Revised: 11/22/2024
Effective Date: 1/01/2025
Reviewed & approved by Director and Personnel Committee
I. Purpose
As stated in AA/PPS No. 04.02.10, “the purposes of annual faculty evaluation are to provide guidance for self-development; to identify, reinforce, and share the strengths of faculty; and to identify opportunities for strengthening the role and contributions of faculty members. The evaluation also provides information that may be used in tenure and promotion recommendations, in the awarding of performance and merit raises, and in decisions regarding the retention of faculty or of tenure itself.”
Annual evaluation affords the faculty member the advantage of open communication lines and specific feedback regarding his/her performance. Additionally, the evaluation affords the tenure-track faculty member an assessment of progress towards tenure and/or promotion.
Annual evaluation provides an opportunity for the school director to meet formally with each faculty member for the purpose of setting specific professional development goals and evaluating progress towards attaining previously set goals.
Annual evaluation of faculty is the responsibility of shared governance, a duty of the school director, personnel committee, and college dean. (AA/PPS No. 04.02.10).
II. Document Review
This document must be reviewed, revised if necessary, and re-approved every three years by a committee that includes the Director and representatives from tenured faculty, tenure-track faculty, faculty of practice, and faculty of instruction. It must be approved by the personnel committee, the Director, the College Dean, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the University Attorney. The school director is responsible for providing all faculty with a copy of the policy and ensuring that it is fully implemented. It is the responsibility of each faculty member to prepare and upload all of their own evaluation materials.
III. Policies and Procedures for Submission of Materials
All faculty will be evaluated annually during the spring semester in accordance with university policy. Tenured and tenure-track faculty, as well as Faculty of Practice, are evaluated on performance in three areas: teaching, creative/scholarly, and service. Faculty of Instruction, Senior Lecturers, and Lecturers are evaluated on teaching and service. They are also evaluated on creative/scholarly in cases where release time is granted for it.
In December, the Director will send the faculty an outline for the Faculty Activities Report, along with instructions for submission of portfolio materials. For evaluation purposes, only activities from January 1 through December 31 of the previous year will be considered.
For faculty who are classified as half-time, three-quarter time, or full-time, the faculty evaluation portfolio shall consist of:
- the school’s Faculty Activities Report;
- all course syllabi;
- grade compilations for each course (without student names);
- all current student evaluations with comments from EvaluationKit;
- signed peer teaching observations (if applicable);
- updated curriculum vitae in Texas State format;
- brief narrative summaries that highlight achievements and place work in context for those;
- outside their area of expertise (not to exceed 250 words);
- and other items deemed necessary by the Personnel Committee and Director.
In addition, all faculty may include other items they deem appropriate. These may include outside and internal evaluations of creative/scholarly research, copies of publications, images of production work, reviews, and/or video clips of performances, productions, films, etc.
The evaluation portfolio will be submitted electronically as PDF attachments in the annual evaluation portal.
It is the responsibility of each faculty to submit a complete evaluation portfolio, with all required items, via Faculty Qualifications by the specified deadline. This includes student evaluations. Faculty must encourage students to complete these and should consider setting aside 20 minutes of classroom time for each course at the end of the semester for completion of this task.
IV. Criteria for Faculty Performance
A. Teaching
It is expected that each member of the faculty will excel in teaching, demonstrating competence in his/her content area, enthusiasm for teaching, and the ability to stimulate students to achieve at the highest levels possible.
- Teaching activities:
- Courses carrying workload credit
- Labs carrying no credit
- Assigned workload related to significant supervision/mentoring of students in shops and/or facilitating production work alongside students
- Internship supervision
- Independent study courses
- Mentoring or supervision of curricular and co-curricular projects
- Graduate exit exam or thesis committee work
- Supervision of undergraduate Honors thesis
- Participation in SoTDF proficiency evaluations, juries, and/or BFA reviews of student work
- Activities related to teaching:
- Development of an original course
- Significant redesign of an existing course
- Preparation for a course that the faculty member has never taught
- Curriculum program development
- Professional development related to teaching
- Grant activities related to teaching
- Involvement of students in research activities
- Integration of research into teaching content and methodologies
- Sponsorship of field trips
- Use of external guest speakers
- Teaching activities are evaluated on:
- Adherence to university standards for syllabi
- Evidence of rigor and impartiality in the assessment and grading of student work
- Peer evaluations
- Student evaluations
- Supplemental texts, class materials, and technological implementations
- Teaching honors and awards
- Student achievements (e.g., awards, internships, grants, honors, employment)
- Integration of research into teaching content and methodologies
Note: While grade compilations and student evaluations can supply important indications of course rigor, impartiality, and teaching effectiveness, the Personnel Committee will treat this information with appropriate caution and as just two of many factors in the determination of teaching effectiveness. The Committee will consider class size, subject matter, and type of student population before drawing conclusions from this data.
