FA

CU

LT

Y C

ON

VE

RS

AT

ION

SE

RIE

S B

OO

K S

EV

EN

introduction to theCFS PROCESS

The purpose of the CFS process is to orient and acclimatize new faculty at BYU-Idaho — to give them access to rich resources during the early years of their career here and to determine how their strengths and talents can best be used by the university for the benefit of the students.

This program offers instructors who are new to BYU-Idaho significant access to the time and experience of more veteran members of the BYU-Idaho community as they pursue self-determined professional development goals. CFS not only assists the candidate in his or her professional development but also provides assessments that are used to offer candidates individualized resources and development opportunities should the need arise.

Key to the CFS program is the collection and discussion of data about our instructional efforts. The process provides candidates with relevant data that can help guide them in their ongoing improvement efforts as a reflective professional. Reflection on the part of the CFS candidate then leads to modifications in the self-determined professional development plan.

A successful CFS process should provide the candidate all of the support, feedback, guidance and opportunities for development necessary to fully integrate them as instructors at BYU-Idaho and ensure their success in their work with students.

The program is intended primarily to support self-defined professional development. It is not conceived primarily as an evaluation or a remediation program

If, however, in the course of the process, remediation becomes necessary or advisable, the pre-CFS candidates will be transferred from the standard CFS process to a more intense, customized process of data collection and skill development.

professionalism requires

PEER REVIEW throughout our entire career

4 | C O N T I N U I N G FA C U LT Y S TAT U S

DESCRIPTION OF CFS

The CFS process is a three-year (nine semester) process in which the candidate

is mentored by members of the CFS committee and assessed by the mentor and

the chair. The committee is comprised of the CFS candidate, the department

chair, a mentor from within the department chosen by the department chair, and

two other faculty members from within the college chosen by the department

chair in consultation with the dean.

The CFS process is built around a personal professional development plan that

the candidate develops in conjunction with their mentor and department chair.

The committee members then act as a support and resource network to help the

candidate achieve the goals articulated in the development plan.

t h e c f s c om m i t t e e ac ts as a su pp ort n et work

cfs is principally to help

IMPROVE SKILLS not to prove them

D E S C R I P T I O N O F C F S

The mentor, with the help of the committee members, takes the major role in

advising and providing feedback to the candidate. The documentation generated

by the process is gathered into a CFS binder which is maintained by the

department office. This includes data collected from some of the classroom

observations, materials generated by the candidate, comments from the mentor

and broader observations from the department chair summarizing course

evaluations and campus citizenship.

Once a year, this documentation is reviewed and acts as the basis for drafting

a status letter. The yearly status letter is co-written by the department chair and

dean and is addressed to the academic administration. The letter notes the

candidate’s progress and any concerns. This letter is copied for the candidate in

order to maintain the transparency of the process.

At the end of three years, the yearly status letters along with other information in

the candidate’s binder will be used by academic administration in making a final

CFS determination.

Write your own thoughts within the sidebars, or consider the questions provided.

B R I G H A M Y O U N G U N I V E R S I T Y – I D A H O | 5 Y E A R LY S TAT U S L E T T E R S

observations and materials audits offer an

EXTRA SET OF EYES that might see what we miss

YEARLY STATUS LETTERS

The following is a list of questions that should be addressed in the yearly

status letter by the chair and dean. Writing this letter should not be delegated.

• What have been the experience and the findings of the CFS committee

as they have observed and worked with the CFS candidate? (The chair

should draw on the summary reports from the mentor to address

this question.)

• What are general trends in the student evaluations and how are issues

being addressed in the professional development plan? (The chair should

not report specifics of the student evaluations, but only trends.)

• What discussions and outcomes emerged from the one-on-one interview

between the CFS candidate and the chair regarding the candidate's

year and plans for the coming year? (This assumes, of course, that this

meeting has taken place as a prerequisite to writing the status letter.)

