Revised 10/2018

D-RE: REPORT OF EVALUATION

Circle appropriate action:
Reappointment Merit Increase Promotion* Tenure* Triennial post-tenure review

*Summary Sheet must also be completed.

Section I: Background Information

A.
Name Daniel Koo
Department Psychology
School College of Arts and Sciences
Date of August 2008
appointment
Faculty Tenure track Tenure Pre-tenure track Non-tenure track
Appointment
(evaluate all areas) (evaluate only teaching (evaluate teaching
(circle one on
your right) and SCAR) and SCAR or service)

B. Date of this evaluation: C. Rank:

March 2020 Professor

D. Period of time covered by the evaluation: from _January 2017______ to _December 2019_____
(time since last reappointment, MI, triennial, or promotion)

E. Documentation of Performance in ASL (UF Handbook, p. 32-34)

ASLPI Rating: 3.8 Date of ASLPI: Oct 2008
Date of Faculty Classroom Discourse Observation Date(s) of Student Rating of Instructor’s
(if applicable): N/A Classroom Communication: Spring 2018
and Fall 2018

Documentation of ASL development (include semesters and years) (UF Handbook p. 33-34):

F. Does faculty member being evaluated hold a joint appointment with a separate administrative unit at Gallaudet or
have administrative responsibilities external to the department (e.g., RSIA, a second academic department, etc.?)
YES NO (Circle one) If yes, write an explanation and attach it to this form.
Page 1 of 11
Revised 10/2018

Dr. Koo has a joint appointment with the Department of Interpreting and Translation (DoIT) as a faculty
advisor to their doctoral students. Per Memorandum of Understanding developed between the DoIT and
the Psychology Department, Dr. Koo is to teach primarily for the Psychology Undergraduate program and
as such is to be evaluated by the Department of Psychology UG Program criteria.

Section II: Teaching

From UF Handbook, p. 22:

Teaching competence includes both expertise in the discipline as well as the ability to clearly communicate knowledge from
that discipline. Effective communication in teaching is separate from and in addition to competency in ASL and Classroom
Discourse as outlined in UF Handbook, pp. 32-33. University-wide requirements for teaching include: adherence to the
university-required instructional time for each course, providing students a clear and complete syllabus for each course (as
specified by Legislative Councils), demonstrate rigor in academic expectations, selecting instructional materials and bilingual
teaching approaches that satisfy the needs of a diverse student population with multiple learning styles, accessibility and
responsiveness to students’ individual academic needs, regular assessment of students’ work, providing students timely and
appropriate feedback, and designing new courses or re-design existing courses if necessary.

A. List of courses taught during evaluation period:

Semester Course # Course Title Credits Enrollment

Spring 2017 PSY 341 Research Design and Analysis I 3 17
Spring 2017 PSY 424 Neuropsychology 3 12
Spring 2017 PSY 499 Independent Study 3 2
Spring 2017 INT 900.16 Dissertation Research-Ricardo Ortiz 1 1

Summer 2017 PSY 499 Independent Study 3 1

Fall 2017 PSY 324-OL1 Cognition-Online 3 15

Fall 2017 PSY 341 Research Design and Analysis I 3 15
Fall 2017 INT 900.15 Dissertation Research-Ricardo Ortiz 1 1

Spring 2018 PSY 342 Research Design and Analysis II 3 10

Spring 2018 PSY 101.03 Introduction to Psychology 3 20
Spring 2018 INT 900.15 Dissertation Research-Ricardo Ortiz 1 1

Fall 2018 PSY 324 Cognition 3 16

Fall 2018 PSY 101.02 Introduction to Psychology 3 20
Fall 2018 INT 900.15 Dissertation Research-Ricardo Ortiz 1 1

Spring 2019 PSY 101.02 Introduction to Psychology 3 21

Spring 2019 PSY 101.04 Introduction to Psychology 3 21
Spring 2019 INT 900.15 Dissertation Research-Ricardo Ortiz 1 1
From Spring 2017 to Fall 2019, one course release per semester for UG Program Director and Program Assessment
Coordinator

