Download the entire contract

Contract

Download Archived Contracts

Effective July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2017

This contract is an agreement between Association of College Educators, AFT Local 6554 and West Valley-Mission Community College District.

Article 24A Performance Appraisal – Regular Tenured Faculty

24A.1 Introduction

The primary goal of performance appraisal is the improvement of the quality of the educational program. The process should promote professionalism, enhance performance, recognize excellent performance, and be effective in yielding a genuinely useful and substantive assessment of performance. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to identify, recognize and nurture competence; to identify standard performance and indicate areas where improvement is desirable; to identify performance that requires improvement; and to identify performance so unsatisfactory that termination may be recommended.
Excellence in performance is crucial to maintain and extend the learning presently shown by students at Mission and West Valley Colleges.
The appraisal system focuses on:
A. Measuring performance in an objective, unbiased manner.
B. Providing useful feedback.
C. Ensuring that appropriate recognition occurs.
D. Encouraging continuing participation in professional development.
E. Ensuring that appropriate training opportunities are recommended as needed for members.
F. Supporting employment status.

The Performance appraisal of a member shall take into account the total assignment of the member and include the following:
A. Site observations
B. Appraisal surveys
C. Criteria for Performance Appraisal, Article 24.A.4
D. Job description
E. Self appraisal
F. Reassigned time evaluation, if reassigned time is 0.2 FTE or more
G. An administrative appraisal, when appropriate, as per Article 24A.6.3.1
By mutual consent, videotapes or other recording devices may be used. Anonymous letters or materials, excluding student survey data, will not be used in the process.

24A.2 Definitions

  1. The academic year begins July 1 and ends June 30.
  2. Faculty or Faculty Member includes, but is not limited to, instructors, librarians, counselors, community college health services professionals, lab faculty specialists, disabled student programs and services professionals, EOP&S professionals, coordinators and individuals employed to perform a service that, before July 1, 1990, required non-supervisorial, non-management community college certification qualifications. (Education Code Section 87001 C).
  3. Performance Appraisal is a written review of the member’s performance as provided in this agreement. The Appraisal Summary Form, the Faculty Observation Form, the Self-Appraisal, Administrative Observation (if submitted per 24A.6.3.1), and the summary of the student evaluation will be submitted to the appropriate Vice President or designee who will certify that the process outlined in this article was properly adhered to and completed. These forms will be placed in the member’s official personnel file in Human Resources. A page listing recommendations, if any, and the supporting documentation for these recommendations for the next appraisal is to be secured in the appropriate Vice-President’s office. All other forms go back to the appraisee. Copies of all forms will be given to the appraisee.
  4. The Self-Appraisal provides the individual faculty member an opportunity for introspection, reflection and planning. It points out areas of significant competence, effort and contribution made by the appraisee. It also addresses specific recommendations, if any, made on the appraisee’s last appraisal cycle.
  5. Plan for Corrective Action: A written plan developed by an appraisal team for members in Needs-to-Improve or Unsatisfactory status. The plan will reflect specific actions, recommendations, and timeline for improvement.
  6. Satisfactory: Member is meeting the criteria as outlined in 24A.4.1 — 24A.4.3.
  7. Needs-to-Improve: Member is consistently not meeting the preponderance of the criteria listed in one or more of the criteria categories outlined in 24A.4.1 — 24A.4.3. It is anticipated that the behavior(s) can be improved and the member will be given the opportunity to return to Satisfactory status by following the process outlined in 24A.8.
  8. A Needs-to-Improve may be given in any of the separate criteria categories.
  9. Unsatisfactory: Member is unable or unwilling to move out of Needs-to-Improve in one or more of the categories outlined in 24A.4.1 and/or 24A.4.2.

