Annual Evaluation of Core Faculty Sample Clauses

Annual Evaluation of Core Faculty a. Core faculty will be evaluated annually. This annual evaluation will include (1) a self-evaluation (including an update of engagement in student learning, scholarship, community engagement and institutional citizenship); (2) an evaluation by a supervisor; and (3) a meeting between the faculty member, academic unit head and CAO (or designee). For evaluations of Core faculty who are chairs or associate chairs, the meeting will include the CAO and Associate ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. b. The academic unit head coordinates the documentation for the regular annual evaluation of Core faculty members and submits the documentation to the CAO for final approval.
View Source

Related to Annual Evaluation of Core Faculty

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP ▇▇-▇▇-▇▇▇, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • Evaluation of Students A teacher shall maintain the right and responsibility to determine grades and other evaluation of students within the grading policies of the District based upon professional judgment of available criteria pertinent to any given subject area or activity for which the teacher is responsible. No grade or evaluation shall be changed without consultation with the teacher.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • DEVELOPMENT OR ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIFICATIONS REQUIREMENTS/ STATEMENTS OF WORK