In order to achieve “Meets expectations” for teaching, faculty are expected to meet the following standards:
- Syllabi contain clear learning outcomes using Bloom’s Taxonomy, a weekly plan for classes, a list of current resources (required and/or suggested), and transparent evaluative standards.
- Establishment of regular office hours for which the modality matches course delivery modality (1 hour/course section)
- Attend classes and be prompt in starting class
- Demonstrate a strong record of positive student response on evaluations
- Receive peer evaluations that show command of subject area, preparation for class, rapport with students, use of appropriate teaching methods, willingness to assist students, sensitivity to diversity in the classroom, and professional decorum.
In order to achieve “Exceeds Expectations” for teaching, faculty will excel in all of the areas above and in addition will demonstrate exceptional achievement in more than one of the following areas:
- Individual mentorship of students outside the classroom
- Demonstrate an exceptional record of positive student response on evaluations
- Exceptional peer teaching reviews
- Evidence of student/alumni achievements (internships, employment, grants, awards, etc.)
- Use of innovative teaching methods
- Enhancement of teaching skills through attending relevant workshops
- Teaching awards and honors
- Grants related to teaching
Faculty will be considered for “Does Not Meet Expectations” when they are deficient in any of the standards described in the “Meets Expectations” section. Faculty must receive a peer teaching evaluation before being given a “Does Not Meet Expectations” assessment. In addition, the Personnel Committee is encouraged to seek additional materials in these cases. The Director will meet with any faculty member receiving this assessment and will assign a faculty teaching mentor. Failure to improve in areas of concern by the end of the fall semester of the following year may result in the termination of contract.
B. Creative/Scholarly Research.
It is expected that each tenured and tenure-track faculty member will pursue professional activities appropriate to his/her field of specialization. Professional activity is an important means by which faculty establish credibility and gain respect within the profession and academic ranks. As the University moves towards Research 1 status, it is increasingly important that tenured and tenure-track faculty establish and maintain significant research agendas that have national and international impact, however work completed at Texas State University will still impact the professional portfolio. Faculty are encouraged to investigate how work completed at Texas State can be peer-reviewed and/or parlayed into national and/or international presentations, publications, or similar.
Tenured and tenure-track faculty should document significant “refereed” activities. In disciplines such as theatre/dance history, theory and criticism, or playwriting, “refereed” means that the creative/scholarly work has been peer-reviewed and selected for publication, presentation, or production. In the case of disciplines such as performance, choreography, direction, design, and devised work, activities will be considered “refereed” if the participant is invited to participate through a competitive process, the creative product is supported by or associated with a professional organization, and/or the creative product is exhibited at the invitation of a professional organization or institution.
Faculty of Practice are expected to maintain connections with the professional world through continued engagement in creative work and are evaluated on these efforts.
Faculty of Instruction and Senior Lecturers who are given workload release for creative/scholarly work will be evaluated on the work that has been approved by the school.
Faculty of Instruction and Senior Lecturers who are not given workload release for creative/scholarly work are not evaluated in this area but are expected to remain current in the professional standards and practices of their teaching field.
Creative/scholarly activities:
- Designing scenery, lighting, costumes, sound, projections, properties, or special effects
- Directing
- Choreographing
- Film Production
- Collaboration on devised work
- Serving as Artistic Director or Producer for concerts or productions
- Performing
- Vocal coaching
- Dialect coaching and design
- Technical direction
- Execution of the technical elements of design work (scenery, costumes, lighting, sound, projections, properties, scenic painting, or special effects)
- Voice-over or voice recording
- Dramatic writing published or produced
- Dramaturgical work
- Editing films or videos
- Book publication
- Book chapter, introduction, or preface
- Book review
- Article in a refereed academic or professional journal
- Editor of a nationally, regionally, or state-recognized professional, trade, or practitioner journal
- Conference paper, presentation, lecture, panel, or workshop
Activities related to creative/scholarly:
- Grants (applied for and/or received)
- Invited presentations, panels, speeches, or lectures at universities, professional meetings, conventions, or conferences
- Published photos, videos, reviews, etc. of creative/scholarly work in digital and/or print editions of books and periodicals
- Invited exhibition or screening of previously executed creative/scholarly work
- Awards or honors
- Professional development related to research
- Active membership in professional organizations
Creative/scholarly activities are evaluated on:
- The local, regional, national, or international reputation of the venue, producing organization, host institution, or publication
- Quantity of work completed
- Significance and quality of work as evidenced in:
- Critical response found in reputable digital and/or print journals, books, and newspapers
- External peer reviews
- Citations in other books, journals, and articles
- Enhancement of the reputation of the school, college, and university
- Significance of grants awarded
- Significance of awards or honors
Completing a dissertation is a condition of employment, not an artifact related to expectations of continued performance.