24A.3 Frequency of Appraisals

24A.3.1 Except for annual appraisal surveys, regular members in Satisfactory status shall be evaluated once every three academic years. Time spent on leave may postpone, but not cancel, an evaluation. Additional evaluations focusing on specific areas may occur with the concurrence of the Department Chair, Division Chair, supervising administrator and appropriate Vice-President with notification to the appropriate ACE, AFT 6554 grievance officer if:

  1. Complaints are received which are of a serious nature.
  2. Appraisal surveys indicate that a problem may exist.
  3. A member reverts to behaviors that formerly placed him/her on Needs-to-Improve.
  4. A member consistently fails to meet a significant number of the criteria for performance appraisal of regular members as outlined in 24A.4.1 — 24A.4.3.
  5. A member consistently fails to meet usual Record-Keeping obligations and timelines (grade, census roster, early progress reports, or SLO assessment reports, etc.).

These additional evaluations will have appropriate timelines developed as they occur.

24A.3.2 Regular members in Needs-to-Improve status will be evaluated every semester according to the process outlined in 24A.8.

24A.3.3 Regular members in Unsatisfactory status will be evaluated every semester according to the process outlined in 24A.12.

24A.3.4 Associate members, long-term substitute and temporary members, and overload assignments not in a regular member’s primary discipline shall be evaluated by the department involved in accordance with the process outlined in Article 100 and 108.

24A.3.5 Reassigned Time

Regular faculty who are reassigned with at least 20% reassigned time during any semester except if funded and supervised outside the district (e.g. ACE, AFT 6554 and State Academic Senate) will be evaluated on the performance of reassigned time activities prior to the thirteenth week during the term of the assignment. If the reassigned time assignment continues for more than one academic year, evaluation shall be on an annual basis during the spring semester. Upon the assignment of reassigned time, the regular member shall meet with the appropriate administrator/designee to establish written goals for the reassigned time and set a date (or dates) for meeting to assess progress toward those goals. The appropriate Vice-President will determine which administrator or designee will oversee and complete the appraisal process for the reassigned time.

Results of any reassigned time evaluation shall be forwarded to the appropriate Vice- President for inclusion in the next full performance appraisal of the member.

Outcomes of the evaluation of the reassigned time assignment may be:

  1. Satisfactory. If the outcome is Satisfactory, the assignment will continue.
  2. Needs-to-Improve. If the outcome is Needs-to-Improve, the appropriate administrator/designee will work with the member to develop a Plan for Corrective Action.
  3. Discontinuance. If the outcome is not Satisfactory, the reassigned time may be discontinued at the option of the appropriate administrator/designee.

24A.3.6 Pending Resignation or Retirement

When a regular member’s year of retirement or resignation coincides with an appraisal year, the appraisal process may be waived, except when the member wants to earn reemployment preference as an associate member (see Article 15.1.5). The member’s written letter of intent to resign or retire on file with the District will serve as notification to the appropriate Vice-President who may approve the waiver.

24A.4 Criteria for Appraisal of Regular Members

All criteria appropriate to the member’s assignment included in this section will be used in the Performance Appraisal Process.

246A.4.1 Professional Criteria Category

Each member shall:

a. Demonstrate currency and depth of knowledge of the field in the performance of assignment.
b. Demonstrate the ability to communicate subject matter clearly, correctly and effectively.
c. Demonstrate an ability to achieve objectives in area of assignment.
d. Demonstrate an ability to adapt methodologies for students/clientele with special needs and different learning styles.

e. Demonstrate regular effective student contact for courses offered either fully or partially through distance education.

f. Utilize methods and materials appropriate to the subject matter.

g. Demonstrate evidence of careful preparation and organizational skills in area of assignment.
h. Provide clear assignments or directives to students and regularly inform students of academic standing in class.
i. Provide for each student a current course syllabus as required by Title 5 that includes SLOs, classroom procedures, requirements, and grading policies and provide a copy to the Division Office.
j. Demonstrate a commitment to student learning by beginning and ending classes according to schedule, holding regular office hours, and meeting student needs as professionally required.
k. Evidence currency in the field through participation in professional conferences, workshops, seminars, etc.
l. Meet Record-Keeping obligations on time, e.g., grades, requisitions, schedules, textbook orders, rosters.
m. Carry out budget responsibilities effectively if it is an agreed part of member’s assignment.
n. Supervise classified personnel appropriately if it is an agreed part of member’s assignment.
o. Participate in the process of SLO assessment and evaluation and using the results of these assessments in the process of continuously improving student learning.

