1. Prepared by Lisa K. Saladin & Maralynne D. Mitcham July 2010

2.  Formed a representative committee ◦ Maralynne Mitcham & Lisa Saladin (co-chairs) ◦ Jim Zoller ◦ Mike Saladin ◦ Naomi Sampson ◦ Tony Shackelford ◦ Jamie Woody ◦ Laura Cousineau  Reviewed and revised current process and procedures  Piloted new approach for FY 09-10

3.  Agreed that evaluation should demonstrate the College’s commitment to MUSC Excellence  Endorsed the need to serve as professional role models for our students,  Agreed that professionalism would be included as part of the annual faculty evaluation  Explored how we might incorporate into our current process

4.  Reviewed published MUSC materials  Adapted 4 categories for our purpose ◦ Respect ◦ Excellence ◦ Accountability ◦ Adaptability  Modified examples of behaviors  Adopted scoring method as used by staff.  Presented revised evaluation components to faculty for feedback and revision

5.  Faculty members performed a self- appraisal and their administrators completed the professionalism assessment  If there was not agreement between the two scores, the first course of action was to discuss and negotiate the differences to determine whether an agreement can be reached  Negotiations were 100% successful this year

6.  In cases, where no agreement could be reached both the faculty member and the administrator could have requested up to two additional peer evaluations using the same professionalism assessment.  These would be reviewed and discussed by both parties and a score taking all evaluations into account would be assigned.

7.  Although professionalism evaluations were completed this year, the scores did not count towards the faculty evaluation this year.  Pilot data will be analyzed to determine the best and most equitable method for incorporating these values into the annual faculty evaluation.  These data and potential options will be presented to the faculty in the fall of 2010 for further discussion and input.