The University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Policy # [####]
Evaluation of Professional Academic Staff (ACS 6.0 and ACS 6.2)

Original Issuance Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Last Revision Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Next Review Date: MMMM DD, YYYY







ACS 6.0. Evaluation of Academic Staff.

All evaluation processes for the academic staff shall be conducted in a manner consistent with any particular requirements of the University’s compensation guidelines (which are normally issued on a yearly basis). For academic staff with a split assignment, the unit in which the assignment is greatest shall have responsibility for initiating the evaluation. All other supervisors shall file evaluations with the initiating unit, with copies also provided to the next level of administrative reportage (i.e., a director files copies with the other unit’s supervisor or director and also with the appropriate Vice Chancellor or equivalent administrator to whom they report). For appointments involving individuals with split appointments in instructional academic staff areas, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will decide which unit shall originate the recommendation; for all other academic staff with split appointments, the decision will be made by the Director of Human Resources after consultation with the appropriate Vice Chancellor(s).

ACS 6.2. Professional/Administrative Academic Staff.

The University of Wisconsin System requires annual evaluation of professional/administrative academic staff. In addition, the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Salary Adjustment Guidelines require that supervisors of such academic staff provide performance/merit expectations, including the relative weights of criteria, well in advance of merit evaluation. Academic staff members must have an opportunity to submit relevant documentation addressing these expectations and their individual performance. The dates used in subsections (3) to (7) below approximate the actual dates as established each year will be published in the annual calendar.

(1) Annual evaluations cover the preceding calendar year (Jan. 1 – Dec. 31). Individuals with split appointments will be evaluated in each assignment area.

(2) Supervisors of professional/administrative academic staff will meet with the academic staff member to review, discuss and establish performance expectations that may either be in the form of a listing of specific goals, projects or initiatives (including the relative priority assigned to each item) or through the establishment of any other relevant performance/merit standards (that should also be presented in a manner that includes relative priority or appropriate weighting of these factors).

(3) Before the first week of December, supervisors will request in writing that professional/administrative academic staff submit information summarizing relevant activities and accomplishments during the preceding calendar year.

(4) By the end of the first week of January, professional/administrative academic staff will provide the information requested. The materials will include information related to the performance/merit expectations discussed and agreed on during the previous evaluation conference. Those with split appointments and/or teaching assignments will submit appropriate information on activities to the respective areas of assignment.

(5) By the end of the third week in January, supervisors will complete their evaluations and schedule conferences with each individual. The conferences will provide both positive and negative feedback on performance, establish performance/merit expectations and the weight of the criteria for the next evaluation, and discuss development activities which might be used to strengthen the staff member’s preparation and performance.

(a) Performance/merit expectations should be specific to the individual and position.

(b) The supervisor will summarize the evaluation of the previous year’s performance in writing and discuss performance/merit expectations and the weight of criteria for the coming year.

(c) Performance/merit expectations and evaluations must include support for and implementation of Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity.

(d) The staff member will sign the evaluation document to acknowledge that the information has been seen and discussed. The person evaluated may append any written disagreement.

(6) By the end of the first week of February, evaluation conferences will be completed and copies of the signed evaluation document [including any appendices from 5(d)] will be forwarded to the appropriate Dean, Vice Chancellor, or equivalent. Supporting documentation should not be included.

(7) By the end of the second week of February, evaluation documents will be forwarded to the Human Resources Director.

(8) The evaluations prepared during this process will become the basis for distributing the portion of the annual salary adjustment based upon merit.