You are here

Periodic Evaluation of Lecturers - Evaluation Procedures and Criteria

August 30, 2020

Article 15 of the CSU/CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement establishes requirements for the periodic evaluation of lecturers. This memo provides a review and summary of the campus-wide lecturer evaluation procedures, criteria, and timelines for the 2020-2021 Academic Year. Please note that these procedures do not apply to T.A's or G.A.s.

Who must be evaluated?

All lecturers with appointments for two or more semesters (regardless of a break in service) must be evaluated. A lecturer holding appointments in two or more departments must receive an evaluation in each department where an appointment is held.

Full and part-time lecturers holding three-year appointments are not required to be evaluated annually. However, please be aware that the Collective Bargaining Agreement provides that all lecturers holding three-year appointments must be evaluated at least once during the term of their three-year appointment and may be evaluated more frequently upon the request of either the employee or the department chair. 

All lecturers (full and part-time) eligible for an initial three-year appointment or a renewal of a subsequent three-year appointment must be evaluated in the academic year preceding the issuance of a three-year appointment. This periodic evaluation shall consider the faculty unit employee’s cumulative work performance during the entire qualifying period for the three-year appointment.

Whose evaluation is optional?

Lecturers who are appointed for only one semester (both full-time and part-time), shall be evaluated at the discretion of the department chair or dean OR upon the request of the lecturer. Howeverif they are appointed to a one‑semester fall contract and they are subsequently appointed for the spring semester, they must also receive a periodic evaluation.

Evaluation Procedures

CSULB Lecturer Evaluation In Interfolio:

The campus has moved lecturer evaluations to the online platform Interfolio. The same evaluation form will be used for both full‑time and part‑time lecturers. The criteria for evaluation and the relevant sections for included information remain the same as they have been on the paper forms. You are encouraged to familiarize yourself with the Interfolio information on the Faculty Affairs website in order to prepare for the evaluation process.

Evaluation of Full Time Lecturers

Full‑time lecturers with appointments for two or more semesters (regardless of a break in service) must be evaluated annually in accordance with Article 15.23 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. An evaluation must be conducted by a peer review committee consisting of tenured faculty. A final evaluation will be conducted by the dean or appropriate administrator. The chair may submit a separate recommendation to the dean or appropriate administrator if not serving as a member of the peer review committee.

Evaluation of Part Time Lecturers

Periodic evaluations of part‑time lecturers are to be completed by the department chair, with opportunity provided for peer input in accordance with Article 15.2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The input must be written, signed, and included in the evaluation materials. Copies of the written input must be provided to the evaluators and the lecturer. The dean may provide an evaluation or may simply acknowledge having reviewed the department evaluation.

Evaluation of all lecturers (Full and part-time) eligible for an initial three-year appointment or a renewal of a subsequent three-year appointment:

All lecturers (full and part-time) eligible for an initial three-year appointment or a renewal of a three-year appointment must be evaluated in the academic year preceding the issuance of a three-year appointment. This evaluation shall include student evaluations of teaching performance for those with teaching duties, peer review by a committee of the department or equivalent unit, and evaluations by appropriate administrators. The evaluation shall rate the temporary faculty unit employee as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Satisfactory ratings may include narrative comments including constructive suggestions for development. This periodic evaluation shall consider the faculty unit employee’s cumulative work performance during the entire qualifying period for the three-year appointment.

Right to Rebut/Respond to Evaluation:

Pursuant to Article 15.5 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, at all levels of review, before recommendations are forwarded to a subsequent level for review, faculty unit employees shall be given a copy of the recommendation and the written reasons thereof. The faculty unit employee may submit a rebuttal or response in writing within ten (10) days following receipt of the recommendation. The response or rebuttal is then forwarded with the evaluation to the next level.

All materials considered by the department shall be made available to the dean.  At the conclusion of the review, the materials in Interfolio are considered incorporated by reference in the appropriate employee’s Personnel Action File (PAF).

