Evaluation of Academic Administrators
Policy Number: 184
- Date Reviewed:
- January 2015
- Responsible Office:
- Office of the President; Office of Academic and Research Affairs
- Responsible Executive:
- President; Executive Vice-President of Academic and Research Affairs
I. POLICY AND GENERAL STATEMENT
In accordance with The University of Texas System Board of Regents' Rules and Regulations, Rule 31101, Evaluation of Administrators, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston ("university") evaluates academic administrators every six years. This evaluation is in addition to the annual performance review required for all university employees.
Academic Administrator: the Executive Vice President for Academic and Research Affairs, deans, department chairs, as well as others who (a) have a title of associate dean or vice-president or above and (b) who are charged with the responsibility for oversight of academic processes within an academic unit, including but not limited to academic affairs, faculty affairs, student affairs, and admissions. These criteria apply regardless of whether an individual is appointed with or without compensation. Additionally, assistant deans with a greater than thirty-percent appointment may be reviewed if it is determined that they have significant decision making authority related to faculty and/or student matters.
Evaluations of Academic Administrators must be scheduled at least every six years but may be scheduled more frequently at the discretion of each school’s dean and the President. The evaluations are conducted in accordance with the processes outlined below. Guidelines for the review of department chairs can be found here.
A. Initiating the Evaluation
The Office of Academic and Research Affairs will prepare an annual report identifying the Academic Administrators due for review during the upcoming year, based on their date of appointment to an Academic Administrator role. These reports will be provided to the President and to the deans of each respective school. The President is responsible for initiating and overseeing the evaluation of Academic Administrators who are under the President’s immediate supervision. The deans are responsible for initiating and overseeing the evaluation of Academic Administrators whose primary appointment is within their respective schools.
B. Appointment of Evaluation Committees
Evaluation Committees will be appointed for one year terms. The President will appoint a committee to review academic administrators who are under the President’s immediate supervision. Each dean will appoint a committee to review academic administrators in his or her school. Each school’s Evaluation Committee will review all Academic Administrators scheduled for evaluation in that school during that year and should include the following representation: four full-time faculty members and two current Academic Administrators. The President or respective dean will appoint one of the members as Chair.
Academic Administrators and faculty members who are scheduled for evaluation that year are not eligible to serve on an Evaluation Committee. Members of an Evaluation Committee may not serve consecutive annual terms.
C. Charge of the Evaluation Committee
The Evaluation Committee will:
- Conduct the evaluation of Academic Administrators as assigned by the President or dean. Work closely with the President or dean on the format of the evaluation.
- Review the most recent prior evaluation of the Academic Administrator under review, when available.
- Solicit self-evaluations from the individual under review. The self-evaluations may include a summary of expectations or objectives and statements about the degree to which the expectations were realized or the objectives accomplished. It is the responsibility of the Academic Administrator under review to provide the self-evaluation to the Committee when requested.
- Solicit input from faculty members in the academic unit(s) reporting to and/or affected directly by the Academic Administrator under review. The Committee should also seek formal or informal student and staff input, if applicable, and incorporate such views into the evaluation. The Committee may conduct interviews or request information in a format that is appropriate for the nature and sensitivity of the issues involved.
- Determine whether to meet with the Academic Administrator under review during the course of the evaluation.
- Use all of the above sources of information and the “Factors for Consideration in Evaluating Academic Administrators” to develop a draft and final evaluation Report.
D. Communication of Findings
A written draft evaluation report will be developed by the Evaluation Committee and provided to the Academic Administrator under review. The Academic Administrator has fourteen (14) calendar days from receipt of the draft evaluation report to provide comments to the Evaluation Committee. Any comments that the Academic Administrator submits on the draft evaluation report may be considered for inclusion in the final evaluation report. Based on the comments, the Evaluation Committee may revise the report as appropriate in drafting the final evaluation report.
The final evaluation report must include a description and summary evaluation of the input from faculty.
The final evaluation report will be provided to the Academic Administrator under review and to his or her immediate supervisor. The report will also be made available to the Executive Vice President for Academic and Research Affairs who will forward it to the President, and the Executive Vice Chancellor of Health Affairs of the UT System.
|Office of the President||713-500-3010||http://www.uthouston.edu/president/presidents_staff.htm|