Summary Evaluations for Faculty and 1st Year Professional Staff

Summary Evaluations were due on  February 1 for:
FT faculty who are in their first through sixth year of FT employment,
FT Professional Staff in their 1st year of employment, and
Tenured faculty in their evaluation year (Not evaluated in the year tenure is received and evaluated every 3rd year from last evaluation).
Unit members are required to sign the Summary Evaluation acknowledging that the unit member has read and received a copy of the evaluation.  Signing the Summary Evaluation does not mean that the unit member agrees with the evaluation. Unit members have the right to request  the reasons for the evaluation.  Unit members have seven working days to respond to the evaluation and have the right to file a grievance.
Professional staff may request a post evaluation meeting to discuss the evaluation. If requested, the supervisor shall meet and confer with the professional staff unit member within 14 days of the evaluation.
Faculty  Summary Evaluations include student evaluations (due January 23), a course materials evaluation, a classroom observation evaluation, a student advisement evaluation, a college service evaluation, and a review of the personnel file since the last summary evaluation. Anche tra le classifiche puoi trovare un sito utile –
Below are the weights for each component.
Student Evaluations = 25%
Course Materials = 15%
Classroom Observation = 25%
Student Advisement = 10%
College Service = 10%
Personnel File = 15%
Professional staff evaluations have 3 components:  Work performance, college service, and the personnel file.
Work Performance = 75%
College Service = 10
Personnel File = 15%
RATINGS – The only component in the summary evaluation process that has a rating is the student evaluation component (excellent, very good, good, fair, poor, or very poor). There are no overall ratings for any of the components on the summary evaluation and there is no overall performance rating. The evaluator must state “unsatisfactory” if a component or the overall performance is unsatisfactory.  Overall ratings such as satisfactory, excellent, very satisfactory, good, etc. for any component or for the overall performance are not acceptable and are in violation of the contract and a 1986 arbitration decision. If a unit member is “other than unsatisfactory”, then the evaluator’s comments should be in the form of a narrative. The evaluator may use adjectives in the narrative, but may not, for example, state the overall classroom observation was satisfactory, or very satisfactory, or good, or excellent. The same is true for the professional staff summary evaluation and its components.


 TIME SENSITIVE:  GIC Public Hearing – Wednesday, February 1, 2017, from 12:30 – 2:30 p.m. in Rabb Hall at the Boston Public Library (700 Boylston Street, Boston).  
Almost every Higher Education unit will be represented, and some K-12 and retired members will also be present.  VP Jeff Seideman and I will both be attending to speak for MCCC.  However, the power to persuade the GIC (Group Insurance Commission) commissioners will come from the number of people who show up.  QUANTITY is important.  Our STORIES are also important.  Our collective voices will carry far more weight than just my and Jeff’s voice.
Please RSVP to me if you will be able to attend in person.  If you cannot attend in person, please send personal stories about how the proposed policy changes will impact you.  Stories are powerful persuaders.  Jeff and I will deliver your stories if you cannot personally appear at the public hearing.
The proposed provisional policy change proposals shift the full burden for increased healthcare costs onto employees…..employers incur no cost.  This is unacceptable!
  1. GIC commissioners have given provisional approval to the following changes for non-Medicare plans:
    1. Increase deductibles from $300 to $500 for individuals and from $900 to $1,000 for families; eliminate the lower deductibles for two-member families.  Deductibles for Fallon Health Direct Care rise to $550 for individual plans ad $1,100 for family plans.
    2. Add a prescription drug deductible of $100 for an individual and $200 for a family.
    3. Freeze enrollment in the Tufts Navigator and Fallon Health Select Care plans and continue to freeze enrollment in the Harvard Pilgrim Independence Plan.
    4. Increase co-pays for visits to primary-care physicians.
  2. We need STORIES and TESTIMONY that reflect these messages:
    1. Cost increases are being unfairly shifted to employees and retirees.
    2. These increases will have a big impact on early-career educators who are at the lower end of pay scales, etc.
    3. Retirees are on fixed incomes.
    4. Increasing out-of-pocket costs may discourage some from seeking care when necessary.
While these changes affect members who currently receive health care benefits, we are ONE union.  As we work to keep health care costs down for full-time and qualified part-time members, we should be working assertively to get equitable healthcare coverage for all part-time and all adjunct members who need health insurance.
Please let your voice be heard–either in person or by sending a story to me or to MTA Consultant Donna Sirutis at:
In solidarity,
P.S.  For members on the GIC Indemnity Plan, it hasn’t been that long since co-pays for specialist office visits changed from $25/$35/$45 to $30/$60/$90 – double the amount at tier 3!  Premiums have increased and deductibles have increased.  The Commonwealth has an obligation to provide affordable and quality health insurance to public employees, setting the example to be followed by all employers.  If you do not want to see your income further reduced, speak up!  We are already working more for less.

