Skip to Content


Minutes of the Evaluation and Assessment Committee
Xavier Retnam called the meeting to order on October 2, 2012 at 1 p.m. in Room 5210.

Members Present:
Peter Dorman, Lysa Holbrook, Carol Keeth Williams, Jeff Laub, Lorna Nelson, Gary Randolph, Xavier Retnam (Chair), Pam Reynolds (Recorder), and Cathy Beale (non-voting member)

Members Absent:
Lynn Dillard, Joey Fronheiser, James Lemons, Muriel Mickles, Kristin Ogden (non-voting member), Will Sandidge, and Cynthia Heying (non-voting member)

Meeting Minutes from September 4, 2012 meeting:
Xavier handed out a copy of the previous meeting’s minutes. Due to Pam sending a copy via email to all members prior to the meeting, the minutes were not read aloud. Peter approved the minutes and Carol seconded the approval.

Old Business:
Agenda from the previous meeting on September 9 included receiving and discussing Joey’s assessment list and timeline and an update from Peter and the subcommittee on faculty evaluations.

Assessment List and Timeline. Joey has been out of town all week attending a SACS Visiting Committee in Georgia. Due to his absence, the committee did not receive the assessment list and timeline. We will continue our discussion on that topic at our next meeting.

Update on Faculty Evaluations. Peter gave the update on the faculty evaluations. A subcommittee meeting was not held but he emailed a draft of the potential policy to all subcommittee members prior to the meeting. A copy of that draft was handed out in the meeting. He discussed his conference call with the Faculty Issues Subcommittee of CFAC (Chancellor’s Faculty Advisory Committee) on October 1. He was excited to say we were way ahead of a lot of other colleges on creating a policy. Peter stated there may be changes to the faculty year from academic to calendar, due to the fact the VCCS policy states that non-returning faculty would need to be notified in December.
Peter announced there would be an ASAC (Academic and Student Affairs Council) meeting with the vice presidents on October 9.
Peter discussed the policy draft in more detail. As far as the Rewards and Recognition component, we will need to decided on who would receive a reward, how many should be given out, and what to do to receive a reward. He believed faculty should be able to nominate themselves if they believe they are doing a good job. Jeff mentioned a website on faculty scholarships named Boyer’s Model of Scholarship. After the meeting, he sent a link to this website for us to view that may help with our decision with the component.
After looking over the policy draft, the committee members discussed the possible changes to the policy. Some of the discussed changes were the following:
·       Peter explained the difference between faculty who are first-year, second- and third-year, and multi-year members. There are also faculty members NOT on a multi-year contract. This may need to be explained more in the policy. He wants to revisit the multi-year contracts. He may try to talk to other colleges to see how the contracts are explained in the policy.
·       Lysa stated that the percentage of the “meets expectations” and “does not meet expectations” was also not clear. Jeff explained that the percentage would be worked out with the faculty and dean. Deans would be receiving training to implement the policy. Xavier pointed out that the deans would be helping you—not condemning your performance as an instructor. Basically, the policy needs levels of success.
·       Gary indicated the grievance procedure can be appealed and our committee should have a say on the grievance appeal procedure. That should be included in the policy.
·       Gary also asked about the 50% of the evaluation rating. It needs to be spelled out more in the policy. The weight of the evaluations would need to be made clearer. 

New Business:
Faculty Evaluation Task Force. Xavier discussed creating a subcommittee for the Faculty Evaluation Task Force. Peter asked who would be willing to serve on the committee. The committee members will include Peter Dorman, Carol Keeth Williams, Xavier Retnam, and Gary Randolph. Peter suggested we should have representation from all three deans—Jeff Laub, James Lemons, and Muriel Mickles. He also suggested Will Sandidge, Michael Bradford, John Poole, and Joey Fronheiser. Joey would be a non-voting member and would be on a call when needed basis.
Cathy Beale, Administrative and Office Specialist in the SME Division, attended the meeting. Pam nominated her to be a non-voting member. Gary seconded the nomination.
Xavier attended the College Governance Committee meeting. He wanted to share some of the information he received from the meeting. They are working on the new Faculty and Staff Manual. They are also working on including activity deadlines on the master calendar. The most important information is the fact we need to keep redefining ourselves. He will be giving us more information as he receives it from the College Governance Committee.
The committee suggested an agenda for our next meeting which will include the following:
·       Details on Awards and Recognition System
·       Details on the Faculty Evaluation Task Force
Our next meeting will be November 13, 2012 at 1 p.m. in Room 5210.
Lysa motioned the meeting be adjourned at 2:15 p.m. Peter seconded the motion.
Minutes submitted by Pam Reynolds
Back to top