For the annual evaluation process, significant research and/or preparation for creative/scholarly work that is “in progress” will be given consideration appropriate to the magnitude of the project. Please note that creative/scholarly work that is “in progress” is not considered in tenure and promotion decisions.
Evaluation of creative/scholarly activities for Faculty of Instruction and Senior Lecturers:
In order to achieve “Meets Expectations” for creative/scholarly work, Faculty of Instruction and Senior Lecturers receiving workload release are expected to meet the following standards:
- Creative work is performed at Texas State University or at a local professional venue for which the release was given. Scholarly work is published in a journal with local reputation;
- Work is completed in the semester for which the workload release is approved;
- Work contributes to the overall effectiveness and quality of school production, event, or instruction;
- Work enhances the reputation of the school;
- Quality of work meets professional standards;
- and Faculty demonstrate a willingness and ability to create a positive collaborative work environment and show respect for the ideas and needs of other faculty, staff, and students.
In order to achieve “Exceeds Expectations” for creative/scholarly work, Faculty of Instruction and Senior Lecturers receiving workload release will excel in all of the areas above and in addition will demonstrate exceptional achievement in more than one of the following areas:
- Work receives regional, national, or international recognition
- Work is in excess of what was approved for workload release
- Work is of exceptional quality as validated by critical reviews, external peer reviews, and/or internal peer reviews.
- Significant grant awarded related to faculty member’s research agenda
- Significant honor or award
Faculty of Instruction and Senior Lecturers receiving workload release will be considered for “Does Not Meet Expectations,” when they are deficient in any of the standards described in the “Meets Expectations” section.
Evaluation of creative/scholarly activities for Faculty of Practice:
In order to achieve “Meets Expectations,” Faculty of Practice are expected to meet the following standards:
- Creative work is performed on the Texas State campus or at a regional professional venue.
- Work continues to enhance connections with the professional world
- Work enhances the reputation of the school
- Quality of work meets professional standards
- Faculty demonstrate a willingness and ability to create a positive collaborative work environment and show respect for the ideas and needs of other faculty, staff, and students
In order to achieve “Exceeds Expectations” for creative/scholarly work, Faculty of Practice will excel in all of the areas above and in addition will demonstrate exceptional achievement in more than one of the following areas:
- Creative work is performed at a national, or international venue
- Work receives regional, national, or international recognition
- Work is of exceptional quality as validated by critical reviews, external peer reviews, and/or internal peer reviews.
- Significant student involvement in work
- Significant grant award related to faculty member’s research agenda
- Significant award or honor
Faculty of Practice will be considered for “Does Not Meet Expectations,” when they are deficient in any of the standards described in the “Meets Expectations” section.
Evaluation of creative/scholarly activities for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty:
In order to achieve “Meets Expectations” for creative/scholarly work, tenured and tenure-track faculty are expected to meet the following standards:
- Faculty complete the equivalent of one significant creative/scholarly work per year (e.g. an article in a major peer-reviewed publication, creative work on a full-length performance piece, choreography of two smaller dance pieces, artistic direction of an event with multiple professional participants)
- Creative work is performed at a professional venue with a regional reputation or within the School of Theatre, Dance, and Film. Scholarly work is published in a peer-reviewed publication with a regional reputation.
- Work is of professional quality as validated by critical reviews, external peer reviews, and/or internal peer reviews
- Work enhances the reputation of the school.
- Faculty demonstrate a willingness and ability to create a positive collaborative work environment and show respect for the ideas and needs of other faculty, staff, and students
In order to achieve “Exceeds Expectations” for creative/scholarly work, tenured and tenure-track faculty will excel in all of the areas above and in addition will demonstrate exceptional achievement in more than one of the following areas:
- Faculty complete the equivalent of more than one significant creative/scholarly works per year
- Creative work is performed at a venue with a significant national or international reputation. Scholarly work is published in a peer-reviewed publication with a national or international reputation.