Both strengths and weaknesses of the CFS candidate should be noted in this

letter as well as plans for addressing weaknesses. The letter should conclude

with a recommendation that the candidate be assigned one of the following CFS

status designations:

Green – no issues or concerns

Yellow – specific issues or concerns that need to be addressed in the course

of regular CFS development or with the help of an individualized remediation

plan in the case of a second yellow or a yellow in the third year

Red – serious issues or concerns warranting intervention or remediation

The

CFS

pro

cess

is in

tended

to

be

an e

xper

ience

ric

h in

re

sour

ces

and d

evel

opm

enta

l op

por

tuni

ties

for

new

fac

ulty

. A

com

mit

tee

of p

eers

pro

vides

men

tori

ng

and s

uppor

t to

the

CFS

can

did

ate

for

thei

r fir

st 3

yea

rs o

n c

ampus

. Thi

s su

ppor

t is

fun

dam

enta

lly c

oach

ing

in n

atur

e. D

ata

colle

cted

dur

ing

the

pro

cess

is la

rgel

y fo

r th

e ben

efit

of

the

facu

lty

mem

ber

th

emse

lves

for

use

in r

efle

ctio

n a

nd in

mod

ifyi

ng

thei

r pro

fess

ional

dev

elop

men

t pla

n.

Ther

e is

an e

valu

ativ

e co

mpon

ent

to t

he

pro

cess

as

wel

l. The

men

tor

and t

he

epar

tmen

t ch

air

colle

ct in

form

atio

n o

n

inst

ruct

ional

and c

ours

e des

ign s

kills

that

is s

umm

ariz

ed in

ye

arly

sta

tus

lett

ers.

If

dif

ficu

ltes

sur

face

dur

ing

this

pro

cess

, ca

ndid

ates

are

giv

en in

div

idua

lized

sup

por

t an

d t

rain

ing.

In

mos

t ca

ses,

succ

essf

ul c

omple

tion

of

the

pro

cess

will

lead

to

Con

tinui

ng

Facu

lty

Sta

tus

bei

ng

awar

ded

at

the

end o

f th

e 3

year

s un

less

dif

ficu

ltes

hav

e ar

isen

that

cou

ld n

ot b

e re

solv

ed.

BY

U-I

DA

HO

CO

NT

INU

ING

FA

CU

LT

Y S

TA

TU

S (

CF

S)

HE

LP

IM

PR

OV

E Y

OU

R S

KIL

LS

, N

OT

MA

KE

YO

U P

RO

VE

TH

EM

TIM

EL

INE

SU

MM

AR

Y

YE

AR

1(1

yea

r =

3 s

emes

ters

)

ST

AR

TE

ND

KE

Y

1S

T2

ND

3R

D1

ST

2N

D3

RD

1S

T2

ND

3R

D

YE

AR

2Y

EA

R 3

EA

CH

SE

ME

ST

ER

Mat

eria

l A

udit

Form

al C

lass

room

Obse

rvat

ion

Info

rmal

Cla

ssro

om O

bse

rvat

ion

Can

did

ate

Obse

rves

Cla

ssro

om

Dev

elop

“Fa

cult

y P

rofe

ssio

nal

Dev

elop

men

t P

lan”

&

“Educa

tion

Philo

sophy

Sta

tem

ent”

(as

nee

ded)

