Contract negotiations between the University of West Florida administration and the faculty union reached an impasse in May of 2009.
The main issue that has substantially delayed the ratification of a new contract revolves around a dispute over the inclusion of anonymous student comments in faculty performance evaluation files. On Tuesday, Feb. 9, hearings were held in front of a magistrate, with the administration and the union providing testimony.
It is time to set the record straight on this issue. Testimony from the administration revealed that nearly all faculty (e.g., 97 percent of College of Arts Sciences faculty) voluntarily included all anonymous student comments in their performance evaluation files last year.
Additional testimony from the administration revealed that the procedures for review of student comments by department chairs vary widely between departments.
Despite the fact that the faculty contract contains absolutely no provisions that prevent department chairs from using anonymous student comments in any number of ways (other than faculty performance evaluations), the administration insists that a change to the contract is the only acceptable solution to a problem that was not created or maintained by the current contract provisions.
The administration argued that requiring all faculty to include all anonymous student comments into their performance evaluations would be necessary to detect gross misconduct on the part of faculty.
Repeatedly using the examples of faculty extortion and harassment of students that could be alleged anonymously during the student assessment process, the administration suggested that they saw the review of student comments in May of each year to be a good mechanism to address these problems.
It is indisputable that the identification and investigation of these kinds of faculty misconduct cannot wait until May or rely on a process that prohibits adequate investigation because of the anonymous nature of the allegations.
The faculty contract does not prohibit the administration from collecting or using student comment data to monitor instructional quality and faculty behavior — so it’s the haphazard implementation of administrative policies and procedures that requires correction, not the faculty contract.
Faculty are required to include numerical student assessment data in their performance evaluation, ensuring that student assessment data play a significant role in evaluation of faculty performance. This will not change. Numerical student ratings provide a much clearer picture of student perceptions of instructional quality, allowing for a fair assessment of faculty performance.
If the administration mandates that all anonymous student comments be submitted as evidence for the evaluation of faculty performance, faculty will be placed at risk for unfair evaluations.
Because anonymous student comments can include erroneous information or false allegations that are unverifiable, faculty can be judged on bad evidence and may suffer from adverse personnel action.
Just as students rightfully insist on fairness in evaluation of their performance in the classroom, faculty must insist on fairness in the evaluation of their job performance. Faculty should not be compelled to submit comments including erroneous accusations or false allegations as “evidence” of their job performance.
The faculty at UWF seek the support of the University community in the pursuit of reasonable and just evaluation practices. It’s only fair.
Be the first to comment on this article!