KIC POLICY DOCUMENT
Transcript of KIC POLICY DOCUMENT
KIC POLICY DOCUMENT
APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN KIC PPM 2019-20, Jan 2020 INTRODUCTION AND ACADEMIC STAFF SECTION AMENDED FOR 2020-21 TO REFLECT NEW FORM
Faculty/ Staff Evaluation Procedures
Staff evaluation procedures involve both teaching and non-teaching staff performance appraisal.
The main objectives of staff evaluation procedures are to:
Make sure that the staff carry out their jobs in line with the College purpose statement.
Encourage academic and professional development by identifying training opportunities.
Make sure that good staff are rewarded financially and promoted in job rank while staff
members with poor performance are identified for subsequent proper actions in terms of
discontinuity or training and further professional development.
Improve the staff loyalty by recognizing their achievements.
Motivate staff to work harder because their performance is being evaluated.
Use the results of the evaluation to improve the educational programs and the College system
as a whole.
Encourage communication between staff and supervisors.
The Teaching & non-staff evaluations of all employees must be completed by the end of Aug every
year.
Procedures for Teaching Staff Performance appraisal
The following performance measures conducted by the relevant Head of academic
department/Program leader will be used for the evaluation of the teaching staff:
Student Course Evaluation Form: At the end of each semester, students complete a course
evaluation form for each course studied. There is a section on this form about the lecturer. The
feedback from each student is summarized in one report evaluation purposed and a copy of the
summarized feedback report is given to the relevant staff member.
Evaluation of the Teaching Staff Performance Form: The relevant head of academic
department/program leader is asked to complete the Academic Staff Appraisal Form for each
member of the teaching staff (the VP for Academic Affairs completes this report for the head
of academic department if she/he is also teaching some courses). The Form covers effectiveness
of course delivery, research activities and other activities including KIC contribution and
community engagement (see Appendix).
A teaching staff member is required to carry out self-evaluation to review his/her overall job
performance with regard to structured teaching techniques, communication skills, professional
development, since the previous year, and plans for future improvement..
The results of the academic and administrative staff evaluation are used to improve the educational
programs offered by Khawarizmi International College and hence improve the effectiveness of KIC
as a whole.
Procedures for Non-Teaching Staff Performance appraisal
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
o Strengthen two-way communication regarding job performance and periodically assess goals
and opportunities for the unit and the individual.
o Establish a mutually-understood set of performance expectations.
KIC POLICY DOCUMENT
APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN KIC PPM 2019-20, Jan 2020 INTRODUCTION AND ACADEMIC STAFF SECTION AMENDED FOR 2020-21 TO REFLECT NEW FORM
o Recognize contributions of employees.
o Discuss opportunities for growth and development.
o Provide necessary feedback when performance does not meet expectations as situations
warrants in addition to annual evaluation process.
o Align employee performance with the vision, mission and the strategy of the institute and unit.
PROCESS
o Line Manager requests prior year’s goals/objectives, general performance, associated
outcomes as well as other information relevant to the performance review process and reviews
them with the employee prior to discussing this year’s evaluation. (Page 5).
o Employee submits prior year’s goals and their associated outcomes as well as other information
relevant to the performance review process at least one week before scheduled meeting (Page
5).
o Line Manager reviews and compares the full range of this year’s performance to the past year
and completes all sections of the Performance Evaluation, following the instructions provided.
o Line Manager provides a working draft of Performance Evaluation to the employee. Line
Manager and employee determine future meeting date and time.
o Line Manager and employee meet to discuss the Performance Evaluation competency ratings.
o Line Manager and employee create shared goals and objectives to enhance employee
performance and successful completion of departmental and KIC/KTS goals and objectives.
o The Overall Evaluation Rating is calculated according to the most frequently assigned
Competency Ratings and Line Manager /employee discussions.
o Upon completion of the performance evaluation discussion, the employee and Line Manager
sign the evaluation. The employee and Line Manager should utilize the comments section
provide additional explanations as needed.
o Line Manager sends the signed copy to the counter signatory for review and signature.
o Once signed, the original document is sent to the Office of Human Resources. An electronic
copy may be provided to the employee upon request.
o Line Manager and employee should then review employee’s Job Analysis Questionnaire (JAQ)
to ensure that actual duties match job description and submit changes as needed.