CFS

AW

AR

DED

orIf

extr

a he

lp is

nee

ded,

pr

oces

s m

ay c

onti

nue

SE

ME

ST

ER

S

CFS

TR

AIN

ING

ME

ET

ING

DE

PA

RT

ME

NT

CH

AIR

CA

ND

IDAT

E

ME

NT

OR

CO

MM

ITT

EE

ME

MB

ER

#1

CO

MM

ITT

EE

ME

MB

ER

#2

AN

NU

AL

LY

Sta

tus

Lett

er

Inte

rvie

w w

ith D

ean

Inte

rvie

w w

ith C

hai

r fo

r th

e Fa

cult

y P

rofe

ssio

nal

Dev

elop

men

t pla

n

RO

LE

SD

EA

N-

Annual

ly m

ake

addit

ions

or c

han

ges

to s

tatu

s le

tter

- Ensu

re a

ccura

cy &

tra

nsp

aren

cy o

f in

form

taio

n t

o ca

ndid

ate

- Id

enti

fy iss

ues

ear

ly o

n

- 3rd

yea

r pre

sent

bin

der

to

Aca

dem

ic o

ffic

e

EA

CH

SE

ME

ST

ER

Mat

eria

l A

udit

Form

al C

lass

room

Obse

rvat

ion

Info

rmal

Cla

ssro

om O

bse

rvat

ion

Can

did

ate

Obse

rves

Cla

ssro

om

Dev

elop

“Fa

cult

y P

rofe

ssio

nal

Dev

elop

men

t P

lan”

&

“Educa

tion

Philo

sophy

Sta

tem

ent”

(as

nee

ded)

CFS

AW

AR

DED

orIf

extr

a he

lp is

nee

ded,

pr

oces

s m

ay c

onti

nue

AN

NU

AL

LY

Sta

tus

Lett

er

Inte

rvie

w w

ith D

ean

Inte

rvie

w w

ith C

hai

r fo

r th

e Fa

cult

y P

rofe

ssio

nal

Dev

elop

men

t pla

n

FO

RM

AL

INF

OR

MA

L

ME

NT

OR

CA

ND

IDA

TE

DE

PA

RT

ME

NT

CH

AIR

- K

eeps

colle

cted

dat

a in

a b

inder

for

rec

ord

- A

ppoi

nt

men

tor

& s

tart

pro

cess

on 1

st d

ay

- 1st

sem

este

r as

sign e

asie

r co

urs

e to

impro

ve t

each

ing

- A

ssig

n c

ours

e w

ith f

unct

ional

tea

chin

g gr

oup

- C

omm

it m

emb

ers

to a

tten

d init

ial C

FS t

rain

ing

mee

ting

ME

NT

OR

(A

dvis

or)

- P

rovi

de

feed

bac

k

- S

et u

p c

lass

room

obse

rvat

ions

& m

ater

ial au

dit

s

- Em

ail dep

artm

ent

chai

r tr

ends

& p

erti

nen

t th

emes

- H

elp D

evel

op m

ater

ials

for

CFS

not

eboo

k &

obse

rve

clas

s

CO

MM

ITT

EE

ME

MB

ER

(C

oach

)

- E

ach s

emes

ter

visi

t ca

ndid

ates

cla

ss &

invi

te t

o ow

n c

lass

- A

udit

syl

labus,

I-lea

rn s

ite

and les

son p

lans

- D

ocu

men

t usi

ng

pro

cess

& f

orm

s pro

vided

in b

inder

- S

har

e in

form

atio

n w

ith m

ento

r &

can

did

ate

CA

ND

IDA

TE

- W

ork

wit

h m

ento

r &

dep

artm

ent

chai

r to

cre

ate

& m

anta

in

curr

ent

Facu

lty

Pro

fess

ional

Dev

elop

men

t P

lan a

nd a

Philo

sophy

of E

duca

tion

Sta

tem

ent

- O

bse

rve

com

mit

tee

mem

ber

s cl

ass

& o

pen

ow

n c

lass

- D

iscu

ss c

ours

e m

ater

ials

wit

h c

omm

itte

e m

emb

er

8 | C O N T I N U I N G FA C U LT Y S TAT U S

MATERIALS AUDIT

The purpose of the material audits is for a more seasoned faculty member to be

able to give some coaching or helpful feedback to a newer faculty member about

such things as syllabus design, I-Learn course layout, creation of test questions,

or any other materials that have been created for a particular course. The most

benefit is probably derived, however, from looking at formal, written lesson plans

for a class and discussing the pedagogical assumptions and implications of the

plan relative to student learning.