24.4.2 Collegial Criteria Category

Each member shall:

  1. Work cooperatively within the college community.
  2. Foster an environment that protects academic freedom within the college community.
  3. Foster a positive working environment that is free from harassment, prejudice, and/or bias.
  4. Demonstrate positive communication skills within the college community.
  5. Demonstrate a respect for the dignity of each individual.

24.4.3 Institutional Criteria Category

Each member shall:

Evidence a commitment to his/her department/division, college and district by fulfilling his/her institutional responsibilities as outlined in Article 21.

24A.5 Team Membership and Responsibilities

24A5.1  Team Membership

Except in the case of a reduced appraisal process (see 24A.5.1.1) the appraisal team shall be composed of two regular faculty in Satisfactory status, within the member’s department, Division, or related discipline. The appraisal team members may not have been evaluated by the appraisee during the last or current appraisal cycle. On alternate evaluation years, one of the faculty members shall be a regular faculty from outside the appraisee’s department. The appraisal team has the exclusive right to include a non-voting external participant for content expertise if that content expertise is not available within the bargaining unit. The selection of the person having content expertise is subject to approval by the appraisee.

Except in the case of Lab Faculty Specialists and Librarians (see below) team members will be recommended by the Department Chair and forwarded to the Division Chair and appropriate Vice-President for approval. When the Department Chair is being evaluated, the Division Chair will recommend the appraisal team to the appropriate Vice-President. When the Division Chair is being evaluated (on instructional duties), the college Academic Senate President will recommend appraisal teams and forward to the appropriate Vice-President for approval.

The leader of the team shall be elected by its members. The appraisal team leader will, whenever possible, be from the same area/department as the appraisee.

On an as-needed basis, the appraisal team leader may invite an appropriate administrator to serve as a non-voting member of the appraisal team. If a regular faculty member has received a Needs-to-Improve or an Unsatisfactory performance appraisal, the composition of the appraisal team varies. (See section 24.A.8 or 24A.12 as appropriate.)

In the case of Lab Faculty Specialists and Librarians, the college Academic Senate President will recommend appraisal teams from those areas and forward to the Vice-President of Instruction for approval.
In those cases where the direct supervisor of the member is an administrator, as is the case with such positions as Librarians and Lab Faculty Specialists, the administrator shall complete an independent appraisal of that member. (See 24A.6.3.1)
In order to allow time for other institutional responsibilities, members, other than the Department Chair, should not serve on more than five (5) appraisal teams within one (1) academic year.

24A.5.1.1 Reduced Appraisal Process

When a Regular Faculty member receives three consecutive Satisfactory appraisal outcomes the next regular evaluation process will be as follows:

a. The evaluation team will consist of only one member in Satisfactory status. The appraisal team member may not have been evaluated by the appraisee during the last or current appraisal cycle.
b. Only one classroom observation needs to be performed.
c. Appraisal surveys will be done for all sections during the evaluation year; however, appraisal surveys will not be required during non-appraisal years.
Successive evaluations of a member in Reduced Appraisal status are not to be conducted by the same individual.

24A.5.2 Appraisla Team Leader

The appraisal team leader is responsible for ensuring that the appraisal process is completed in accordance with the appropriate provisions and timelines of the contract. The responsibilities of the team leader will include at least the following items:

a. Obtaining a list of any recommendations resulting from the appraisee’s prior appraisal and surveys done during intervening years kept in the appropriate Vice-President’s office.
b. Scheduling and conducting the pre-appraisal conference.
c. Coordinating appraisal observations and surveying appropriate administrative and other personnel regarding the performance of responsibilities that cannot be
assessed by a classroom observation, and summarizing such input for inclusion in the post appraisal performance conference.

d. Ensuring that the appraisal surveys are completed in a timely manner.

e. Obtaining completed administrative appraisal as per 24A.6.3.1.

f. Reviewing the results of the pre-appraisal conference, appraisal observations, surveys and comments, and other information such as commendations, Record-Keeping documents, attendance, course syllabi and drop/retention rates with the team.
g. Preparing for and conducting the post-appraisal conference. Prior to the post-appraisal conference, the appraisal team leader will compile and prepare all of the appropriate documents for the conference using the criteria from Section 24A.4 and following the process specified in Section 24.A.6.
h. Completing the post-appraisal summary form and ensuring that the appropriate documentation is submitted to the appropriate Vice-President.