- Work is of exceptional quality as validated by critical reviews, external peer reviews, and/or internal peer reviews.
- Work enhances the reputation of the university
- Significant student involvement in work
- Significant grant award related to the faculty member’s research area
- Significant award or honor
Tenured and tenure-track faculty will be considered for “Does Not Meet Expectations,” when they are deficient in any of the standards described in the “Meets Expectations” section.
Faculty working towards application for tenure and/or promotion must have a record of consistently exceeding expectations.
It should be noted that tenured and tenure-track faculty are expected to demonstrate a sustained trajectory of excellence in their area of creative/scholarly work.
While tenured and tenure-track faculty doing creative work at Texas State University can earn “Meets Expectations” or “Exceeds Expectations”, the university expects that a substantial portion of work will be done at outside professional venues.
All appointments will recognize the individual’s teaching background and contributions as well as their potential to provide robust and consistent curricular support and service in relevant areas of the School of Theatre, Dance, and Film. Rank will be limited to the option(s) available at the time of the search and search committee’s confirmation of appropriate rank based on the qualifications of the selected applicant.
- Assistant Professor of Instruction – Initial appointment to the rank of assistant professor of instruction may be extended to an individual with the following qualifications:
- Meets the faculty qualifications of the hiring unit as stated in individual job description;
- Demonstrates current and contemporary competence in the content area they will be assigned to teach;
- Documented effective teaching and learning contributions in traditional classrooms and/or practical settings as necessitated by their content area; and
- Exhibits the potential for continued professional growth in support of instructional assignment.
- Associate Professor of Instruction – Initial appointment to the rank of associate professor of instruction may be extended to an individual with the following qualifications:
- Meets the faculty qualifications of the hiring unit as stated in individual job description;
- Demonstrates current and contemporary competence in the content area they will be assigned to teach;
- Documents more than five years of full-time effective teaching and learning contributions at the university level in traditional classrooms and/or practical settings as necessitated by their content area;
- Documents contributions to advancements in curriculum, pedagogy, course delivery, or similar innovation; and
- Exhibits the potential for increased leadership in teaching and instructional activities.
- Professor of Instruction – Initial appointment to the rank of professor of instruction may be extended to an individual with the following qualifications:
- Meets the faculty qualifications of the hiring unit as stated in individual job description;
- Demonstrates current and contemporary competence in the content area they will be assigned to teach;
- Documents more than ten years of full-time effective and sustained teaching and learning contributions at the university level in traditional classrooms and/or practical settings as necessitated by their content area;
- Documents contributions to sustained advancements in curriculum, pedagogy, course delivery, or similar innovation; and
- Documents recognition for leadership and contributions in teaching and instructional activities (e.g., awards).
C. Service
Promotion eligible faculty are expected to devote time, energy, and professional expertise in service to school, college, and/or university committees. Service in the community, to professional organizations, and other work assigned by the Director will also count towards this requirement. Tenure and tenure-track faculty are expected to demonstrate a sustained commitment to university and professional service.
As part of service to the university, full-time and promotion eligible faculty are expected to attend one graduation over a 12-month period.
Part-time faculty are expected to meet minimal SoTDF service assignments commensurate with their teaching load.
School service:
- Administration of SoTDF programs, productions, and procedures
- Substantial and sustained recruitment responsibilities
- Significant and/or sustained fund-raising responsibilities
- Substantial audition responsibilities for program placement
- SoTDF committees as assigned by the Director
- Student academic advisement
- Supervision of staff or student assistants
- Supervision of student organizations
- Supervision of equipment/facilities
- Supervision of student participation in conferences, festivals (KC/ACTF, USITT, ACDA)
PLEASE NOTE: Attending meetings and joining a class as a guest are not service. While many service activities involve meetings, simply attending meetings is not a service. You can list your membership in a particular program area, however, ideally you would highlight your specific contributions to this area in your listing or your narrative.