M AT E R I A L S A U D I T

B R I G H A M Y O U N G U N I V E R S I T Y – I D A H O | 9 O B S E RV AT I O N F O R M

t h e de a n e n su re s a l l re l eva n t i n f or m at i on i s d o c um e n t e d

CLASSROOM OBSERVATION

BYU-Idaho had developed a tool that has been designed to aid in the observation

of peers during instruction. This tool is divided into three parts:

1. observation and data capture,

2. data organization and categorization, and a

3. brief summary of resulting feedback.

Part 1: Observation and Data Capture

One of the most difficult aspects of observing another faculty member’s

classroom is learning how to really observe rather than assess. It is far too easy

to see only what one is looking for and only what confirms one’s preconceptions

or one’s favorite method. While exchanges of best practices between peers can

be helpful, this instrument is not designed to facilitate that type of conversation.

Rather, the first part of this tool is intended to capture as much raw data as

possible about what happens in a classroom. The interpretive step of noting

why’s or causalities is delayed until the next step.

The data capture is done on a note form like the one below, organized around the

chronology of the class:

The first column is to record the time of key transition points in the classroom

experience. This helps to later be able to determine the length of various

activities, the ratio of instructor-led to student-led discussion, the alignment of

learning objectives to learning activities etc.

The second column is for naming the transition or activity noted by the time it

occurred. Often these activities correlate with the topics being studied, but it is

certainly possible to have various activities and related transitions to a

single topic.

1 0 | C O N T I N U I N G FA C U LT Y S TAT U S

t h e ob se rv e r f i r st si m ply re c ord s w hat ha ppe n s

TA K I N G D ATA O N I N S T R U C T I O N

Column three records the instructor’s behavior using descriptive but not interpre-

tive language (see the example on the following page).

Column four notes those student behaviors that seem relevant or that seem to be

results of the instructor-initiated action.

On the far right of the columns is a line number which is used as a reference

number when referring to the occurrence with which it’s associated.

classroom observations act as a

MIRROR allowing reflection

on our work

B R I G H A M Y O U N G U N I V E R S I T Y – I D A H O | 1 1 C O M PA R I N G T O S TA N D A R S

t h e i n st ru c t i ona l e x pe ri e n c e i s t h e n c om pa re d to sta n da rd s

Part 2 : Compare Data to Standards

The second part of the form reviews the data collected through the lens of

general standards of good teaching. Critical to part 2 is that any interpretations

made (Oh, she did that well, or I don’t think that was so good…) need to refer-

ence specific examples and specific line numbers in drawing the conclusion. The

feedback from this form is to be derived from specific, concrete actions that

took place during the observation. It is important to maintain the connection to

the observation data and not move through the comparison to standards based

solely on memory or a ‘gut feeling.’

1 2 | C O N T I N U I N G FA C U LT Y S TAT U S

a sum m a ry re p ort i s g e n e r at e d to f o c u s on k ey i n si g h ts

R E P O R T O U T K E Y I N S I G H T S

Part 3: Summary and Feedback

Part 3 is the only part of the form that the instructor will normally see. On this

part, the observer gleans from part 2 the three strongest points of instruction

observed and explains, using examples from the data, why they seemed to be

so powerful. The observer then shares the area where a change in instructional

practice could make the most difference, and again, backs the conclusion with

data or examples from parts 1 and 2 of the form.

Finally, the observer summarizes several observations gleaned from the data

and provides them to the instructor without comment at the bottom of the page.

These include information about the times and types of participation, the number

and duration of activities, the number and kinds of questions asked, etc.

