The goal of these principles and procedures is to provide sustained information to academic administrators¹ in order that they can perform effectively and can improve in the performance of their responsibilities. Effective evaluation of an administrator must include faculty evaluation.

Principles

1. All academic administrators will be evaluated, in writing, by their immediate supervisors annually on their performance with respect to the goals and objectives of their jobs. This evaluation will include written evaluation from various constituencies including the Personnel Affairs Committee of the unit of the person being evaluated, where appropriate. A questionnaire will be used to secure anonymous information from deans, department chairs, faculty and directors. All evaluations will be returned to the Faculty Senate Office.

2. As circumstances dictate, supervisors of each administrator may develop additional evaluative procedures to evaluate academic administrators who report to them.

3. Evaluation of all academic administrators will be in accord with the following principles:

a. To provide the basis for meaningful and productive evaluation, each school or college must work with the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs to prepare a job description for all such academic administrators. These descriptions should define the duties and responsibilities of each administrator, while providing a mechanism for goal setting.

b. The evaluation should be based on an assessment of the individual's effectiveness as an administrator in achieving the university's and the academic unit's predetermined goals and objectives.

c. Each administrator shall receive a written evaluation which shall be discussed with the individual by the appropriate supervisory administrator. The administrator to whom the academic administrator being evaluated reports shall consider all available information in his or her annual evaluation and decisions to reappoint.

Procedures

1. Evaluations must be submitted to the appropriate supervisors by April 1 and the evaluation completed by April 30 of each year.

2. There must be an understanding between the administrator being evaluated and the administrator to whom he or she reports regarding the factors and criteria on which the evaluation will be based. Both parties must agree on (1) long range goals for the academic unit, (2) how these goals relate to the university’s goals and (3) short-term objectives that will facilitate achievement of the long-range goals.

a. These goals and objectives must be determined in relation to the total amount of time which is committed to administration and should be based on budget allocations and/or work load reports. More specifically, goals and objectives should be realistic, depending upon whether the administrative duties are full or part time. Goals and objectives should reflect the appropriate mix of teaching; scholarly, creative and professional activities; service, and administrative responsibilities.

b. These goals and objectives will be established annually, at the beginning of each academic year, during a conference between the administrator and the administrator to whom he or she reports. These plans will, whenever possible, be in writing, so that there is a clear understanding of the intent and agreement of the parties.

3. No later than April 1, the administrator being evaluated will prepare a written summary of the year's achievements and accomplishments, relating these to the goals and objectives established at the beginning of the year. Additionally, the summary will include significant activities and accomplishments that were not included in the original goals and objectives. The summary shall be provided to the evaluating administrator.

4. For deans and department chairs or their equivalent, part of the evaluation process will include anonymously written evaluations by faculty within their academic unit. For the graduate dean, anonymously written evaluations by the graduate faculty will be used.

5. Department chairs and deans shall be evaluated each year, except that no administrator will be evaluated during the first or last year of appointment.

6. Copies of all evaluations will be forwarded to the office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. Arrangements for a compilation shall be approved by the Committee on Evaluation of Administrators and the office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. The compilation shall be forwarded with the raw data to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. A copy of the compilation will be provided to the administrator being evaluated.

7. After reviewing the written summary, the Personnel Affairs Committee's evaluation and the compilation of anonymous evaluations, the evaluating administrator will arrange for a conference with the administrator being evaluated. In the conference, the discussion should focus on the administrator's performance during the past year and should relate clearly to the plan of action developed at the beginning of the year. Because the attainment of goals often involves long-range effort, the evaluation must consider the performance of previous years in addition to the current year. In this conference, the administrator conducting the evaluation should frankly discuss the progress toward attainment of the goals and objectives established for the period under consideration.

8. The evaluating administrator will, following the conference, prepare a written summary and will transmit it with the raw data to the administrator being evaluated. This yearly summary will also become a part of the administrator’s personnel file.

9. Following the evaluation process the results will be shared by the provost and vice president for academic affairs in a general way with the University Committee of the Faculty Senate.

10. The evaluating instrument shall be subject to approval by the Faculty Senate and the Dean's Council. The Faculty Senate and the Dean's Council shall review the instrument from time to time as the need arises.

11. Deans shall institute a system of annual faculty evaluation of assistant and associate deans.

12. The provost and vice president for academic affairs is evaluated according to the general procedures outlined for other academic administrators in that the same evaluative instrument is used. The president is evaluated according to a negotiated procedure that is based on evaluations in essay form and based on the job description of the office.

____________________________________

1 As used in this document, the term academic administrators includes deans, the graduate dean and department chairs or their equivalent.