Recommendations
Chair-Led Action Plans • Immediate to Long-Term • Implementation Timeline
Immediate (0-30 Days)
Critical faculty interventions and grading timeliness initiative
Short-Term (1-3 Months)
Drawing I standardization and peer mentoring program
Long-Term (3-12 Months)
Recognition programs and response rate improvement
Immediate Actions (0-30 Days)
1Critical Faculty Interventions
0-30 DaysMaureen Costa - Immediate Review
Responsible: Dean
Formal performance review meeting within 1 week. Review student feedback. Determine: intensive support plan vs. removal from teaching.
Jodi Kolpakov - Support Plan
Responsible: Chair-led Initiative
Assign senior faculty mentor (suggest Laura Bloomenstein). Weekly observations and feedback sessions.
2Grading Timeliness Initiative
0-30 DaysDepartment-Wide Policy
Responsible: Chair-led Initiative
Establish maximum 7-day grading turnaround requirement for all courses.
Individual Plans
Responsible: Chair-led Initiative
Create specific improvement plans for Lindsay Masten, Matthias Petsche, and other faculty with Q2 < 4.00.
Short-Term Actions (1-3 Months)
1Drawing I Standardization
1-3 MonthsCurriculum Review Committee
Responsible: Faculty Committee
Convene instructors to develop shared learning outcomes, assessments, and rubrics.
Richard Derman Leadership
Responsible: Richard Derman
Leverage his 4.81 score as model for Drawing I instruction.
2Peer Mentoring Program
1-3 MonthsPair Top & Struggling Faculty
Responsible: Chair-led Initiative
Laura Bloomenstein mentors Jodi Kolpakov; Kat Brint mentors Matthias Petsche (grading practices).
Teaching Observations
Responsible: All Faculty
Implement cross-classroom observations for professional development.
Long-Term Actions (3-12 Months)
1Recognition & Leadership Development
3-12 MonthsTeaching Excellence Awards
Responsible: Dean
Recognize Jill Brugler, Dana Cohn, Laura Bloomenstein for outstanding performance.
Program Coordinator Roles
Responsible: Chair-led Initiative
Laura Bloomenstein as Ceramics Coordinator; Benjamin Norton for Faculty Development.
2Response Rate Improvement
3-12 MonthsTarget 50%+ Response Rates
Responsible: All Faculty
Current 40.5% is below ideal. Implement in-class evaluation completion time.
Mid-Semester Feedback
Responsible: All Faculty
Add formative assessments to catch issues early.
Cultural Changes Recommended
Recognition Culture
Implement formal recognition for teaching excellence
- Annual teaching awards ceremony
- Highlight top performers in department communications
- Create "Best Practices" showcases
Continuous Improvement
Establish ongoing feedback and development systems
- Regular peer observations (not just for struggling faculty)
- Mid-semester student feedback collection
- Teaching circles for sharing strategies
Accountability
Create clear expectations and accountability systems
- Published grading turnaround standards
- Chair monitoring of Q2 compliance
- Course presence requirements
Data-Driven Decisions
Use evaluation data systematically
- Semester-over-semester trend tracking
- Early warning systems for struggling faculty
- Course assignment decisions informed by data
Implementation Timeline
Week 1-2
Maureen Costa performance review; Department policy announcement on grading timeliness
Week 3-4
Jodi Kolpakov support plan initiated; Peer mentoring pairs assigned
Month 2
Drawing I curriculum committee formed; Grading workshops scheduled
Month 3
Mid-semester check-ins for concern faculty; Progress reviews
End of Semester
Recognition awards; Long-term improvement plans finalized