1. Faculty Performance Assessment Report (FPAR) College of Human Ecology April 20, 2006

2. FPAR Project Team  Marilyn DeLong, Associate Dean for Faculty and Graduate Programs  Kathy Witherow, Chief of Staff  Tom Thao, Data Manager

3. Objective: Why did we do this? Benefit to faculty  One reporting tool to serve multiple purposes  Open and accessible year round for input  Data from central automatically populated  Historical data available in the system Benefit to administration  Standardized reporting tool  Summary reports  Ability to capture trend data over time  Historical data available in the system

4. Barriers  Memories of an earlier attempt  Concern about security & confidentiality  Is it more work for faculty?  Skepticism about the purpose; what is being measured and why?  Would the form capture the scholarship differences in units? Research, both social science and bench science Community Outreach and Service Learning Minnesota Extension Service Creative production, including exhibitions

5. Addressing the barriers  Web-based system; easy to use  X500 login is secure & confidential  Data automatically populated Student advisees Courses taught Grants data (SPA, EGMS)  Clearly communicate the purpose  Form allows for scholarship differences

6. Product Development: 9-12 months  Directive from Dean  Consensus from executive committee  Identify project team Content experts Technical expert  Consultation Department Heads Faculty Representatives  Clearly define criteria, purpose, scope  Programming

7. Product Development: 9-12 months  Alpha testing Selected faculty in diverse disciplines, in all units  Those that were technologically challenged  The harshest critics  More consultation & refinements  Beta testing  Bribes & incentives  More consultation & refinements  Product release  Continued maintenance

10. Project Implementation  Communication to faculty  Support from department heads  Group training  One-one assistance  After Year 1 and Year 2, feedback drove refinements

11. Project Cost  Programmer time  Associate Dean and administrative oversight  SQL server  Faculty alpha and beta testers  Small gift incentives, food

12. Lessons Learned  Communicate, communicate, communicate  Know your faculty and what will motivate them  X500 password was a huge improvement  Year 3 was easier than Year 2; Year 2 was easier than Year 1  No matter how hard you try, some will always hate it  Allow for flexibility and refinements  Persevere and be positive

13. Questions?