1.06-1 Written Annual Evaluation
Each faculty member at the University of Georgia, regardless of rank or responsibilities, must receive a written annual evaluation of his or her performance. All annual evaluations of faculty performance must be supported by an annual activity report from UGA Elements. Each evaluation must address the components outlined in the following framework. However, evaluators may use their own format and include additional components if they wish. Some units may have unique needs that require an adjustment to some component of the annual evaluation letter. Units should work directly with their dean for approval of any adjustments and to ensure that all faculty members in their units are fully informed. A faculty member may or may not respond to his/her annual evaluation in writing; any such response will become part of the record. An editable copy of the evaluation framework is posted at the Office of Faculty Affairs website.
[YEAR] ANNUAL EVALUATION
To: [Faculty Member’s Name]
From: [Dean/Department Chair/Center Director’s Name; for those schools with departments, the dean should be cc’d]
Date: [Must be before March 31 of the calendar year; for those colleges/schools with departments, the dean should set an earlier deadline with sufficient opportunity to review and provide feedback on a draft.]
Attachment(s): UGA Elements annual activity report [plus any self-assessments or other reports, as required by each academic unit]
This constitutes your annual written evaluation required by Section 184.108.40.206 of the Board of Regents Policy Manual. Your assigned allocation of effort this year was [x%] scholarship, [y%] teaching, [z%] service, and [zz%] administration (or other ___________).
[The faculty member should be evaluated in each category below. Tenure-track and tenured faculty should be evaluated based upon their Promotion and Tenure Unit’s discipline-specific criteria. Where the rating is “does not meet expectations,” the evaluation must provide a concrete course of action with measureable and documentable achievements expected, including a timeline for improving this rating. Faculty activity and productivity in each of the categories below may be briefly summarized as necessary by the evaluator. However, more extensive data or summaries or self-assessments by the faculty should be attached to the evaluation].
Scholarship/Research/Creative Work – [EXCEEDS/MEETS/DOES NOT MEET] EXPECTATIONS
[Evaluation should present quantitative data where applicable (e.g., impact of journals, numbers of publications, amounts of external grant funding and sources, original creative works judged/reviewed) and an assessment of the importance of the scholarship to the field]
Teaching – [EXCEEDS/MEETS/DOES NOT MEET] EXPECTATIONS
[Evaluation should be more than just the number of classes taught and must include an assessment of quality of teaching (e.g., peer reviews, student evaluations, demand for classes from students, enrollment, and development of innovative teaching approaches)]
Service – [EXCEEDS/MEETS/DOES NOT MEET] EXPECTATIONS]
[Evaluation should assess the impact of achievements in service (e.g., documented impact of service on audiences served)]
Administration or Other – [EXCEEDS/MEETS/DOES NOT MEET] EXPECTATIONS]
[Evaluation should assess the progress of the unit administered toward its strategic goals with measurable outcomes that document achievement of these objectives]
OVERALL EVALUATION – [EXCEEDS/MEETS/DOES NOT MEET] EXPECTATIONS
[This section should provide an overall assessment of performance in relation to the individual’s assigned allocation of effort. If at least 50% of the faculty member’s assigned time receives a rating of “Does Not Meet Expectations,” then the overall evaluation should be “Does Not Meet Expectations.”
The overall evaluation should also indicate whether the faculty member is making satisfactory progress toward the next level of review appropriate to their rank, i.e., promotion and/or tenure as appropriate. A statement should be included to indicate that satisfactory progress in any one year does not guarantee that the faculty member will be successful in promotion and/or tenure.]
You may respond to this report in writing. That response must be submitted within 10 days of the date on this evaluation. Although it is not required for the annual evaluation, you may be asked to sign the evaluation; your signature on this memo only acknowledges its receipt and does not imply agreement.
Name and Title of Evaluator
Signature of Evaluator
Signature of Faculty Member being evaluated