Evaluation of Faculty Job Performance
[For 2020-2021 Evaluation Cycle]

SP 3-31

APPROVED: July 1, 2002
EFFECTIVE: July 1, 2002
REVISED: July 1, 2013
REVISED: November 18, 2013

REFERENCE: Board Policy on Evaluation of Faculty Job Performance, BP-31


/ Nancy J. McCallin /
Nancy J. McCallin, Ph.D.
System President


This policy applies to regular teaching faculty.


The goal of faculty evaluation is to assess faculty performance and reward contribution to the success of students and improve the environment of the college community.


Board Policy 3-31 requires the System President to establish System guidelines for the evaluation of faculty job performance.

Factors in Evaluation of Job Performance

Faculty will be evaluated according to their documented responsibilities, job description, and the ability to meet program, college and Board goals related to their areas of responsibility. These documented responsibilities and goals will determine the specific focus of the faculty member’s work and evaluation in the two principal evaluation categories: teaching and service.

A faculty member would typically be expected to devote 70 percent of his or her effort and attention to teaching activities and 30 percent to service activities. These percentages may be modified in circumstances including but not limited to: provisional status; reduced teaching loads for department chair or other leadership duties; special assignment or projects, such as accreditation; or where performance concerns have been identified. The modified percentages should be specified in the performance plan. The final overall evaluation rating is not meant to be a weighted average of ratings in each category, but should reflect the faculty member’s overall performance based on his or her individual responsibilities.
Compliance with State Board policies and System President’s procedures is a requirement of all State System employees; noncompliance will be an overall negative factor in a faculty member’s evaluation.


The evaluation of teaching will include but is not limited to consideration of student evaluations and direct observation by supervisors. Evaluators should consider all the following components of teaching: class structure and organization; course materials, including syllabi, course outlines, and lesson plans; command of subject matter; demonstrated currency in the field and in teaching methodology; presentation skill; professional and courteous interaction with students; availability to students during office hours; student engagement; and promotion of student achievement.

In addition, evaluators should consider other factors that may be relevant based on the faculty member’s job description, responsibilities and individual and college/department goals. These may include, but are not limited to: assessment of student learning; documented teaching and curriculum improvement based on assessment results; incorporation of course, program, and college student learning outcomes; incorporation of student retention strategies; and integration of technology into course work as appropriate to the discipline.


Service includes fulfilling the mission and goals of the college outside of the classroom. Components of service to be considered in the evaluation should be based on the faculty member’s job description, role, goals, and documented responsibilities. These may include but are not limited to departmental service, including curriculum coordination and development, advising and outreach, administrative assignments, and committee work; system, college-wide and campus committee work; sponsoring and participating in student activities; and attendance at college activities and events. Additional activities may include serving as the college representative on a local board or commission, making community or professional presentations, serving as a liaison to local schools, or serving as an elected or appointed member of local boards.

Service also includes professional and courteous interaction with colleagues, staff and community as typically demonstrated by active engagement, collaboration, and constructive cooperation in department and college activities. This shall not diminish lively, critical debate which is both necessary and appropriate in an academic institution.

Evaluation Procedures

The college presidents, with input from faculty and other pertinent staff, will develop procedures for conducting evaluations that will assess each faculty member’s proficiency in performing the duties of his or her position. Such procedures will meet the following guidelines:

  1. Faculty members will develop and submit for supervisor approval an annual performance plan incorporating teaching and service. Individual performance objectives will be based on the faculty members documented responsibilities and the department and college goals. Plans and associated factor percentages may be modified in the event of a change in faculty role.
  2. Faculty members shall receive annual performance evaluations from trained supervisors which shall be reviewed by the second level supervisor. The delegated faculty supervisor has discretion to require more frequent comprehensive evaluations as the supervisor deems necessary.
  3. Faculty members will prepare a brief written summary of their activities for the year and the contribution and outcome of those activities to teaching and service and their performance objectives
  4. Performance evaluations and ratings shall be narrative – not numerical.
  5. There shall be three performance ratings; Exemplary, Commendable, Needs Improvement.
  6. A formal evaluation conference shall be held at least once during each evaluation cycle. A written report of the conference, including supervisor’s rationale for the rating, will be provided to the faculty member.
  7. The faculty member shall have the opportunity to respond to the formal evaluation report for the record.
  8. A faculty member may petition the college president for a review of the formal evaluation report within 10 days of receipt of that report. Each college president will establish guidelines for a prompt review of the appeal; these guidelines may include a requirement that the faculty member seek to resolve the dispute informally with a dean or vice-president before a review by the president.
  9. Faculty members must meet the standards for Commendable performance or above in both teaching and service to receive an overall rating of Commendable or above.
  10. Faculty members must meet the standards of Exemplary performance in both teaching and service to receive an overall rating of Exemplary.

Only faculty members whose performance rating is “Commendable” or above are eligible for salary increases.

CCCS reserves the right to change any provision or requirement of any procedure at anytime.

Definitions of Performance Ratings

The definitions below are meant to be starting points for colleges to develop more college-specific guidance for each performance rating for faculty and evaluators. Colleges must follow the basic definitions below, but can provide more detail on rating definitions or evaluation methods.


To receive a rating of “exemplary,” a faculty member must meet the standards for Exemplary performance in both teaching and service.” Evidence of exemplary performance must be documented within the performance evaluation.

Examples of the kinds of combinations of qualities or activities an “exemplary” teacher might demonstrate include, but are not limited to: exceptional skills in both instructional delivery and course design and planning; engaging students at a high level; demonstrating a strong commitment to using assessment data to guide revision of his or her teaching methods to improve student outcomes; leading the integration of new technology into the classroom; or developing new courses or curriculum either in the classroom and online that are of impressive quality.

For service, exemplary faculty typically perform their department and discipline responsibilities at a high level or take active leadership on specific initiatives that meet significant college or department goals. For example, if charged with managing a career/technical program they might demonstrate very strong relationships with industry partners that lead to high levels of program support, internships, and high placement rates for students

Other examples of the type of efforts that might characterize exemplary service include: effective leadership roles in college or system committees; developing significant new relationships in the community that meet college goals (with institutions like K-12 districts, other colleges or key business partners) ;making a contribution to their field of study, either in published work, presentations, or service in a professional organization; leadership in broader college initiatives that improve teaching and learning like Learning Communities, Service Learning, Writing Across the Curriculum or similar initiatives.

Exemplary service should be consistent with the faculty members performance plan.


To receive a rating of “commendable” a faculty member must meet the standards for commendable performance or above in both teaching and service, abide by all college guidelines and CCCS policies and procedures and meet department, college, and board goals related to his or her area of responsibility, including performance objectives defined in his or her performance plan.

Commendable faculty members meet basic instructional requirements, including following curriculum guidelines, college and department syllabus policies, assessment requirements and deadlines for schedules and grades. They demonstrate currency in the field and in teaching methodology. They demonstrate skill in both instructional delivery and course design and planning, as well as innovation in teaching methods and a commitment to continuous improvement of student learning outcomes, including meeting college guidelines for assessment of student learning.

Commendable faculty members engage actively in service such as serving on department and college committees, engaging in department and college functions and activities, advising students as appropriate and demonstrating professional and courteous behavior. They also meet the critical duties of their assigned roles. For example, if charged with managing a program, they meet all basic program requirements, including holding productive advisory committee meetings and appropriately advising students. Or, if charged with hiring and mentoring part-time instructors, they provide appropriate screening, orientation, and supervision, including classroom observations.

Needs Improvement

A faculty member “Needs Improvement” when he or she does not meet the criteria of a “commendable” performance rating in either teaching or service – he or she fails to competently meet the teaching or program management standards outlined above or in college guidelines, fails to provide significant service to the college or department, or violates the expectation of professional and collegial behavior. Any disregard for or violation of established CCCS policy or procedures or college guidelines may also result in this rating.