Committee Meetings and Minutes

Administrative Login

Faculty and Staff Evaluation

Meeting Minutes

Current Status of Minutes: Final
Date	October 2, 2009
Time	1:00 PM - 3:00 PM
Location	HBC 407

Members Present
Teresa Ashley, Amber Banks, Sue Bloodsworth, Glo Foley , Kelly Grant, Richard Griffiths, Linda Johnson, Marlene Meador, Teresa Moore, Martha Perez, Charles Quinn, Pamela Soto, Sarah Strong
Guests Present
No guest attendance has been recorded.

Item # 1:	Faculty Evaluation
Presenter	Martha Perez
Discussion	Dr. P�rez reported that the flex form will be built for Fall 09 and will test process to create a Hybrid form. The EC confirmed that only Professor Jane Billingsley's department currently holds flex courses; Dr. P�rez said that the hybrid form is under construction and will be used through the same online system of delivery than DL. This form will be used for the Hybrid D (part online) courses. Action Items: Dr. P�rez will work with IT to set up and test Flex Form.

Item # 2:	Staff Evaluation
Presenter	Martha Perez
Discussion	The EC brainstormed over the renewed form for the Department Chair (DC) PEP. The EC agreed that this form serves better the deans the purpose of evaluating DCs. In the previous meeting the committee proposed to blend the questions on the DC form with the safety, servant leadership and professional development questions currently in the PEP for all employees. The draft form met approval except for a few changes and clarifying the scale as described below. The EC agreed to leave the scale as it was in the original DC form and to not add an "N/A" rating to the scale. Action Items: Dr. P�rez will integrate edits suggested by the committee and will then circulate to deans and bring back next month to be edited. Changes suggested were: a) Divide # 13 into two separate questions. b) Add Assistant Deans to question # 14 c) Clarify the meaning of the scale as follows: a. Exceeds requirements: Excellent; delivers outstanding performance; significantly and consistently exceeds performance standards b. Meets requirements: Performs satisfactorily, meeting performance standards. d. Needs Improvement: Improvement required to fully meet performance standards. e. Unsatisfactory: Consistently fails to meet performance standards.

Item # 3:	DL Evaluations
Presenter	Martha Perez
Discussion	Dr. P�rez thanked members of the EC for participating on various aspects of updating the evaluation website. She proceeded to show the Distance Learning (DL) Evaluation link on the Evaluation website. Discussion ensued for ways to make the distance learning evaluation more visible and more user-friendly. Action Items: Dr. P�rez will meet with Robert Bermea, director of ACC DL to discuss placing a very visible reminder on ACC front page website (meet with Edward Terry) when the time comes to do the 16 week course evaluations for DL. The EC also suggested writing an article that explains the importance of evaluating courses attached to this front page reminder. Dr. P�rez will discuss with DL director the EC proposal of achieving an alternative delivery of the evaluation form perhaps through systems that younger students use like Google g-mail or send to phones; this will probably entail a conversation with IT as well.

Austin Community College
5930 Middle Fiskville Rd.
Austin, Texas 78752-4390
512.223.4ACC (4222)