Faculty Evaluation of Program Chair Sample Clauses

Faculty Evaluation of Program Chair. An informal evaluation of each Program Chair by the faculty of his/her program shall occur during February/March each year of the term of office using a form developed by AFT and the administration. The administrator and Program Chair shall examine and discuss all submitted evaluation forms. The administrator shall summarize the informal review in the Administrator Evaluation Form where appropriate.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Faculty Evaluation of Program Chair

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • DEVELOPMENT OR ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS/ STATEMENTS OF WORK Firms and/or individuals that assisted in the development or drafting of the specifications, requirements, statements of work, or solicitation documents contained herein are excluded from competing for this solicitation. This shall not be applicable to firms and/or individuals providing responses to a publicly posted Request for Information (RFI) associated with a solicitation.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxx will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • MANAGEMENT OF EVALUATION OUTCOMES 12.1 The evaluation of the Employee’s performance will form the basis for rewarding outstanding performance or correcting unacceptable performance.

  • Evaluation of Students A teacher shall maintain the right and responsibility to determine grades and other evaluation of students within the grading policies of the District based upon professional judgment of available criteria pertinent to any given subject area or activity for which the teacher is responsible. No grade or evaluation shall be changed without consultation with the teacher.

  • Finalization of Evaluation A Written Report 1 Before the evaluation cycle is final, and not later than May 10, a copy of the formal written evaluation report shall be given to the teacher and a conference shall be held between the teacher and the evaluator.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Faculty Selection, Supervision, and Evaluation A. Faculty for a dual credit course will be approved and employed by Hill College. The instructor must meet credential requirements of Hill College and minimum requirements as specified by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). Each faculty member assigned to teach an academic course will have a master’s degree plus 18 hours in the specific discipline. Technical course instructors will have at least an associate degree and three years of work experience in the related business or industry.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.