 

24A.6 Appraisal Process

24A.6.1  Previous Recommendations

The appraisee will obtain a copy of the previous team’s recommendations (if any) from the current team leader. The appraisee will complete a self-appraisal on the Faculty Self-Appraisal form.

24.6.2 Pre-Appraisal Conference

It is recommended that by the end of the 5th week of instruction, the appraisal team will meet with the member to discuss the Faculty Self-Appraisal, the elements of the appraisal, and other information such as commendations, Record-Keeping documents, attendance, course syllabi and drop/retention rates, and establish expectations as defined in the job description. Documents related to the evaluation process will be distributed.

24A.6.3 Observations

There will be a minimum of one observation by each member of the appraisal team. Observations may be conducted without advance notice, and should be completed no later than week 13 of the semester. Observations will include activities appropriate to the member’s service area(s).

24A.6.3.1 An administrator authorized to perform an independent appraisal of a regular faculty member, as in 24A.5.1, shall observe the member in the activities appropriate to the member’s service area(s) or otherwise in those duties outlined in the member’s position description. The administrator will complete her or his written appraisal report and must deliver the report to the appraisal team leader at least one week prior to the post-appraisal conference. All substantive points made in the administrator’s appraisal will be included in the team’s summary report.

246A.6.4 Appraisal Surveys

24A.6.4.1 Classroom Activities

Evaluation year.  Student appraisal surveys will be conducted using official ACE, AFT 6554 forms in each class section during one semester of the appraisal year. Surveys will be completed between weeks 6 and 13. When administering student surveys, a member of the appraisal team or its designee, which could be the appraisee, shall read the written instructions to the class and distribute the evaluation forms. That person will inform the students that ratings and written comments will be used in the appraisals and that the instructor will not have access to the written comments until after grades are recorded. A person other than the appraisee will be designated to collect the completed appraisal forms and return them immediately to the Division Office or appropriate collection point. The appraisee will leave the room while students fill out the appraisal surveys. For Distance Education Courses, the student appraisal surveys will be administered by the Office of Instruction electronically.

Non-evaluation year. Each regular faculty member not on reduced appraisal process (see 24A.5.1.1) will have student appraisal surveys conducted for at least one course selected by the Division Chair/Supervisor every year. The appraisal will follow the procedure described in the preceding paragraph between the 6th and 13th week of instruction. The student surveys are to be for the purpose of providing valuable feedback for faculty members. The student surveys will be reviewed by the Division Chair/Supervisor and the faculty member. The summarized results will be reviewed and retained by the appropriate Vice-President and forwarded to the appraisal team leader during the next appraisal process.

24A.6.4.2 Non-classroom Activities.

Appropriate appraisal surveys will be conducted using official ACE, AFT 6554 forms during one semester of every year. These surveys will be processed regularly and the results reviewed by the Division Chair/Supervisor and the faculty member. The summarized results will be reviewed and retained by the appropriate Vice-President and forwarded to the appraisal team leader during the next appraisal process.

24A.6.5 Post-Appraisal Conference

At the conclusion of the appraisal, there will be a conference with the appraisee and the appraisal team to discuss the outcomes of the appraisal and other information such as commendations, Record-Keeping documents, attendance, course syllabi and drop/retention rates. Performance on professional, collegial, and institutional responsibilities will also be discussed and comments written on the final Appraisal Summary Conference/Recommendation form.

The Department Chair or immediate supervisor, if not a member of the team, will be informed by the team leader of the outcome of each appraisal and may be included in the post-appraisal conference by request of the team leader.