Fall 2019 PSY 101.03 Introduction to Psychology 3 12

Fall 2019 PSY 324-OL1 Cognition-Online 3 19
Fall 2019 PSY 341 Research Design and Analysis I 3 18
Fall 2019 INT 900.15 Dissertation Research-Ricardo Ortiz 1 1
No course release in the Fall 2019 semester while still UG Program Director and Program Assessment Coordinator

Honors Contract with Max Graham-Putter for PSY 341 (Fall 2017)
Honors Contract with Alex Forkin for PSY 324 (Fall 2018)
Revised 10/2018

B. List of other teaching-related activities (e.g., dissertation committees, course development, unique
features, etc.) during the evaluation period:

Course Development
● Developed and taught PSY 342 (RDA II) for the first time while Dr. Schooler was on sabbatical leave.
● During the Spring 2018, Drs. Koo and Kobek Pezzarossi redesigned the Introduction to Psychology course
materials and balanced the grading system by including more homework and additional grading materials.

Dissertations, Advising, and Supervision

● Dissertation committee chair:
o Ricardo Ortiz, Interpreting,“The effects of cognates on trilingual (ASL-English-Spanish)
interpreters” (Proposal defended May 2019)
o Jennifer Cranston, Interpreting, (Fall 2018-Spring 2019 Currently on LOA from program)
● Dissertation committee member:
o Gillie Barrett, Psychology, “An exploration of the impact of questions as they apply to signing and
oral deaf children participating in Parent Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT)” (Dissertation
Defended January 2020)
o Stephen Fitzmaurice, Interpreting, “An investigation of administrators and teachers perception of
educational interpreters’ role in K-12 education” (Dissertation Defended April 2018)
● University Honors Co-Reader:
o Sawyer Willis, Psychology, “Investigation of the role of mirroring neuron systems in signing deaf
readers” (Completed May 2018)
● Average of 10 academic advisees per semester

Other activities
 Coordinator, Psi Chi Conference Spring 2018. This allowed our UG students an opportunity to practice and
showcase their class research projects. Students from PSY 342 (RDA II) and PSY 486 (Senior Capstone) as
well as honors students presented their work to PSY 101 students who came for extra credit.
 Developed and implemented Academic Bowl for Intro to Psychology students in Spring 2019. This was a
fun and competitive activity that pits PSY 101 sections against each other in an Academic Bowl style game
that quizzed students on their psychology vocabulary knowledge in preparation for the final exam. Repeated
in Fall 2019.

C. Sources used in determining the rating: (check all that apply)

__X___self-report X peers X students

_______classroom observation _____personal observation _______ others

D. Narrative:

The criteria for Satisfactory for Teaching as set by the Undergraduate Program with the Department of Psychology include
fulfill the knowledge, skills, syllabi, and attendance commitments for 3 undergraduate level courses per semester, or the
equivalent (such as graduate courses and any course releases/buyouts), schedule and maintain at least 2 hours per week of
office hours per 3 credit course, satisfactory evaluation from in-class observations when conducted, student evaluations are
predominantly at least Satisfactory, and peer evaluations are predominantly at least Satisfactory.
The criteria for Commendable as set forth include all expectations of Satisfactory plus all of the following: satisfy all
expectations for Satisfactory plus: engage in at least two additional instructional activity per year such as: teaching an
additional course (Psych UG or graduate, GSR, on-line, etc.), serving on two or more honors capstone, predissertation or
dissertation committees, chairing/supervising an honors thesis or independent study, developing a new course, attend teaching
conference or workshop, or write or contribute to a grant proposal to improve teaching, provide evidence of high quality
teaching including a demonstration of how teaching assignments and activities help student reach course SLOs, high student
Page 3 of 11
Revised 10/2018
engagement and learning, Satisfactory to Commendable evaluation from in-class observations when conducted, and receive
student evaluations that are predominantly at least in the range between Satisfactory and Commendable.
The criteria for Outstanding as set forth include all of the expectations of Satisfactory and Commendable plus the following:
satisfy all expectations for Satisfactory plus: engage in at least three (2 from commendable and one additional) instructional
activities that are listed under Commendable, at least one of the additional activities should be of higher quality/quantity than
listed in Commendable or, provide evidence of outstanding teaching including a demonstration of how teaching assignments
and activities help student reach course SLOs, high student engagement and learning or, in-class observation ratings (when
conducted) are predominantly at least in the range between Commendable and Outstanding, student evaluations are
predominantly at least in the range between Commendable and Outstanding, and peer evaluations are predominantly at least
in the range between Commendable and Outstanding.