The non-teaching staff performance evaluation involves the following Core Competencies
Job Knowledge
Interpersonal Skills, Cooperation, Collaboration
Communication Skills
Planning, Organizing, And Achieving Results
Problems Analysis And Decision Making
Commitment To Diversity/Inclusion
Leadership
Supervision *Applies To Those In Supervision/Management Positions
KIC POLICY DOCUMENT
APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN KIC PPM 2019-20, Jan 2020 INTRODUCTION AND ACADEMIC STAFF SECTION AMENDED FOR 2020-21 TO REFLECT NEW FORM
Description of Ratings:
Ratings used in the staff evaluation Process are:
RATING SCALE DEFINITION
5 = Outstanding
Objectives and standards are clearly and substantially surpassed.
Consistently and significantly exceeds all performance expectations
and standards. Highest performance level. Demonstrates a personal
commitment to a high level of performance and results, even under
challenging work goals.
4=Exceeds Expectations
Frequently exceeds job requirements. Makes contributions well beyond
job demands. Seizes initiative in development and implementation of
challenging work goals. Each project or job is done thoroughly and on
time. Thinks beyond details of the job, working toward the overall goals
of the component.
3 = Meets Expectations
Performance is what is expected of a fully qualified and experienced
person in this position. All objectives and standards are met.
Consistently meets all performance expectations and standards. Job
well done. Errors are minimal and seldom repeated. Prioritizes
problems and projects well. Requires normal supervision and follow-up.
Almost always completes work or projects on schedule.
2 = Approaches Expectations
Objectives and standards are generally met but full results are not
totally achieved. Occasionally falls short of consistently meeting
performance expectations and standards. Some performance aspects
were not met – needs slight improvement. Could result from being
newly appointed to the position – continuing to learn all aspects of the
position.
1 = Does Not Meet Expectations
Objectives and standards are consistently not met. Consistently fails to
meet performance expectations. Needs significant improvement. Has
been on the job long enough to have shown better performance.
Excessive attention by Line Manager is required. Does not grasp
situation when explained. Corrective action is required.
NA = Not Applicable Does not apply to job performance expectations.
Recommendations and Actions based on the outcome of the staff evaluations
The Staff Evaluation Committee provides its recommendations to the Finance & Administration
Manager for making a decision, which is subject to the approval of the President.
The recommendations are as follows:
Issuing an appreciation letter, certificate of outstanding performance, and warning letters.
Job Promotion, Salary Increments, Non-renewal Notice, and Termination Letters.
Requesting changes to the KIC Structured Teaching Techniques, Program Syllabi, improvements
in the Learning Resource Center, etc.
Review of effectiveness of staff evaluation procedures
The Director of Institutional Quality and Effectiveness is responsible for compiling a report in early
September every year for the benefit of the President, giving a summary of the staff performance
evaluation. The report also includes an assessment of the effectiveness of the policies and procedures
KIC POLICY DOCUMENT
APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN KIC PPM 2019-20, Jan 2020 INTRODUCTION AND ACADEMIC STAFF SECTION AMENDED FOR 2020-21 TO REFLECT NEW FORM
in achieving the above-mentioned objectives (10.1 above).
The President and the Director of Institutional Quality and Effectiveness should invite suggestions
from the various heads of departments and Head of academic department/Program leaders as well
as KIC’s external quality auditors for continuously improving the staff performance evaluation
practices.
Approved changes (by the President) to the staff performance evaluation policies and procedures
must be introduced at the start of the academic year only.
Appeal
A Staff member may appeal against the evaluation made by the staff evaluation committee to the
Head of Human Resources.
The Head of Human Resources must meet with the staff member and discuss his/her ground for the
appeal. The Head of Human Resources may ask a new committee to be set up and re-evaluate the
concerned staff performance.
If the staff member is not satisfied with the decision of the Head of Human Resources, then further
appeal may be directed to the President supporting the appeal with the reasons along with any
supporting documentation. In serious cases, where the outcome of the performance evaluation
recommends the termination or non-renewal of the contract of the concerned staff, the President
may arrange a hearing where the staff member puts his case to a panel of experts from KIC (and
external experts if necessary). The panel will report their findings to the President. The decision of
the President is final.
