1. Faculty Prioritization: Feedback & Recommendations for Improvement
Roundtable
December 12, 2016

2. Step 1: Gather requests and data for initial rubric from APU
What worked well –
Data collected and compiled for all instructional areas by Research Office.
Counseling (general and special program requests included ahead of time)
Room for Improvement –
Automatic generation of the data from Research to be completed by end of October each year.
Sign-off from chairs/deans on requests to confirm accuracy of position titles requested.

3. Step 2-3: Apply initial quantitative rubric rankings
What worked well:
VPI and Deans along with Chair of Chairs applied the rubric and provided initial ranking. This provided standardized and fair application of the rubric across all positions.
New category and quantitative scoring provided good review of relevant variables: Productivity, FT/PT ratio, FT/FTES ratio
Room for improvement–
Rubric needs further definition for:
Non-instructional faculty areas – quantitative variables need to be identified along with data gathering and compilation process.
Joint position requests
Revisit quantitative data gathering by discipline vs sub- discipline
Revisit point value distribution

4. Step 4: Narrative Presentations
What worked well –
Narratives compiled and provided before meeting
Most presentations provided time for questions
Room for improvement –
More faculty senate participation to hear the narrative presentations. Good learning opportunity regarding the programs and college needs.
Narrative rubric for ranking based on the position’s contribution to:
Programmatic Needs/Goals
College Needs/Goals
Greater Community and Industry Needs

5. Step 5: Final Ranking What worked well: Room for improvement:
Review and Recommendation to Senate before going to Roundtable
President will have initial recommendation in time for District PBC meeting
Room for improvement:
Update the scoring of total narrative points (8) to be divided by the total number of positions requested-1 so that the distribution of points ranks the position and gives the lowest one zero points.
Revisit scoring when ties within the narrative portion only. Combined scores of the two spots and divided by to and each spot got the same score.

6. Step 6-9: Final Recommendations and Communications
In process –
Roundtable can provide feedback on what worked and room for improvement.