Dr. Koo meets the criteria for Outstanding because of the following reasons: 1) development of a new
course (PSY 342), 2) service on four dissertation committees (chairing two), 3) two independent studies
courses, 4) coordination of the Spring 2018 Psi Chi Conference, 5) redesign of PSY 101 with another
faculty member, and 5) development of the Academic Bowl for Introduction to Psychology students. In
addition, student evaluations of Dr. Koo’s courses have been consistently outstanding.
In the Spring of 2018 Dr. Koo developed and taught PSY 342 (RDA II) for the first time while the regular
faculty member for PSY 342 was on sabbatical. In addition, Dr. Koo, along with Dr. Kobek-Pezzarossi,
revised the Introduction to Psychology course in Spring 2019 to include weekly homework to create a
more balanced grading system with less weight on tests. Dr. Koo also incorporated multiple in-class
activities such as debate-style dialogue, group work, Kahoot quizzes, worksheets, in many of his classes to
make the class more stimulating and engaging. In response to “In general how would you rate this
teacher?”, PSY 101 students rated Dr. Koo an average score of 1.5 on a scale of 1-5 which indicates
Excellent. In response to “In general, how would you rate this course?”, students rated the newly
redesigned PSY 101 course (Spring 2018) an average score of 1.9 which is close to Excellent. Yet, students
rated PSY 101 course difficulty as 3.5 (on 1-5 scale). PSY 101 students in the Fall 2018 showed similar
response rates although there was a smaller sample size (n=7) due to a weak response rate. Similarly,
several students from PSY 324 Cognition (Fall 2018) reported positive comments such as “One of my
favorite teachers at Gally; great style of teaching, very clear, and discussions are meaningful”; and “Clear
communication, exciting lectures and activities, flexible and accommodating, fair”. Student evaluations in
the Spring 2019 and Fall 2019 have been overwhelmingly outstanding. For instance, 80% of the students’
responses (n=10) from PSY 341 Research Design and Analysis I class (Fall 2019), a notoriously difficult and
student-adverse class, rated Dr. Koo as an “Excellent” instructor with the remaining 20% saying “Good”.
90% of the PSY 341 students stated the instructor stimulated them to think “Most of the time” or “Very
much.” Similar response trends also appeared in other Fall and Spring 2019 courses.
Dr. Koo coordinated the Psi Chi conference in Spring 2018 that drew many students from multiple PSY
courses (PSY 101, PSY 342, PSY 486) together in a lively discussion of research. This event not only
afforded upper-class students an excellent opportunity to practice their presentation skills and discuss
research ideas in a relaxed environment but also gave our introductory level
students the opportunity to see what is expected of Psychology majors.
Psychology students from PSY 342 (Research Design and Analysis II) as well as
the PSY 486 (Senior Capstone) courses had posters covering a wide range of
topics including roommate dynamics, sexual behavior, and bullying. Picture
on the right is a photo of the event posted in the CAS Newsletter (Fall 2018).
Revised 10/2018
Dr. Koo also developed and coordinated the Introduction to Psychology Academic Bowl event in Spring
2019. This event pitted four Introduction to Psychology sections against each other in a fun and
competitive learning environment with the winning section taking cupcakes as a prize. This event helped
students prepare for their final exams and was so well-received that we repeated the event again in the
Fall of 2019. Pictures shown below are from the Spring 2019 event.

