of an original book
sole or primary authorship of a research grant
Peer Assessment Draft
5
 co-authorship of a research grant
 conducting a research project
 research award
 honors
To meet expectations faculty are expected to exceed in one of these areas each year.
To Exceed Expectations, faculty should have evidence of a consistent record of
research activities that reveal significant achievement defined as two or more of the
above mentioned activities.
Need Improvement is warranted when the faculty fails to have evidence of
being productive in their scholarly activity.
Scholarly activity
To achieve Meets Expectation faculty should have evidence of recognition
among one’s peers in the field(s) inside and/or outside the university of
continued scholarly activities of high quality. These activities are defined by the
following activities:






publication of articles in non-peer-review journals
publication of a book review or editorial comments
ongoing development of and edited book
publication of an edited book
publication of a book chapter
invited lectures, conference participation such as, symposiums, paper and poster
presentations, discussant, etc. on local, regional, national, or international level.
 Sole or primary author of a service grant with opportunities for evaluation
research
To meet expectations faculty are expected to exceed in one of these areas each year.
To Exceed Expectations, faculty should have evidence of a consistent record of
scholarly activities that reveal significant achievement defined as two or more of the
above mentioned activities.
Need Improvement is warranted when the faculty fails to have evidence of
being productive in their scholarly activities.
Measurement
Research and Scholarly Activity will be measured with each criterion being measured on
an 11 point scale. This scale allows for interpretation of the value of specific items or
categories. The scale score for each criterion will be averaged for a total score which will
be then recorded on the chart seen in the following example:
Research Activity
Peer Assessment Draft
Meets expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Exceeds Expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Need Improvement 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Research Activity will then be recorded using the following table with justification to
follow.
Research Activity
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Justification:
Scholarly Activity
Meets expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Exceeds Expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Need Improvement 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Research Activity will then be recorded using the following table with justification to
follow.
Scholarly Activity
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Justification:
Service
By way of service, faculty may perform service at several levels; the department,
college, university and community, and in many different ways therefore, there is no
requirement that faculty have to serve at every level.
Operational Definitions
To achieve Meets Expectation faculty should succeed in the following categories:
Contributions to Student Activities and Programs
Contributions to university committees, departmental, school/college
Contributions to university administration
Through programs which serve and/or cause positive recognition by university clientele
To Meet Expectations in Contributions to Student Activities and Programs faculty
should do at least two of the following:
6
Peer Assessment Draft




Maintain office hours to assist students with advisement questions
Provide leadership to student organizations
Promote awareness of ways in which students can gain additional research
experience through summer research programs
Provide support for students wishing to apply for scholarships, research programs
by assisting them with the application process and by offering letters of support
To Meet Expectations in Contributions to university committees, departmental,
school/college, and university faculty should do at least three of the following with
excellent attendance and participation:








Serve as a member of departmental committees
Serve as a member of a school/college committee
Service as a member of an autonomous university committee
Serve as a member of an other university committee
Serve as a member of a special projects committee
Serve as a member of the Faculty Senate
Serve as a member of a Faculty Senate standing committee
Service as a member of an ad hoc committee
To Meet Expectations in Contributions to university administration faculty may do
one of the following:



Serve as department program coordinator
Service as Chair of a program
Direct special projects and/or perform special services within the department,
school/college, and university
To Meet Expectations through programs which serve and/or cause positive
recognition by university clientele faculty should do one of the following:








7
Conduct workshops or special projects at any level
Participate in community related activities (school and/or community
organizations)
Serve on community councils, boards, commissions etc
Serve on Faculty Assembly
Serve as alternate to Faculty Assembly
Speak to community groups
Assist community groups in designing programs
Assist community groups with grant writing
Peer Assessment Draft
8
To Exceed Expectations in Contributions to Student Activities and Programs faculty
should provide extensive leadership on a consistent basis in any of the following
activities:



Create new student organizations or projects
Promote awareness of ways in which students can gain additional research
experience through summer research programs
Provide support for students wishing to apply for scholarships, research programs
by assisting them with the application process and by offering letters of support
To Exceed Expectations in Contributions to university committees, departmental,
school/college, and university faculty should provide extensive leadership by serving as
chair of committees, undertaking extensive work for the department including writing
self studies, developing evaluations, providing coordination/leadership for program
functions such as program coordinator.
To Exceed Expectations faculty should provide extensive leadership on a consistent basis
in any of the above mentioned activities as well as participating on state boards, councils,
commissions and organizations, providing expertise, consultation, or testimony to local
and state governing bodies.
Needs Improvement is warranted when faculty does not meet criteria in any of the
above mentioned categories.
Measurement
Each criterion will be measured on an 11 point scale. The scale score for each criterion
will be averaged for a total score which will be then recorded on the chart seen in the
following example:
Contributions to Student Activities and Programs
Meets expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Exceeds Expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Need Improvement 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Contributions to Student Activities and Programs
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Contributions to university committees, departmental, school/college, and university
Meets expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Exceeds Expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Need Improvement 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Contributions to university committees, departmental, school/college, and university
Peer Assessment Draft
will then be recorded using the following table with justification to follow.
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Justification:
Contributions to university administration
Meets expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Exceeds Expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Need Improvement 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Contributions to university administration will then be recorded using the following
table with justification to follow.
Contributions to university administration
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Justification:
Programs which serve and/or cause positive recognition by university clientele
Meets expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Exceeds Expectation 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Need Improvement 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Programs which serve and/or cause positive recognition by university clientele will
then be recorded using the following table with justification to follow.
Programs which serve and/or cause positive recognition by university clientele
Check One
□ Exceeds Expectations
□ Meets Expectations
□ Needs Improvement
Justification:
9