Purpose:

The purpose of this policy is to describe the process for the peer evaluation part of a performance appraisal that will assist an instructor who is a probationary or non-probationary faculty member, or lecturer to improve his/her overall teaching. The policy
documents campus procedures for the peer evaluation of instructors and lecturers. A separate policy, HAW 9.204, addresses Student Evaluation of Instructors and Lecturers.

Background:

From August 25, 1999, HAW 9.204 covered both peer and student evaluations of instructors and HAW 9.205 covered peer and student evaluations of lecturers. With the current revision, the peer evaluation of both instructors and lecturers are combined into
one policy. Student evaluation of both instructors and lecturers are combined into another revised policy, HAW 9.204.

During Spring and Fall 2011, division and department chairs (DCs) reviewed HAW 9.204 and HAW 9.205 to separate the student evaluation procedures from peer evaluation procedures. On October 4, 2011, DCs endorsed the revised policy. On January 27, 2012, the Academic Senate amended and approved the revised policy.

Policy:

Probationary and non-probationary instructors will be evaluated by at least two peers each semester.

Lecturers are also subject to peer evaluations:

• Experienced lecturers, defined as having at least 5 years experience lecturing for a specific department at HawCC, will be evaluated every three years by a faculty member within that department.
• New lecturers or lecturers with less that 5 years experience lecturing for a specific department at HawCC, will be evaluated by a faculty member within that department at the rate of once each semester in the first year, and once a year in the second until the fifth year of teaching.
• A lecturer evaluation may be scheduled more frequently.

Tenured instructors are encouraged to participate in peer review.

The DC is responsible for coordinating, with division/department faculty, the selection of the peer evaluation instrument.

Procedures:

Probationary and non-probationary instructors

1. Instructors choose peer evaluators in consultation with the respective DC.
2. If an instructor does not agree with the peer evaluation, he/she has the option of submitting a rebuttal to the Division Personnel Committee as part of his/her reappointment, tenure or promotion dossier.

Lecturers

1. The DC assigns a full-time faculty member to evaluate a lecturer.
2. The division’s or department’s peer evaluation instrument is used.
3. If a lecturer does not agree with a peer evaluation, he/she has the option of submitting a rebuttal to the DC. The rebuttal becomes part of the lecturer’s file, which is kept in the division/department office