B R I G H A M Y O U N G U N I V E R S I T Y – I D A H O | 1 3

e x a m pl e of y e a rly l et t e r

E X A M P L E O F Y E A R LY L E T T E R

EXAMPLE OF YEARLY STATUS LETTER

1 4 | C O N T I N U I N G FA C U LT Y S TAT U S

INDIVIDUALIZED CFS PROCESS

The CFS process is intended as a developmental process. Its main purpose is to

integrate a new faculty member into the BYU-Idaho community while giving her all

the resources she need to meet the expectations of her job description.

The kinds of data collected through the standard CFS process are not refined

enough nor are the resources broad enough to act as remediation. Rather,

another process exists as part of the CFS experience for the specific purpose

of remediation.

If, in the course of the regular CFS process, significant difficulties have surfaced,

the CFS candidate will be asked to augment or replace the standard CFS process

with a more individualized process. This individualized process is designed to

gather more detailed data and offer more specific developmental resources than

can be had in the standard process.

The "red flags" that move a candidate from the more general process to the

individualized plan are as follows:

• A red status on any status report

• A second yellow status on any yearly status report

• A yellow status in the 3rd year of the process

I N T E RV E N T I O N C R I T E R I A

B R I G H A M Y O U N G U N I V E R S I T Y – I D A H O | 1 5 D ATA A N D D E V E L O P M E N T

Once in the individualized process, the candidate receives a written plan created

jointly with the department chair, the dean, and when appropriate, the Department

of Instructional Development.

The plan includes a discussion of the kind of data to be gathered and how it is to

be collected. This might include direct measurements of student learning, work

with the Office of Instructional Development, student focus groups or other data

gathering deemed necessary.

The plan will also include a specific schedule for remediation activities including

milestones and expectations.

Candidates who have been moved to an individualized plan during the initial nine

semesters of the CFS process will continue in the regular sequence of classroom

observations with their CFS committee members. In addition, the mentor and

department chair may elect to review course syllabi, I-Learn courses, course

outcomes, lesson plans, or other course documentation with the CFS candidate

as part of the more detailed data capture and development process. Candidates

extended to a fourth probationary year will no longer work with the prior CFS

committee.

REGUL AR CFS PROCESS (3 years)

DATA DEVELOPMENT

1. Student Course Evaluations2. Classroom Observations3. Stewardship Reviews

Voluntary development activities as per the five year development plan

Criteria that move the CFS process to the individualized process:

• Red Status• Second yellow status• Yellow in third year

INDIVIDUALIZED CFS PROCESS (1-2 years)

ADDITIONAL DATA ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT

1. Direct measurement of student learning (pre/post testing)

2. Peer review of syllabi, lesson plans, outcomes and website

3. Classroom observations by the Office of Instructional Development

4. Student focus groups5. Detailed self-evaluation of

feedback data

Mandatory remediation/development according to an individualized development plan as agreed upon by the dean and department chair in consultation with the pre-cfs candidate and the Department of Instructional Development.

a ddi t i ona l i n di v i d ua l i z e d su pp ort i s ava i l a b l e w h e n n e e de d

SUMMARY

The BYU-Idaho CFS process is intended to be an experience rich in resources and

developmental opportunities for new BYU-Idaho faculty. To this end, a committee

of peers provides mentoring and support to the CFS candidate for his or her first

three years on campus. This support is fundamentally coaching in nature. Data

collected during the process is largely for the benefit of the faculty member him-

or herself for use in reflection and in modifying their professional

development plan.

There is an evaluative component to the process as well. The mentor and the

department chair collect information on instructional and course design skills

that are summarized in yearly status letters. If difficulties surface during this

process, candidates are given individualized support and training. In most cases,

successful completion of the process will lead to Continuing Faculty Status being

awarded at the end of the three years unless difficulties have arisen that could

not be resolved.

PR

OD

UC

ED

BY

: T

HE

AC

AD

EM

IC O

FF

ICE

— B

YU

–ID

AH

O

w w w. b y u i . e d u / l e a rn i n g - t e ac h i n g