Finally, Dr. Koo served on four dissertation committees. He is currently the dissertation committee chair
for Ricardo Ortiz, a doctoral student from the Department of Interpreting and Translation (DoIT), who
successfully defended his dissertation proposal in May 2019. He continues to meet with Dr. Koo on a
weekly basis to discuss and plan his data collection and analysis. Dr. Koo served as a dissertation
committee member for two students who successfully defended their dissertations: Gillie Barrett, a
doctoral student in Clinical Psychology program and Stephen Fitzmaurice, a doctoral student in DoIT. A
fourth doctoral candidate, Jennifer Cranston, from the DoIT, is currently on leave of absence from the
program.

Dr. Koo’s peers agree unanimously he meets the criteria of Outstanding in the evaluation area of
Teaching. Comments include, “Dan shows outstanding teaching due to his extensive course development,
work on pre-/dissertation committees, and high student evaluations,” “Dan has met the criteria for
Outstanding Teaching with all of his work on dissertation and honors committees (in Psychology and
Interpreting) and revising courses,” Dr Koo's efforts to redesign our introductory course to include
additional non-test based assessments of student learning is needed and reflective of best practices. Dr.
Koo's teaching activities have extended beyond the department and reflective of his commitment to
interdisciplinary collaboration and supporting GU's mission for sharing resources where we can. Within
the department, Dr. Koo typically teaches the more technical courses that are among the most challenging
for our students and he is known among students for going that extra mile to help students meet the
standards when they are struggling,” and “Hard worker. He is in the department early. He provides
students with additional review and teaching after class. He can often be observed sitting on the table
outside his office helping students.”
Rating: (circle one) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Commendable Outstanding

Section III: Scholarship/Creative Activity/Research (SCAR)

From UF Handbook, p. 23:

Page 5 of 11
Revised 10/2018
A faculty member must be professionally active in a specific academic discipline or allied fields. Examples of professional
activities include:
• Attending professional meetings in the field,
• Participating in professional organizations and activities,
• Demonstrating knowledge of current developments in the field through a variety of scholarly activities such as writing and
signing for professional publications,
• Presenting at professional conferences and professional workshops,
• Dissemination of at least one scholarly or creative product (e.g., a scholarly publication, presentation of a creative product,
submission of a grant proposal) to the field every three years,
• Progress in executing research, scholarship or a creative activity agenda.
Faculty are expected to produce at least one scholarly product (e.g., a scholarly publication, presentation of a creative
product, submission of a grant proposal) triennially. The range of acceptable scholarly or creative products will be determined
by the faculty of the programs and/or departments.

A. List of scholarly, creative, research activities conducted during evaluation period:

Invited Presentations
Koo, D. (2017) “Is working memory different in deaf and hearing individuals?” McDaniel College, Westminster,
MD.

Peer-reviewed Manuscripts
Kobek Pezzarossi, C.M., Leigh, I.W., & Koo, D. (under review). Psychologists' use of touch in individual
psychotherapy with deaf and hard-of-hearing clients. Journal of the American Deafness and Rehabilitation
Association.

Taylor, C.M., Koo, D., Evans T.M., Olulade O.A., LaSasso C, and Eden G.F. (submitted. not accepted). Effects
of sensory and language experience on the neural bases of visual motion processing. Nature
Communications

Ad Hoc Journal Reviewer

Ear and Hearing (2018)

