Common use of Unsatisfactory Evaluation Clause in Contracts

Unsatisfactory Evaluation. If student evaluations, oral or written complaints, classroom visits, or evaluation of the performance of other services, identify recurring and serious problems, an Amelioration Committee shall be formed by the end of the first week of the semester following that of the original evaluation. This committee shall consist of the Division Chairperson/immediate supervisor; one of the peers who served on the original evaluation committee; a district representative (who may be the evaluatee’s immediate supervisor if he/she is not a member of the unit) designated by the Superintendent/President; and an independent facilitator from outside the college, who will chair the committee. In the event that the evaluatee’s immediate supervisor is not a member of the unit, the Senate Committee on Committees and the immediate supervisor shall choose a tenured peer from within the evaluatee’s department/division to serve on the Amelioration Committee and to chair the Committee when it conducts the follow up evaluation described in paragraph five below. The District and the Association shall mutually agree upon the choice of the facilitator. The facilitator must be knowledgeable about educational and instructional issues, skilled in interpersonal communication and conflict resolution, and also skilled in guiding the development of a specific action plan including steps to ameliorate the identified problems. A plan for improvement, including specific indices for measuring progress, shall be developed jointly by the Amelioration Committee and the evaluatee by the end of the sixth week of the semester in which the Committee was formed and will be positively directed at assisting the evaluatee in amelioration of the identified problems. This plan shall be appended to the previous Committee Report, and a copy shall be given to the evaluatee. A complete evaluation following the appropriate procedures described in Section 14.3.2 for tenured faculty shall be conducted in the semester following the establishment of the Amelioration Committee. However the components of this evaluation (which may include reviews of previous Evaluation Final Reports) shall be specified by the Amelioration Committee, which shall henceforth function as the Evaluation Committee. However, the Division Chairperson/immediate supervisor shall now act as the Committee Chairperson, and the facilitator shall participate in order to continue to help the evaluatee to successfully resolve the issues identified in his/her plan for improvement. If this evaluation is satisfactory, the next evaluation will be in two years. However, if the evaluation is unsatisfactory, a summative written report shall be forwarded to the Superintendent/President for review and action.

Unsatisfactory Evaluation. If student evaluations, oral or written complaints, classroom visits, or evaluation of the performance of other services, identify recurring and serious problems, an Amelioration Committee shall be formed by the end of the first week of the semester following that of the original evaluation. This committee shall consist of the Division Chairperson/immediate supervisor; one of the peers who served on the original evaluation committee; a district representative (who may be the evaluatee’s immediate supervisor if he/she is not a member of the unit) designated by the Superintendent/President; and an independent facilitator from outside the college, who will chair the committee. In the event that the evaluatee’s immediate supervisor is not a member of the unit, the Senate Committee on Committees and the immediate supervisor shall choose a tenured peer from within the evaluatee’s department/division to serve on the Amelioration Committee and to chair the Committee when it conducts the follow up evaluation described in paragraph five below. The District and the Association shall mutually agree upon the choice of the facilitator. The facilitator must be knowledgeable about educational and instructional issues, skilled in interpersonal communication and conflict resolution, and also skilled in guiding the development of a specific action plan including steps to ameliorate the identified problems. A plan for improvement, including specific indices for measuring progress, shall be developed jointly by the Amelioration Committee and the evaluatee by the end of the sixth week of the semester in which the Committee was formed and will be positively directed at assisting the evaluatee in amelioration of the identified problems. This plan shall be appended to the previous Committee Report, and a copy shall be given to the evaluatee. A complete evaluation following the appropriate procedures described in Section inSection 14.3.2 for tenured faculty shall be conducted in the semester following the establishment of the Amelioration Committee. However the components of this evaluation (which may include reviews of previous Evaluation Final Reports) shall be specified by the Amelioration Committee, which shall henceforth function as the Evaluation Committee. However, the Division Chairperson/immediate supervisor shall now act as the Committee Chairperson, and the facilitator shall participate in order to continue to help the evaluatee to successfully resolve the issues identified in his/her plan for improvement. If this evaluation is satisfactory, the next evaluation will be in two years. However, if the evaluation is unsatisfactory, a summative written report shall be forwarded to the Superintendent/President for review and action.