If the evaluation is conducted in the Fall and if a preliminary indication from the appraisal team is that the result of the appraisal will be Needs-to-Improve in any of the criteria, then the faculty member and the appropriate Vice-President will be informed of that fact. The evaluation will be continued through the following semester before the evaluation results are finished. The appraisal team will determine which of the criteria, if not all, will continue to be evaluated during the extended period of the evaluation. At the conclusion of the second semester the results of the appraisal must be finished and the summary evaluation must be submitted.

The Post-Appraisal Conference shall be completed and the summary forwarded to the appropriate Vice-President prior to finals week.

24A.7 Appraisal Outcomes

At the discretion of the appropriate Vice-President, consultation with the appraisal team regarding the outcome may occur.

The possible outcomes are:

  1. Satisfactory: If the recommendation is Satisfactory in all areas, the appraisal is completed.
  2. Needs-to-Improve:If the appraisal recommends that the member needs to improve in any of the three criteria categories listed in 24A.4, and it is approved by the appropriate Vice-President, the process outlined in 24A.8 will be followed. When a Needs-to-Improve is given, the specific criteria categories for reappraisal shall be specified.
  3. Unsatisfactory: A member may not be placed in this outcome category without first going through Needs-to-Improve status.

A member may be in Needs-to-Improve status on the basis of the Professional Criteria category (24A.4.1) and/or the Collegial Criteria category (24A.4.2) for no more than two semesters and then needs to be moved either up or down from Needs-to-Improve.

Needs-to-Improve status on the basis of the Institutional Criteria category (24A.4.3) may exceed two semesters. If the appraisal team is unable to document a member’s satisfactory participation in fulfilling the Institutional Criteria category, the team must place the member in Needs-to-Improve status for that category (24A.4.3).

While a member is in Needs-to-Improve, she/he shall be ineligible to teach overloads or summer school, to apply for new PG&D projects, or to apply for or take a sabbatical leave.

The appraisal team, with the appropriate administrator, will meet with the appraisee to review the results of the appraisal and to inform the member of the member’s placement in Needs-to-Improve. When a Needs-to-Improve outcome is given, all supporting documents will be placed into the appraisee’s personnel file.

Prior to final exam week in May, the college President will notify the Associate Vice-Chancellor of Human Resources of all members placed on Needs-to-Improve status.

The Associate Vice-Chancellor of Human Resources will notify the appropriate grievance officer.

24A.8 Appraisal Process for Regular Faculty Members in Needs-To-Improve Status

If the appraisee’s performance is identified as “Needs-To-Improve,” the original review team, plus the appropriate administrator, will serve as the appraisal team. The Division Chair, in consultation with the appropriate administrator or the Department Chair, will draft a Plan for Corrective Action for those areas noted as “Needs-to-Improve.” The process will focus exclusively on the identified area or areas.

Upon request of the appraisee or the District, the grievance officer will serve as an observer of the process.

26.A.8.1 Pre-Appraisal Conference for Needs-to-Improve Status, any category (24A.4.1, 24A.4.2, or 24A.4.3)

The procedure for Needs-to-Improve status will be reviewed with the appraisee by the appraisal team. The Plan for Corrective Action developed by the appraisal team will be reviewed with the appraisee.

24A.8.2 Appraisal Methods for Professional Criteria Category Either Instruction/Classroom Related or Non-Instruction/Non-Classroom Related Criteria (both under 24A.4.1) and/or for Collegial Related Criteria (24A.4.2)

26A.8.2.1 Instruction or Classroom Related (24A.4.1)

Based on the Plan for Corrective Action, if the area for improvement is classroom related, appraisal methods may include, but need not be limited to, the following:

Course Planning: The appraisee will prepare and submit to the appraisal team a plan for each course which addresses course content, skills to be developed, teaching methods and rationale, and student evaluation procedures.

Observations: Each member of the team must observe each section each semester. The team will determine the maximum number of observations to be conducted.