B. Sources used in determining the rating: (check all that apply)

X self-report X peers _____personal observation _____other

C. Narrative:

The criteria for Satisfactory for scholarship, creative activity, or research (SCAR) as set by the Undergraduate Program with
the Department of Psychology is as follows: Engage in continuous professional development, participate in scholarly exchanges
through participation in professional conferences, engage in an ongoing program of research or scholarship (such as ongoing
literature review, data collection or analysis, proposal development, manuscript preparation), or make satisfactory progress on
completing PhD if not yet completed.
The criteria for Commendable for SCAR include all of the criteria for Satisfactory plus at least one of the following:
expectations for "Satisfactory" completed plus any of the following items: complete at least one substantial scholarly product
(such as a submitted manuscript, technical report, or accreditation report), write or contribute to a scholarly grant proposal or
manage a funded grant, or least one presentation at a national or regional professional conference.
The criteria for Outstanding for SCAR include Satisfy all expectations for Satisfactory plus any of the items: produce two or
more scholarly products (publication or presentation completed) in high quality peer-reviewed venue(s), received funding for
at least one large internal (i.e. Priority Grant) or external grant, publication of a book, extensive monograph, and/or journal
may be considered equivalent to several individual articles, depending upon the faculty member's contributions (i.e. as author,
co-author, editor, or co-editor).
Revised 10/2018
Dr. Koo meets the criteria for Commendable based on submitting two co-authored articles for publication
in peer-reviewed journals. One of the manuscripts was submitted and reviewed by JDARA. A response
from the authors has recently been submitted. Dr. Koo also was invited to present his scholarly work at
McDaniel College in the Fall of 2017 to ASL students.

Dr. Koo’s peers agree he meets the criteria for Commendable in the evaluation area of SCAR. Comments
include, “Dan shows commendable scholarship due to his important cognitive neuroscience publications in
the field during this time period,” and “Dan's responsibilities as Director of the Undergraduate Program
have taken a toll on his research productivity. This is unfortunate because his research has always been
outstanding.”

D. Rating: (circle one) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Commendable Outstanding

Section IV: Service

From UF Handbook, p. 23:

A faculty member must actively participate in at least one academic or professional service activity on behalf of the
University. Such service activity may be provided to:
• Students (e.g. academic advising, sponsoring of student activities),
• The academic program or department (e.g. service on committees, participating in department academic assessment
activities, evaluating peers, coordinating multi-section courses),
• The University (e.g. faculty committees, evaluating administrators, participating in public relations activities, recruitment,
outreach),
• The deaf community, and/or
• Professional organizations (e.g. committee participation or leadership responsibilities).
From UF Handbook, p. 31:
The faculty of the program and/or department shall determine what is satisfactory professional or academic service. In
addition, a faculty member shall participate in program or department and University meetings and activities (e.g. attending
University faculty meetings and commencement).

A. List of service activities engaged in during evaluation period:

Service to Gallaudet University:

● Member, GSR self-study committee (2017-2018)
● Member, Tenure and Promotion Committee (2016-2018)
● Member, Faculty of Color Coalition (2017-Present)
● Chair, Tenure and Promotion Committee (2018-Present)
● Pilot Member, Assessment Council. This select group of program assessment coordinators met regularly
with Office of Academic Quality to train and experiment with Watermark and Taskstream (2017-2018)
● Sign Narrator for Maguire Welcome Center Video (2018)
● Coordinator, AFS Exchange student campus visit to Gallaudet University. This one-day event gave
international exchange students a unique educational opportunity to visit GU and learn about deaf education,
deaf culture, and the history and value of ASL.

Service to the Department of Psychology at Gallaudet University:

● Chair, Faculty Search Committee for UG Applied Psychology Position (2019-present)
● Member, Faculty Search Committee for School Psychology Position (2018)
● UG Program Director and Assessment Coordinator (Spring 2017-present)
● Coordinated and participated in UG Open Houses every semester
Page 7 of 11
Revised 10/2018

Service outside of Gallaudet University:

● Advisory Board member, Hands and Voices
● Board member and Webmaster of Deaf Calvary Church, Frederick, MD.
● Member, National Psi Chi Honor Society
● Treasurer and Webmaster, CueSign Inc.
● Presenter, “Setting the Bilingual Table: Cognitive and Linguistic Outcomes of Cued English” at CueSign
Summit, July 2018
● Co-Presenter, “Achieving Manual Bilingualism” presentation to parents and educational professionals in
Prince William County.