Name Numerical Rating
Descriptive Rating
Department 93 - 100 85 - 92 80 - 84 70 - 79
Below 69
Outstanding (O) Very Good (VG)
Good (G) Satisfactory (S)
Below Satisfactory (BS)
Semester / Academic Year
Numeric Rating
Descriptive Rating
COMPONENTS WEIGHT MAX. POINTS
POINTS EARNED
A. Teaching and Course development 60%
1. Students’ Teacher Evaluation/Course Evaluations (STE) (based on students end of semester evaluation)
10
2. Department Heads’ Evaluation
- Classroom Observation (see specific form)
10
- Quality Records and Report Management
10
- Academic Advising 10
- Support to students 10 - Innovation in teaching and learning design and e-
learning/Blended learning content 05
- Effective E-learning/Blended learning delivery with appropriate use of technology: e.g. BB, , e-Library, ICT
05
B. Professional Development 20%
1. Research Conferences and Publications 15
2. Training Awards, Certifications and Professional Affiliations
5
C. Services to the College and the Community 20%
1. Services to the College 15
2. Community Engagement 5
FPE Rating
Prepared by: Shown to and discussed with me.
_____________________________ <<name>> Head of Department/Program Leader’s Signature / Date
_____________________________ <<name>> Faculty Member’s Signature/ ate
Verified and Approved by: _____________________________ <<name>> VPAA’s Signature/Date
Received by: _____________________________ <<name>> HR Department ‘s Signature / Date
A.2 Head of Department’s Evaluation:
Quality Record and Report Management (10 points)
Rubrics Max. Points
1. Submit complete records and reports accurately and on time 10
2. Submit complete records and reports accurately with delay 9
3. Submit records and reports with slight lack of accuracy 5
4. Submit records and reports with slight lack of accuracy and with delay 3
5. Any Other Case 0
Points Earned (* please attached summary of submission statistics supporting your evaluation)
Academic Advising (10 points)
As Academic Advisers (Thesis Advisers, Final Project/ Internship Competition Advisers/Coach, Registration etc)*
Rubrics Max. Points
Perform Efficiently, Accurately and on time 20
Perform Efficiently, Accurately and with delay 15
Perform with slight lack of Efficiency or accuracy and with delay 10
Any other case with partial accomplishments 5
Points Earned (*please attached summary of statistics supporting your evaluation)
Support to students (10 points)
Rubrics Max. Points
Dedicate clear time to student advising and is available during the selected time 05
Schedule and run Tutorial sessions for at-risk students 02
Adequate and appropriate advising during registration period 5
Points Earned (* please attached summary of statistics supporting your evaluation)
Effective E-learning delivery with appropriate use of technology: e.g. BB, , e-Library, ICT (05 points)
Rubrics Max. Points
Active use of E-Library Resources (03 instance or more full mark,) 01
Appropriate use of BB, SafeAssign/Turnitin 01
Effective e-Learning/Blended delivery with use of other appropriate technology and tools (simulators, …)
03
Points Earned (* please attached summary of statistics supporting your evaluation)
Innovation in teaching and learning and e-learning content (05 points)
Rubrics Max. Points
Use of project based learning 01
Use of Flipped class-approach 01
Use for modern teaching methodologies appropriate to the field in an e-learning/Blended learning context
03
Points Earned (* please refer to sample of course folder supporting your evaluation)
B. Professional Development:
Research Conferences and Publications (15 points)
Type National/International dually reviewed
Weight Max. Points Earned
Points
Session Chair +10% +1.5 16.5
Conference Chair +5% +0.75 15.75
Keynote Speaker in Conference (1-3
papers)
80% 12 12
Article in Conference (1-3papers) 70% 10 10
Article in Journal (1-3papers) 80% 12 12
Book 100% 15 15
Points Earned (*Best criteria to be
considered in case of multiple
alternatives; * Please submit proofs of
all publications supporting your
evaluation)
*encircle the appropriate mark and attach proof of conference/ publication
Training Awards, Certifications and Professional Affiliations (5 points)
Type National International
Weight Max. Points Weight Max. Points
2 or more trainings 90% 4.5 100% 5
1 training 70% 3.5 80% 4
Earning an International Certification 100% 5 100% 5
Professional Affiliation to
International/ Local Organization
100% 5 100% 5
Points Earned (* Please
submit proofs of training,
certification and other
elements supporting your
evaluation)
*encircle the appropriate mark and attach proof of training/ certification/ affiliation
C. Services to the College and the Community:
Services to the College (15 points)
Position Description
Accomplishment /s that is/are
Weight Max.