Student Surveys: Student surveys will be conducted by the eleventh week of class in each semester. The survey shall include all students enrolled in such sections and may include students who were enrolled but dropped or withdrew from the sections.

24A.8.2.2 Non-Instruction/Non-Classroom Related (24A.4.1)

The Plan for Corrective Action, if the area of improvement falls under the Professional Criteria category (24A.4.1) but is not instruction nor classroom related, shall identify specific criteria that are not being met, the expectation of the appraisal team, the actions that are expected to correct the area, and a timeline for completion. The appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.

246A.8.2.3 Collegial Related (264.4.2)

Based on the Plan for Corrective Action, if the area for improvement is related to Collegial Criteria, the team shall identify the criteria that are not being met, the expectation(s) of the appraisal team, the actions that are expected to correct the area, and a timeline for completion. The appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate the response to the Plan for Corrective action.

24A.8.2.4 Progress Conference For Needs-to-Improve Status (1st Semester) for Professional Related Criteria (24A.4.1) and/or Collegial Criteria (24A.4.2)

Prior to the thirteenth week of the first semester in Needs-to-Improve Status, the appraisal team will review the Plan for Corrective Action, the appraisal observations, and other relevant information to ensure compliance with the plan. A Progress Conference will be held with the appraisal team and the appraisee prior to the final exam week of the first semester in Needs-to-Improve status.

At the end of the Progress Conference, the appropriate administrator will prepare a written summary that will specify the progress made to date by the appraisee. If the member is returned to Satisfactory status in the Professional Related and Collegial Related Criteria, the appraisal is complete. If the team recommends that continued performance improvement is necessary to correct noted deficiencies, the member will be continued in Needs-to-Improve status for the appropriate category for one more semester. This Progress Conference may also serve as the pre-appraisal conference for the next semester.

24A.8.2.5 Progress Conference for Needs-to-Improve Status (2nd Semester) for Professional Related Criteria (24A.4.1) and/or Collegial Criteria (24A.4.2)

Prior to the thirteenth week of the second semester in Needs-to-Improve status, the appraisal team will meet to review the Plan for Corrective Action, the appraisal observations and other relevant information. A Progress Conference will be held with the appraisal team and the appraisee prior to the final exam week of the second semester in Needs-to-Improve Status. Following the Progress Conference, the appropriate administrator will prepare a written summary of the finding and the outcome.

24A.9 Outcome for Needs-to-Improve Status for Professional Related Criteria (24A.4.1) and/or for Collegial Criteria (24A.4.2)

At the conclusion of the appraisal period (two semesters), there are two possible outcomes:

  1. Satisfactory Status: If there has been satisfactory improvement, the appraisee will be returned to Satisfactory status and the appraisal is complete.
  2. Unsatisfactory Performance: If insufficient progress has been made, a notice of Unsatisfactory performance will be issued by the appropriate administrator and the member will be notified of being placed in Unsatisfactory status.

24A.10 Appraisal Methods for Institutional Related Criteria (24A.4.3)

If the area of improvement is for performance in the Institutional Related Criteria category (24A.4.3), the Plan for Corrective Action shall identify specific criteria that are not being met. The Plan shall also state the expectation of the appraisal team, the actions that are expected to correct the area and a timeline for completion. The Appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.

Needs-to-Improve status may be used more than one year for 24A.4.3 Institutional Criteria only (see 24A.7.b).

24A.11 Outcome for Needs-to-Improve Status for Institutional Related Criteria (24A.4.3)

If progress has been made, but further improvement is necessary, the member will continue to work in the Needs-to-Improve status. If the member states, or the team identifies, that the member does not wish to fulfill expectations for category 24A.4.3, the team may recommend that the appraisal process for correction of this area cease. The appropriate Vice-President, ACE, AFT 6554 Grievance Officer, and Human Resources shall be notified.

If/ when the member wishes to return to Satisfactory status for Institutional Related Criteria, he/she must notify the appropriate Vice-President and ACE, AFT 6554 Grievance Officer so that the appraisal team can be reconvened.