B. Sources used in determining the rating: (check all that apply)

X self-report X peers _____personal observation _____other

C. Narrative:

The criteria for Satisfactory in service as set forth by the Undergraduate Program in the Department of Psychology is as
follows: attend departmental and program meetings, advise psychology majors and minors, write letters of recommendation
for undergraduate students for graduate school admission and employment, attend program, department-sponsored, and
university-sponsored events during normal university hours.
The criteria for Commendable in service as set forth by the Undergraduate Program in the Department of Psychology is as
follows: expectations for "Satisfactory" completed plus one of the following: serve as an active member on two program,
departmental, college, or university-wide committees, regularly share expertise with on- or off-campus groups and individuals
(through giving presentations to lay audiences, consultation, or providing information), active involvement in a professional
organization (e.g., APA, ADARA, APS) by serving on committees or other programs, provide service to the deaf community via
outreach, educational services, psychological services, consultation, etc., or write or contribute to a grant proposal of value to
the program, department or university OR manage a funded grant.
The criteria for Outstanding in service as set forth by the Undergraduate Program in the Department of Psychology is as
follows: Expectations for "Satisfactory" completed plus at least one cell of this column: (a) take a leadership role or a position of
responsibility in a demanding, ongoing university, college, departmental, or program activity; or (b) serve on one time-intensive
or very demanding University committee; or (c) serve on three or more committees at the departmental, university and/or
professional level; or (d) provide additional significant service, such as: leadership role in a professional organization, significant
service to deaf community organizations reflective of the faculty member’s expertise, other significant community service
reflective of the faculty member’s expertise; or (e) three or more items from Commendable.

Dr. Koo meets the criteria for Outstanding because he is currently the Undergraduate Program Director
and Assessment coordinator, the Chair of the Tenure and Promotion (T&P) committee (August 2018
-Present), his commitment to multiple university-level committees such as the GSR Self-Study Group and
his volunteer efforts in several external deaf-related organizations such as Hands and Voices, and CueSign,
Inc. Dr. Koo is also serving as the chair of the UG applied psychology position. Dr. Koo was selected to
serve as a pilot group for the University’s new WaterMark assessment protocol from 2017-2018. This
group had regular training sessions with the Office of Student Success and Academic Quality where
Watermark’s templates were reviewed and fed in program assessment goals/data. Dr. Koo is currently the
chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee which is a university-wide, time-intensive service. As Chair
of the T&P Committee, he leads committee deliberations, answers questions from faculty, and reports the
committee’s recommendations to the administration as well as Faculty Senate. He is also helping the
university in its transition to using Interfolio for tenure and promotion requests this academic year. Dr.
Koo continues to serve as the Program Director of the Undergraduate Program with an average of 50
majors/minors in the Undergraduate Program, all of whom see him before declaring their major/minor.
Revised 10/2018
In addition to leading the course schedules and program meetings, he coordinates the Psychology
program’s representations at multiple Open House events and helps recruit students into the major by
answering queries from prospective students. He recently served on the faculty search committee
member for the School Psychology graduate faculty position and is the search committee chair for the UG
Applied Psychology position. Dr. Koo is also actively involved in external organizations mostly catering to
the deaf community such as serving on the Advisory Board for Hands and Voices and CueSign Inc. Dr. Koo
also brought a group of largely hearing international exchange students staying in the Capitol DC area in
Fall 2017 for an educational visit to Gallaudet University which will undoubtedly enhance Gallaudet’s
branding and profile when they return to their home countries.

