3.2.10 Evaluation of Administrators

Commission Standard: The institution evaluates the effectiveness of its administrators, including the chief executive officer, on a periodic basis .

Status: In Compliance

Rationale: Western expects administrators to show high levels of personal integrity, appropriate skills and abilities, and demonstrated effectiveness. Written performance appraisals are conducted at least annually on all employees, including the president, the Administrative Council, deans, directors, and department heads. The performance appraisal system also includes an optional but recommended mid-year performance review based on specific performance objectives.

Western's system of appraisals serves to promote professional growth and institutional improvement and also provides information pertinent to salaries and other human resource decisions.

Evaluation of the President

The president is evaluated annually by Western's board of regents. According to board bylaws , Section VI.2.A, the appraisal focuses on the president's overall management of the institution:

The President shall be evaluated, in executive session, at the annual meeting of the Board, according to written objectives, specific and general, developed by the President in conjunction with the Board and presented to the Board at the outset of each academic year. The Board shall have the discretion to obtain the services of an outside evaluator to assist the Board in the evaluation of the President.

The University Senate annually surveys faculty opinions on the president's job performance, and the Faculty Regent reports these results to the board of regents.

Evaluation of Administrative Council Members

The eleven-member Administrative Council is evaluated by the president annually in a comprehensive process focused on management of the individual's division and external relationships, including those with the surrounding community.

Evaluation of College Deans and Other Academic Administrators

Western has a well-established process for regular, comprehensive evaluation of college deans and other academic administrators. The process encompasses three major elements: an annual survey of faculty opinions about the performance of department heads, college deans and the provost conducted by the Office of Institutional Research; annual written evaluations of the provost by the university president, the college deans by the provost, and the academic department heads by the college deans; and comprehensive reviews at five-year intervals for deans and four-year intervals for department heads.

Evaluation of College Deans

Deans are evaluated annually by the provost for leadership and management skills and their contributions to the university's strategic plan, Challenging the Spirit . Each dean establishes performance goals for the coming year and reports on his or her success at meeting those of the previous year. On a rotating five-year cycle deans are also formally evaluated by their faculty, who complete a special evaluation form and recommend for or against continuation. At the same time an outside reviewer assesses the dean's work in a written report, and the provost interviews department heads and faculty and finally recommends the dean's continuation or non-continuation to the president.

Evaluation of Department Heads and Directors

Directors and heads of non-academic departments are evaluated annually by the vice president having administrative authority in their areas, while college deans evaluate academic department heads and directors. These evaluations use both the established performance appraisal process and other criteria specifically related to the goals of the division or college. The Department Heads Manual for academic department heads describes the process in detail.

In addition to annual evaluations by the dean, every four years each department head is evaluated in depth, and a recommendation is made regarding re-appointment for an additional four-year term. Faculty input, including a non-binding referendum by tenured and tenure-track faculty, is used by the dean in making the recommendation for re-appointment.

Faculty Input in Evaluation of Academic Administrators

Based on a policy approved in 1983, each year academic department heads and deans (including assistant and associate deans) are assessed by their faculty, and the provost is assessed by faculty across the university. Faculty respond to a standard set of evaluation items, with space for written comments. Evaluations are anonymous. The Office of Institutional Research compiles results of the evaluations and transcribes the comments. Results are distributed as follows:

Department Head Evaluations

Statistical summaries and transcribed comments are provided to the department head and to the appropriate dean.

Dean Evaluations

Statistical summaries and transcribed comments are provided to the dean and the provost.

Vice President for Academic Affairs Evaluation

Statistical summaries and transcribed comments are provided to the provost and the president.

Reverse Appraisals for Supervisors

Another element of the university's performance appraisal system is that of reverse appraisals submitted voluntarily and confidentially to the next level supervisor. Employees are encouraged but not required to complete reverse appraisals, which are used in their supervisors' performance appraisals.