Evaluation Criteria

Lecturer evaluations must be appropriate to the lecturer’s position description and actual work assignment.

Materials to be considered:

The Collective Bargaining Agreement stipulates that student evaluations of teaching must be considered in the periodic evaluation of lecturers. The use of student evaluations shall be in accordance with Articles 15.15, 15.17, 15.18, and university policy.  

Special Notice: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic response, SPOT scores for Spring 2020 will not be required for evaluations. Fall 2020 SPOT scores may be required by your college or department.

Lecturers may be asked by department evaluators to submit a current curriculum vitae and copies of instructional materials such as course syllabi, representative assignments, and exams for all the courses evaluated. Lecturers may be asked by department evaluators to submit the materials from prior academic years if they have not already been reviewed due to evaluation timelines.

Prior to the beginning of the review process, the faculty unit employee subject to review shall be responsible for the identification and submission of materials to be considered for evaluation. Evaluating committees and administrators shall be responsible for identifying and providing materials relating to evaluation not accessible by the employee.

Full-time lecturers must submit materials that illustrate their performance as related to the duties identified in their position description and/or actual work assignment (i.e., teaching, professional development, and/or service).

Part-time lecturers may submit additional materials, including but not limited to materials that illustrate their performance related to the duties identified in their position description and/or actual work assignment (i.e., teaching, professional development, and/or service) such as a brief list of professional accomplishments or contributions over the past year, a reflective narrative, and/or a peer evaluation of teaching. If additional documentation is submitted by a lecturer, it must be considered in the lecturer's periodic evaluation. Lecturers may submit materials from the previous semester if those materials were not previously reviewed due to evaluation timelines.

Please note: When evaluators request that a lecturer provide materials for consideration and the requested material(s) are not provided, this may have an adverse impact on the lecturer’s evaluation.

Classroom visits:

Classroom visits may be a useful tool in the evaluation process and may be utilized at the discretion of the department evaluators/evaluation committee.  When classroom visits are determined to be appropriate in the evaluation process, the individual lecturer being evaluated shall be provided a notice of at least five (5) days that a classroom visit is to take place. There shall be consultation between the lecturer being evaluated and the individual who visits his/her class(es) regarding which classes will be visited and a reasonable date range in which the visits will take place. (Generally, the range given should not exceed three weeks. However, unique circumstances can arise where a reasonable date range could exceed that general guidance.)

Timelines and Deadlines

The following timelines have been established for the 2020-2021 lecturer evaluation cycle. Please note that those lecturers working only one semester but subject to evaluation will have an alternative timeline determined by the college.


 

Timeframe Description
August 3, 2020 through October 2, 2020 Department lecturer evaluation committees are elected if they have not already been elected in the prior academic year.
October 5, 2020 Deadline for Dept. Chairs to communicate who is on lecturer evaluation committees to Faculty Affairs.
October 26, 2020 through November 6, 2020 Lecturer Evaluation cases are created in Interfolio. Lecturers notified of case by automatic email.
November 6, 2020 Faculty Affairs sends out 2nd email notice of evaluation directly to lecturers.
November 16, 2020 through November 20, 2020 Lecturer evaluation workshops for evaluators and lecturers being evaluated.
January 25, 2021 Faculty Affairs sends email reminder to lecturers that candidate file is due on Monday, February 8, 2020
February 8, 2021 Candidate file is due.
February 9, 2021 through March 8, 2021 Department level recommendation period.
March 9, 2021 Department level recommendation due to candidates
March 10, 2021 through March 19, 2021 Candidate rebuttal period for department level recommendations.
March 19, 2021 Deadline to receive candidate rebuttals to department level recommendation.
March 22, 2021 through April 30, 2021 Evaluation of file by appropriate administrator. 
May 3, 2021 through May 5, 2021 Candidate receives evaluation from appropriate administrator. 

 

Questions should be directed to Faculty Affairs at extension 51742.