The majority of Dr. Koo’s peers agree he meets the criteria for Outstanding in the evaluation area of
Service. Comments include, “The UG Psychology program has thrived under Dr. Koo's leadership. He has
been quick to volunteer for university initiatives such as piloting the new Watermark program,” “Dan
shows outstanding service due to his leadership on an important university committee, leadership in his
program, and extensive work in the deaf community,” “In addition to his large amount of work as
Program Director for the Undergraduate Psychology Program, Dr. Koo also is the Chair of the T and P
committee. This work is vital to the department, as well as the University faculty. In addition he has
participated in other smaller committees or community presentations in his areas of interest. These
activities requiring high level of commitment and oversight meet the criteria of Outstanding,” and “It has
been a pleasure working in the undergraduate program with Dr. Koo as program director. His
management and leadership have served the program well.”
D. Rating: (circle one) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Commendable Outstanding

Section V: Rating Summary and Calculation of Points

Three areas of evaluation

Unsatisfactory = 0 points
Satisfactory = 1 point

Commendable = 2 points
Outstanding = 3 points

ASL Proficiency
For MI, Promotion, and Tenure: ASLPI target score of 3

Note: For MI, Promotion, and Tenure, target ASLPI rating of 3 is expected. Additional documentation must be
provided if the rating is below the expected score, and is also strongly encouraged if the level is 3 or above.
(UF Handbook p. 24.)

Areas of Evaluation Rating Merit Points

(circle)
Page 9 of 11
Revised 10/2018
1. Teaching USCO 3
2. Scholarship/creative activity/research USCO 2
3. Service USCO 3
4. ASL Development/Proficiency N/A
1. ASLPI date:
2. CDO date:
3. Student Rating of Classroom Communication
date:
4. Efforts to improve ASL and classroom discourse

Total: 8

Section VI: Personnel Action Criteria

Merit Increase - 6 Levels (4-9 points) Promotion Tenure

Satisfactory in all categories; at least
commendable in one area (teaching, SCAR
and/or service); must earn the following
points:
Tenured & Tenure-track: 4-9 points
Pre-tenure track: 3-6 points
Non-tenure track: 3-6 points
Tenured & Tenure-track: at least 6 At least 6 points or
points; no unsatisfactory ratings in any higher; no unsatisfactory
of the four categories of evaluation. rating in the cumulative
evaluation for tenure in
Pre-tenure track: at least 4 points; no
any area and
unsatisfactory ratings in any of the four
categories of evaluation. demonstrate ASL and
classroom discourse
Non-tenure track: A total of at least 4 competence.
points in teaching and service or
scholarship; no unsatisfactory ratings
in any of the four categories of
evaluation.

(UF Handbook, pp. 30-31)

Section VII: Summary/Recommendations

Narrative highlighting recommendations for continued development as a faculty member and prospects for
future personnel action:

Dr. Daniel Koo is clearly well-liked and respected in the Department of Psychology and within the
Undergraduate Program. The program has done well under his leadership. His calm and reasoned
leadership, willingness to communicate in a transparent approach, and tackling of various projects has
given the Undergraduate Program the opportunity to showcase its faculty and as a result, the students.
The area of his teaching shows a clear strength in his approach to the pedagogy, particularly with the
more difficult and technical courses (e.g., the Research Design and Analysis sequence and Cognition). His
Revised 10/2018
service as Chair of the Tenure & Promotion committee has been an invaluable area of his service. The
knowledge, understanding, and pragmatic approach he brings to a committee with enormous
responsibility for personnel actions has benefitted the University as a whole.

Dr. Koo has a strong background in research and publication. During this brief evaluation period; however,
he has not produced as much as he has in the past. His peers understand that with his new leadership
responsibilities, this area may be impacted. Despite his slight reduction in products, Dr. Koo is still very
much a respected scholar in his area of research focus.

Section VIII: Recommendations

Based on this evaluation and the criteria for personnel actions summarized above, the following action is
recommended: (Check where appropriate)

____ Reappointment ____ Non-reappointment ____ Tenure ____ Dismissal

X Merit Increase/Triennial: (Number Points Earned: 8 )

____ Promotion to new Rank: ______________________

Chair¹ Date ________________________

Faculty member comments (optional):

Faculty Member² Date _______________

¹ If this evaluation pertains to a department Chair, the Dean or other department member designated by the Dean will prepare and sign the
form.
² A faculty member’s signature does not necessarily indicate agreement with the contents of the evaluation.

Page 11 of 11