See 24A.7.b for limitations when a member remains in Needs-to-Improve status.

24A.12 Appraisal Process For Regular Members In Unsatisfactory Status

A new appraisal team shall be recommended to the appropriate Vice-President by the Academic Senate President and formed consisting of:

  1. a regular faculty member in Satisfactory status;
  2. a Division Chair;
  3. the Vice-President of Instruction or Vice-President of Student Services of the college, as appropriate.

When possible, either the Division Chair or faculty member serving on the appraisal team will have content expertise.

The Vice-President of Instruction or Vice-President of Student Services will serve as Chair of the Team. The team will review the written summary and any additional relevant information. The team will develop a new Plan for Corrective Action focused on the specific area(s) identified as Unsatisfactory.

Upon request of the appraisee or the District, the grievance officer may serve as an observer of the process.

24A.12.1 Pre-Appraisal Conference for Unsatisfactory Status for Professional Related Criteria (24A.4.1) and/or Collegial Related Criteria (24A.4.2)

The procedure for Unsatisfactory status will be reviewed with the appraisee by the appraisal team. The Plan for Corrective Action developed by the appraisal team will be reviewed with the appraisee.

24A.12.2 Appraisal Methods for Unsatisfactory Status for Professional Related Criteria (24A.4.1) and/or for Collegial Related Criteria (24A.4.2)

24A.12.2.1 Instructional or Classroom Related (24A.4.1)

Classroom Activities - Based on the Plan for Corrective Action, if the area for improvement is classroom related, appraisal methods may include, but need not be limited to, the following:

Course Planning: The appraisee will prepare and submit to the appraisal team a plan for each course which addresses course content, skills to be developed, teaching methods and rationale, and student evaluation procedures.

Observations: Each member of the team must observe each section each semester. The team will determine the maximum number of observations to be conducted.

Student Surveys: Student surveys will be conducted by the eleventh week of class in each semester. The survey shall include all students enrolled in such sections and may include students who were enrolled but dropped or withdrew from the sections.

24A.12.2.2 Non-Instruction/Non-classroom Related (24A.4.1)

The Plan for Corrective Action, if the area of improvement falls under the Professional Criteria category (24A.4.1) but is not instruction nor classroom related, shall identify the criteria that are unsatisfactory and the expectations of the appraisal team. The team will establish what corrections are necessary and develop a timeline for completion. The appraisal team will determine the appropriate methods to evaluate the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.

24A.12.2.3 Collegial Related (24A.4.2)

The Plan for Corrective Action shall identify specific criteria that are not being met and the expectations of the appraisal team. The team shall identify what the member needs to correct and determine a timeline for completion. The appraisal team will establish the appropriate methods that will be used to evaluate the response to the Plan for Corrective Action.

24A.13 Outcome for Unsatisfactory Status for Professional Related Criteria (24A.4.1) and/or for Collegial Related Criteria (24A.4.2)

By the 13th week of the 2nd semester in which the faculty member is in Unsatisfactory status the team shall make one of two possible recommendations to the President. The team may recommend that:

  1. the faculty member be returned to Satisfactory status; or
  2. the member shall not be continued as a faculty member.

The President shall determine whether or not to initiate termination proceedings in accordance with Article 24. If the decision is made to terminate, the member’s assignment will be determined by the President during termination proceedings.

24A.14 Authorization

Education Code Sections §87660 et seq. set forth the requirements for the performance appraisal of members. The legislative intent, as stated in AB 1725, provides that a member’s students, administrators and peers should all contribute to the appraisal, but the member should play a central role in the appraisal process, and, together with appropriate administrators, assume principal responsibility for the effectiveness of the process.

24A.15 Negotiability

Any changes in the District Tenure Review or Performance Appraisal Process shall be subject to the negotiation process. ACE, AFT 6554 shall consult with the Academic Senate prior to engaging in collective bargaining procedures regarding this article (Education Code Sections §87610.1 and §87663).

24A.16 Grievability

Only compliance with the performance appraisal process is grievable. Outcomes or results of this article are not grievable.