DYSTOPIA–All Dystopia College faculty-evaluation dossiers must be completed and submitted electronically by Feb. 15, according to Provost Eddina Field and Director of Institutional Research and Development Gwen Down-Fast.
Field said the dossiers, part of the college’s new faculty-driven performance evaluation process, will be a critical part of the peer-evaluation process, in which randomly chosen faculty members will evaluate their unknown colleagues’ evasive answers to a series of inane questions. Although Field said the results of the evaluation process will have “a significant impact” on faculty members’ careers at the college, Down-Fast said that no particular evaluation criteria have been established, and she trusts faculty evaluators to “just wing it.”
In the past, faculty evaluation–a combination of self- and administrative assessment–resulted in a judgment of “meets expectations” or “fails to meet expectations.” By popular demand, the new system also includes “exceeds expectations” and “way too good to work here,” but Field stressed that faculty members who are deemed worthy of the latter two categories should not expect a pay raise because the college is broke, and faculty compensation is currently number 17 on the college’s priority list, just below window cleaning and urinal replacement.
Down-Fast said she is confident that faculty members are going to love the new system, because it will allow them to waste hours and hours of time learning to use defective technology and craft sincere-sounding nonsense prose instead of preparing for classes, therefore contributing directly to the college’s goal of providing students with a better educational experience.
Asst. Prof. of Biology Zoe Logique, who spent most of last week vainly attempting to log in to UNRAVEL, the college’s assessment tool, said she has been so busy working on her dossier that she forgot to attend the first few weeks of her classes and has not yet met any of her students.
Asst. Prof. of English Owen Hornblower, interviewed rather incoherently at the Dead Albatross, a local pub, said he is hoping that if he drinks enough whisky the whole thing will just go away.
The new system was developed after the college’s accrediting organization, the League of Really Bad Colleges (LRBC). An LRBC spokesperson, Pape R. Pusher, said peer evaluation of faculty is a crucial component of staying accrediting, though the accreditors do not have access to faculty dossiers and really only want colleges to provide them with an array of numerical data. As for how the LRBC processes data once it is received, Pusher said, “Well, you know, things just disappear.”
T. Allen Culpepper