Professional service:
- An officer in a professional organization
- Committee member in a professional organization
- Referee for a journal or member of an editorial board
- Event planner (convention, conference, festival)
- Convention or conference respondent or critic
- Adjudication of professionally sponsored events within your area of expertise (international, national, regional, or statewide competitions)
International service in a professional capacity:
- Workshops
- Master classes
- Consulting
- Presentations
- Adjudication of student work
Community service in a professional capacity:
- Member of community arts organization
- Contribution of professional services in public schools, churches, or service clubs
- Workshop in public schools
- Exhibitions and/or creative/scholarly contributions for community benefit
- Consulting
- Adjudication of community events related to your area of expertise
Service is evaluated on:
- Commitment to service as evidenced by attendance at and preparation for meetings/assignments
- Significance, time-commitment, and number of committees/assignments
- Leadership responsibilities
In order to achieve “Meets expectations” for service, faculty are expected to meet the following standards:
- Provide service to the school and/or college
- Prepare for and be actively engaged in meetings
- Complete service obligations to the school, college, or university in a thorough and timely fashion
- Demonstrate a willingness and ability to create a positive collaborative work environment, showing respect for the ideas and needs of others
In order to achieve “Exceeds expectations” for service, faculty will excel in all of the areas above and in addition will demonstrate exceptional achievement in more
than one of the following areas:
- Fulfill leadership roles on SoTDF, college, and/or university committees
- Serve on time-intensive committees or projects
- Serve on multiple committees
- Serve on committees at the university level
- Fulfill leadership roles for professional organizations at a regional, national, or international level
- Provide significant community service in a professional capacity
Faculty will be considered for “Does Not Meet Expectations”, when they are deficient in any of the standards described in the “Meets Expectations” section.
V. Merit and Performance Assumptions
Because of the variance in areas of focus within the SoTDF and because quality of work is difficult to quantify, there will always be a subjective element to these decisions. While this document attempts to clarify and make more transparent the evaluative process, ultimately the Personnel Committee and Director are entrusted with making, to the best of their abilities, informed and fair judgements about the annual evaluation materials submitted by faculty.
The Personnel Committee must often weigh quantity against quality and may decide that someone who quantitatively meets performance standards did so in a manner that is not qualitatively worthy of merit. For example, the committee may determine that one person’s teaching of three sections was better than another person’s teaching of four.
It should also be noted that while each of the areas are valued, teaching and creative/scholarly are weighted equally and more heavily than service.
VI. Eligibility For Retention and Merit Increase
The annual evaluation of faculty is the direct source for decisions regarding the retention and re-appointment of faculty as well as merit increases. In evaluating performance, the Personnel Committee, Director, and college Dean will consider the faculty member’s contributions in the context of school, college, and institutional needs and the faculty member’s past performance and career path. (AA/PPS No. 04.02.10 and AA/PPS No. 04.02.11)
As part of the evaluative process, the Personnel Committee will recommend to the Director that a faculty member be considered for no merit or merit based on evaluations of teaching, creative/scholarship, and service. Ultimately, merit is an assessment of one’s overall contribution (both in terms of functioning and in terms of prestige) to the school and to the university.
When the Director is asked to make recommendations to the Dean of Fine Arts and Communication regarding merit and performance salary increases, the Director will examine all Faculty Activities Reports, portfolio materials, and the recommendations from the Personnel Committee. Based on the above input, and exercising administrative judgement, the Director will make specific monetary recommendations for performance and merit increases to the dean.
VII. Personnel Committee Evaluation and Director’s Statement
After a review of a faculty member’s portfolio, the Personnel Committee will submit an evaluation through Faculty Qualifications or some other method prescribed by the university. The evaluation will include a recommendation for performance and merit.
The Director will then submit a statement summarizing his/her own evaluation of the faculty member through Faculty Qualifications or some other method prescribed by the university. The evaluation will include a recommendation for performance and merit.
If a faculty member, including tenured professors, receives Does Not Meet in any assessed category, a short-term development plan will be created that includes benchmarks for returning to satisfactory performance.
Once posted, faculty members must go to Faculty Qualifications to read and certify their evaluations. Faculty who believe their accomplishments have been overlooked or undervalued may, within five working days, request a meeting with the Director. At this meeting, the Director will explain the reasons for the level of merit or for denying merit, and the faculty member may ask the Director to reconsider the preliminary decision. After reconsidering the accomplishments of all faculty who request a review of their activities, the Director will proceed to make final merit recommendations to the dean.
This evaluative process must be completed by March 1.
VIII. University Policy and Procedures
University policy and procedures for faculty evaluation are covered in AA/PPS No. 04.02.10 Performance Evaluation of Faculty and Post-Tenure Review.
Faculty are also urged to read (as appropriate to their rank): AA/PPS No. 04.02.01: Development and Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty, AA/PPS No. 04.02.20: Tenure-Line Faculty Tenure and Promotion Review, and AA/PPS No. 04.01.23: Faculty of Practice Appointments.