Contract Administration Tip – Student Evaluations

NON-TENURED AND TENURED FACULTY IN AN EVALUATION YEAR – The tabulated data from the Fall 2016 student evaluations for full-time faculty in an evaluation year should have been distributed to faculty by January 23 and these student evaluations will be evaluated by the immediate supervisor in the summary evaluations on February 1.   The student evaluation process is a stand alone evaluation and no decile rankings, department averages, division averages, and college averages are allowed.  If your summary evaluation and/or student evaluation comments include any comparative analysis, please contact your chapter leadership so they can pursue an individual or chapter grievance.

TENURED FACULTY IN NON-EVALUATION YEAR – Although student evaluations were administered to tenured faculty in a non-evaluation year, the tabulated data from these evaluations shall be sent only to the tenured faculty member and they are NOT part of any summary evaluation.

Attached is an outline of the Student Evaluation and Summary Evaluation Process.

DCE Course Cancellation Fee

10.06   If a faculty member is offered and accepts a course which is subsequently cancelled, there will be no break in previously accrued seniority or credit towards eligibility for reappointment.  If such course is canceled within seven (7) calendar days prior to the first scheduled class for the assigned course, the instructor shall receive two hundred and twenty-five dollars ($225); provided however, there shall be only one cancellation fee paid for multiple sections of the same subject.


A ‘calendar day’ is defined in this context as the 24-hour period from midnight to midnight.  For the purposes of calculating the ‘seven (7) calendar days’ cancellation period, Day 1 shall be the day of the first scheduled class of the assigned course. Example: If a class was first scheduled to meet on a Tuesday, the notice of cancellation of the course on the previous Wednesday or later would necessitate the payment of the cancellation fee.

Contract Administration Tip – Faculty Workload Requirements, Workload Parameters, & Non-Instructional Workload

Workload Computation Forms – At the end of the drop/add period, workload computation forms are developed and faculty instructional and non-instructional workloads are determined.

The President or the president’s designee shall at the end of  the “add/drop” period of each semester compute the actual instructional workload for each full-time faculty member according to the workload formulas. The President or the President’s designee will, on basis of the faculty member’s instructional and reassigned workload:

  1. Reduce the non-instructional workload in writing proportionately for any faculty member whose instructional and reassigned hours per week exceeds thirty-one (31) instructional and reassigned hours for faculty teaching only didactic courses or thirty-four (34) or more instructional and reassigned hours for faculty teaching other than only didactic courses; OR
  2. Determine in writing after discussing alternativeswith the affected faculty members whose load is below the twenty-nine (29) instructional and reassigned hour minimum (see alternatives – p. 4 of attachment).

Since preparation time and contact time have changed to give faculty more credit under the new contract, faculty should request their Workload Computation Form and review the pdf document attached for compliance. The Workload Computation Form is due at the end of the drop/add period each semester.

The new Workload Computation Form is also attached.

Faculty Workload, Workload Parameters, Prep Hours, Non-Intruction

2015-2018-1 Workload Computation Form copy

Full Time Faculty and Part-time Day Unit Faculty Class Enrollments

The workload article of the MCCC day unit contract defines the number of students that are allowed in each class per semester depending on the type of course.  These calculations are made at the end of the add/drop period. If a faculty member exceeds the total number of students, then there shall be a proportional adjustment in the succeeding semester.
The average number of students in each course is 32 students per semester except in the following courses:
1) 28 students for writing and/or critical thinking intensive courses (see note below).
2) 22 students for English Composition, English as a Second Language, introductory foreign language courses, remedial and/or developmental courses.
Writing and Critical Thinking Intensive Courses:
There must be mutual agreement between the unit member and the immediate supervisor  to reduce the number of students from 32 to 28 in intensive courses.
For writing courses, the course description and the syllabus should be sufficient to show that course is a writing intensive course.
For critical thinking courses, the attached document  defines the requirements of this course.
All of the above student enrollment averages are based on total students for all classes. Therefore, for example, It is permissible to have 5 classes with enrollments of 34, 30, 32, 33, 31 because the average number of students is 32 which is within the contractual limit.


Distance Ed Courses – For the first 2 times taught, the maximum is 25 students.  Thereafter, the above-referenced day contract numbers apply.
Limited Space –  Limited and available physical space will mandate the number of students especially for safety concerns. There  is no language regarding class size for labs, but in accordance with the facilities article (3) and the safety article (2), the employer must make reasonable efforts to provide space and necessary equipment to carry out assigned responsibilities.   For example, if there are only 24 work stations, then the employer could not assign more than 24 students.


If you believe that your course is one of the above-referenced courses and you exceed the maximum student enrollment, contact your immediate supervisor to resolve the matter.  If no resolution is reached, contact your chapter grievance coordinator or me.


Dennis Fitzgerald
MCCC Grievance Coordinator
170 Beach Road #52
Salisbury, MA 01952email
tel   978-255-2798
fax  978-255-2896