All-University Faculty Committee for Evaluation of Administrators

(MUPIM 12.5/OAC 3339-12-05)

Membership (MUPIM 12.5.A)

An All-University Faculty Committee for Evaluation of Administrators will review the Provost, all academic deans, the Associate Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, the Dean and University Librarian, and the University Director of Liberal Education in years three (3) and five (5) of their five-year administrative appointments. Committee reports are intended to serve two functions: a) to guide the professional development of the individuals, and b) to record part of the evidence upon which future personnel decisions may be based.

The All-University Faculty Committee for Evaluation of Administrators (Committee) will consist of eight (8) members of Faculty Assembly, one to be chosen by each division for a total of five (5), one (1) to be chosen by the library faculty, and one (1) to be chosen by each of the regional campuses. The members of the Committee will be elected by the faculty with election procedures to be set by the University Senate. The Committee shall elect one of its members to serve as chair.  Members of the Committee who are on probationary status (i.e., nontenured or who do not hold continuing contract status) are not eligible to serve as chair of the Committee.  In accordance with a University Senate motion of November 5, 1990, the library faculty as well as the faculty of the regional campuses shall not be eligible as nominees or electors in the election of divisional representatives. Each member will serve a nonrenewable three-year term beginning July 1.  The terms will be staggered so that one-third of the Committee is elected each year.  In the event of the resignation of a member of the Committee before the end of his or her term, that seat shall be filled by the candidate (who had not been previously elected) who received the largest number of votes when the ballots are retabulated after votes for the person who has resigned have been deleted.  In the event no such candidate is available, a new election will be held for the vacated seat.

Schedule (MUPIM 12.5.B)

Each fall semester, the Committee shall prepare a questionnaire for the evaluation of each administrator it is scheduled to evaluate during the  academic year. Administrators in year five (5) of their five-year administrative appointment will be evaluated in the fall semester of the evaluation year. Administrators in year three (3) of their five-year appointment will be evaluated in the spring semester of the evaluation year. The Committee shall distribute the questionnaire to members of Faculty Assembly assigned to or served by the administrator’s unit and it shall prepare an evaluation report to be submitted to the administrator’s supervisor.

Evaluation Questionnaires (MUPIM 12.5.C)

The Committee shall develop a common core of questions appropriate for each class of administrators it is responsible for reviewing. For example, it shall develop a common core of questions for all deans of academic divisions. When developing these questions, the Committee shall consult with the class of administrators to be reviewed and with their supervisor.  All questionnaires shall be accompanied by a one- to two-page statement from the administrator being evaluated that addresses the following questions:

  1. What are your duties?
  2. What have been your most significant accomplishments since occupying this position or since last you were evaluated in your current position?
  3. What are your primary goals for the duration of your appointment?

All questionnaires shall begin with a question that asks respondents whether they feel that they have sufficient information to evaluate the administrator; respondents who reply that they do not shall be asked to return the questionnaire with only that question completed. All questionnaires shall ask respondents who complete more than the first question to indicate the extent of their knowledge of the administrator’s responsibilities and performance.

When preparing to evaluate a particular administrator, the Committee shall adapt the common core of questions to reflect this person’s responsibilities and any special and unique aspects of the administrator’s position or circumstances. In this process, the Committee shall consult with the administrator to be reviewed and the administrator’s supervisor.  The final decision on the composition of the questionnaire rests with the Committee.

Committee Reports (MUPIM 12.5.D)

The Committee’s final evaluation reports shall be submitted by December 1 for administrators evaluated in year five (5) and by April 15 for administrators evaluated in year three (3). Before then, the Committee shall submit a draft of the report to the administrator’s supervisor. The supervisor and the Committee (or a representative) shall meet to discuss the draft report and make any modifications deemed appropriate by the Committee. If the Committee and the supervisor disagree on the final report, the supervisor may attach a letter to the Committee report explaining the disagreement.  This letter becomes part of the final report.

In year three (3) of an administrator’s appointment, the Committee’s final report shall be promptly shared by the supervisor with the administrator being evaluated, and a summary of the Committee’s final report shall be prepared jointly by the supervising administrator and the Committee. If the administrator is continuing in his or her position for at least one (1) more year, this summary shall be submitted to the faculty within the unit. If the supervising administrator and the Committee cannot agree on the summary, they shall prepare separate summaries that shall be distributed together to the faculty within the unit.

In year five (5) of an administrator’s appointment, the All-University Faculty Committee shall cooperate with the evaluation committee established in “Appointment, Evaluation, and Reappointment of Academic Deans ” or “Evaluation and Reappointment of the Provost ” of this manual.  A summary of the final reports by the Faculty Committee and the committee established in “Appointment, Evaluation, and Reappointment of Academic Deans” or “Evaluation and Reappointment of the Provost” of this manual shall be prepared jointly by the supervising administrator and the combined evaluation committees. This summary shall be submitted to the faculty within the unit if the administrator is reappointed for another five-year term. If the supervising administrator, the Faculty Committee, and the committee established in “Appointment, Evaluation, and Reappointment of Academic Deans” or “Evaluation and Reappointment of the Provost” of this manual cannot agree on the summary, they shall prepare separate summaries which shall be distributed together to the faculty within the unit.

The Faculty Committee’s final reports and the summaries of these reports that are prepared jointly by the Committee and the supervising administrator shall include the following information:

  1. the number of surveys sent, response rate, the number of people indicating insufficient information to evaluate the administrator
  2. the mean and distribution of responses, if numerical data are reported
  3. a brief, balanced overview of the overall response to each question or set of questions, not quotations of the respondents’ actual words
  4. when the Committee feels it is appropriate, separate analyses of responses from individuals who indicated that they have a more extensive knowledge of the administrator’s responsibilities and performance and of responses from individuals who indicate that they have a less extensive knowledge of the administrator’s responsibilities and performance

In addition, the Faculty Committee’s fifth-year final report and the summary of that report shall include the Faculty Committee’s recommendation concerning whether the administrator should be reappointed for another five-year term.  If an administrator is reappointed despite the Faculty Committee’s recommendation against reappointment, the Committee may call for a vote of no confidence from the appropriate faculty. In the case of the Provost, the Associate Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, the Dean and University Librarian, and the Director of the Liberal Education Program, the appropriate faculty unit for a vote of no confidence will be Faculty Assembly.

The supervisor and the administrator being evaluated shall have access to all of the faculty responses, including survey results and transcribed copies of comments.  The Committee shall retain the questionnaires returned by faculty for a period of three (3) years from the date of the final evaluation report.

Election Procedures for the All-University Faculty Committee for Evaluation of Administrators (MUPIM 12.5.E)

A total of five (5) nominees for each position will be chosen by the single transferable vote method from a complete list of all the eligible voters in each unit. Within no less than two weeks after the ballots for nominees have been returned, a second ballot naming the nominees will be distributed to the voters in their respective units and again counted by the single transferable vote method.  For mid-term resignation/vacancies, see Section 12.5.A.  Units may adopt alternative procedures with the approval of University Senate.

Previous (Appointment and Evaluation of and Reappointment of Department Chairs)

Next (Divisional Faculty Committee for Evaluation of Administrators)

Bookmark the permalink.