Points
Head of Department/Program
Leader/ Unit Head
Complete, Accurate and on time 100% 15
Complete, somehow accurate or with delay 80% 12
Partial or with lack of efficiency 50% 7.5
Any other case with partial accomplishment/s 30% 4.5
College Coordinators
(Research, Internship, Course
Coordinator, ….),
Standing/AdHoc Committees
Complete, Accurate and on time 100% 15
Complete, somehow accurate or with delay 80% 12
Partial or with lack of efficiency 50% 7.5
Any other case with partial accomplishment/s 30% 4.5
Total Points Earned (* Please submit proofs supporting your evaluation)
* encircle the appropriate mark
Community Engagement (5 points)
Type of Community Engagement* Organizers Facilitators/ Participants
Weight Max. Points Weight Max. Points
Outreach Activities with the College 100% 5 80% 4
Professional Services for Industry and
Community
80% 4 70% 3.5
Research Partnerships/ Collaborations/
Consortia
80% 4 70% 3.5
Lectures/ Conferences/Trainings/
Festivals/Art Events/ College Open Days/
ect.
100% 5 80% 4
Alumni Activities 80% 4 70% 3.5
Forge partnerships with private sector
corporations
80% 4 70% 3.5
College/ Charity activities 80% 4 70% 3.5
Coaching/Mentoring/Teaching in Lifelong
Learning courses offered by the college
100% 5 80% 4
Total Points Earned(* Please submit proofs
supporting your evaluation)
*Other Community Engagement activities of the College may qualify for points provided approved *encircle the appropriate mark and attach proof of community engagement activity
Class Visit Report (XXX)
Semester: Fall 2020/2021 Visit Number: 1
Lecturer Name: Visitor Name:
Date: 18/10/2020 Time: Room: ***** Online Session XXXXX on BB
☐ A pre-visit meeting was held ☒ A post-visit meeting was held
Part 1: To be filled by the visitor
1. Variety and Pacing of Instruction
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
)
Uses a variety of instructional methods
Allows adequate wait time when asking questions
Responds to wrong answers constructively
Draws non-participating students into activities/discussion
Prevents specific students from dominating activities/discussion
Asks probing questions when student answers are incomplete
Guides the direction of the discussion
Refrains from answering own questions
Uses active learning strategies (group work, paired discussions, polling)
Specifies how learning tasks will be evaluated (if appropriate)
Provides opportunities for students to practice what they have learned
Total (Max 55)
2. Organization
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
)
Begins and ends class on time
Relates this and previous class(es), or provides students with opportunity to do so
Provides and follows an outline for the class session
Has all necessary materials and equipment readily available
Uses effective transitions between class topics
Conveys the purpose of each class activity or assignment and allows sufficient time to complete it
Completes the scheduled topics
Summarizes periodically throughout and at end of class or prompts students to do so
Takes attendance
Total (Max 45)
Class Visit Report (XXX)
3. Presentation Skills
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
)
Communicates audibly and clearly
Establishes and maintains eye contact with students
Varies pace and tone to keep students alert
Uses a presentation style that facilitates note-taking
Uses positive and appropriate humour
Incorporates various instructional supports (film, diagrams)
Handouts are easy to follow
Total (Max 35)
4. Clarity
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
)
Notes and explains new terms or concepts
Elaborates or repeats complex information
Uses examples to explain content and draw student attention to key ideas
Relates new ideas to familiar concepts
Total (Max 20)
5. Content Knowledge
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
) Makes accurate statements according to discipline standards
Incorporates current research in the field
Cites authorities to support statements
Presents divergent viewpoints
Total (Max 20)
Class Visit Report (XXX)
6. Lecturer – Student Interaction
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
)
Attends to student comprehension, puzzlement, and behaviour
Asks questions of students that challenge them to think more deeply
Invites and encourages student participation and comments
Incorporates student responses when appropriate
Encourages students to respond to their peers throughout the discussions respectfully
Treats students with respect
Total (Max 30)
7. Use of Technology/E-learning
Exe
mp
lary
(5
)
Ad
van
ced
(4
)
Pro
fici
en
t (3
)
Ne
ed
s
Imp
rove
me
nt
(2)
No
t
Ob
serv
ed
(0
)
Effectively incorporates a variety of instructional technologies to enhance student learning (PPT, websites, YouTube, blogs, etc.)
Uses BB (Black Board) or Moodle to provide supplemental materials
Appropriate usage of E-learning/blended delivery approaches
Appropriate usage of course content design fit for e-learning/Blended learning
Total (Max 20)
Final Mark (225)
Score for Appraisal (FM/225*10)
Remarks
Must have course name and number of students in the class
Department Head Name: Feedback Date:
Signature:
Class Visit Report (XXX)
Necessary Action for Next Visit ☐ Another visit during the current semester is necessary
Department Head Name Feedback Date:
Signature:
Part Two: Faculty Member Feedback
Faculty Member Feedback
Faculty Member Name Feedback Date:
Signature: