Evaluations & Faculty Performance Review

Overview of the faculty evaluation process

Performance evaluation tends to cause most people some degree of anxiety. In an attempt to alleviate some of the anxiety surrounding the tenure, reappointmnt, and promotions process, the MRFA, in conjunction with General Faculties Council and other associated committes, has been working hard to clarify and standardize the use and interpretation of faculty evaluations across all faculties at Mount Royal University. It is important to know that the evaluation of faculty, whether for reappointment, tenure, or promotion is to be viewed holistically rather than focused on a single component. To this end, there are three key methods used to evaluate faculty: the Faculty Annual Report, Student Perception of Instructions, and Classroom Observations (Peer and Chair). Although most articles in the Collective Agreement relate to evaluation of teaching, Articles 10.2.1 (Criteria for Tenure) and 11.2.2 (General Criteria for Promotion to the Rank of Professor) outline the general criteria as being

1. Evidence of proficient and scholarly teaching, including the extent to which duties have been carried out in a responsible and professional manner;
2. Evidence of scholarship, where applicable, congruent with the teaching loads and resources available for scholarship at an undergraduate university, including the extent to which duties have been carried out in a responsible and professional manner; and

iii.  Evidence of significant contributions in service, including the extent to which duties have been carried out in a responsible and professional manner.

What exactly is meant by “evidence”? In 2016-2017, the Academic Standards Committee created the Mount Royal University Institutional Tenure and Promotion Criteria (http://www.mtroyal.ca/AboutMountRoyal/OfficesGovernance/GeneralFacultiesCouncil/TenurePromotionCriteria/index.htm). This provides many examples of the types of evidence that would demonstrate proficiency in teaching, scholarship, and service. Although the list of evidence is extensive, not all types of evidence is appropriate for all disciplines, and not all types of evidence must be demonstrated by each faculty member. Again, these are examples and are not exclusive to other forms of evidence that a faculty member may provide. That being said, Article 10.2.1 makes it clear that faculty must meet the standards in each applicable category (depending on whether you are TS or TSS). Exceeding the standards in one category (e.g., service), does not mean you do not have to meet the standards in another category (e.g., teaching).

Evaluation of Teaching

Mount Royal University is committed to excellence in teaching. As such there are a number of different evaluation methods used to assist faculty in further developing their teaching skills. Although some of these methods are certainly summative and must be included in the tenure, promotion, or reappointment process, they should also be viewed as formative in that we want to provide our students with the most intellectually engaged learning opportunities in the classroom.