Evaluation of Academic Administrators - UTDPP1047
The University of Texas at Dallas is committed to regular, substantive reviews of its academic administrators and to involvement of members of the faculty, staff, and students in these reviews.
- The Rules and Regulations of the Board of Regents, Rule 30501, Section 1 requires annual evaluation of all U.T. System employees to be used for the improvement of performance, promotion consideration, and merit salary review. Rule 31101, Section 3 of the Rules also requires that all academic administrators below the level of President receive periodic evaluations that include faculty, staff, and student input. To simplify the schedule of the review of academic administrators and to provide substantial feedback, every academic administrator at U.T. Dallas will be formally reviewed three years after the initial administrative appointment and at least every six years thereafter. The review shall be comprehensive and include input from faculty, staff, and students, and where appropriate alumni, community leaders, and other sources identified in the charge to the committee from the President or Provost. Comments by full-time faculty members in the appropriate academic unit will provide the faculty's response to the academic administrator's performance in that unit. Faculty and staff members in an academic unit are encouraged, moreover, to provide information to an academic administrator's supervising officer at any time regarding that academic administrator's performance.
- For the purpose of this policy, an academic administrator is defined as an individual who has either direct and significant responsibility for determination of the duties, support, and/or compensation for faculty or has supervisory responsibilities over major academic support functions such as the library and research. In the current administrative structure at U.T. Dallas, academic administrators include the Provost, the Vice President for Research and Innovation, the Dean of Graduate Education, the Dean of Undergraduate Education, the School Deans, the Executive Director of the Callier Center for Communication Disorders, the Dean of Libraries, the Dean of the Hobson Wildenthal Honors College, the School's Department or Program Heads, and the Associate Deans in each School. In departments in which multiple majors are offered and each major has a program head, program heads and department heads should each be evaluated.
- The President has responsibility, directly or through designees, for appointment, review, and dismissal of all administrative officers, including the Provost, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors, Department Heads, Program Heads, and Associate Deans.
- The responsibility for the review of an academic administrator, with significant involvement of and input from full-time faculty will, in general, be delegated by the President to that administrator's immediate supervisor. Thus, the Provost and School Deans normally will conduct the reviews of the academic administrators whom they supervise. The Provost may delegate some aspects of the review process to a Vice or Associate Provost.
- Review procedures:
- Reviews will normally be initiated by the administrator's immediate supervisor and may occur at any time of the academic year. The immediate supervisor will be responsible for the development of a timetable for the review process.
- The immediate supervisor or designee will be responsible for the distribution and collection of faculty and staff comment forms and for the analysis of the responses on these forms.
- Faculty and staff comment forms will be sent by the immediate supervisor to all full-time faculty and staff members in the unit of the academic administrator being evaluated. In the case of the review of the Dean of Libraries and Undergraduate and Graduate Deans, the Provost will distribute faculty and staff comment forms to all full-time faculty and full-time Academic Affairs staff. In the case of the review of the Provost or the Vice President for Research and Innovation, the President will distribute comment forms to all full-time faculty and to all full-time staff of the administrative units led by the Provost or the Vice President for Research and Innovation. In the case of the review of a school dean or the Dean of the Hobson Wildenthal Honors College, faculty comment forms will be sent to full-time faculty outside of the dean's school upon a request made to the Provost's Office. Faculty comment forms from faculty within a school will be distinguishable from those submitted by faculty outside the school. In the case of Associate Deans, Department Heads, and Program Heads, the Dean of the School will distribute faculty and staff comment forms to all full-time faculty and staff within the school or department as appropriate.
- In addition, the immediate supervisor or designee will contact relevant faculty and staff members to solicit group interviews. Individuals may also request one-on-one interviews.
- The immediate supervisor or designee will also interview students from appropriate student organizations and will hold an open forum as an additional opportunity to garner relevant student feedback. Students with declared majors within a particular school will be invited as relevant to share feedback via the open forum specific to their major's program head, department head, and/or school dean. All graduate and undergraduate students will be invited to provide comments via open forums for the Graduate and Undergraduate Deans, respectively. These open forums may be held in person or via remote conferencing software.
- To the extent allowed by law, supervisors will not reveal the identity of the sources of all written comments received in connection with the review of an academic administrator. No anonymous material other than the official surveys that correspond with this policy will be considered as part of the review. Information collected as part of the interviews and/or open forums will be summarized and not attributed to specific individuals.
- After the immediate supervisor has received and analyzed comments, as well as the summarized feedback from interviews and/or open forums, the immediate supervisor will meet with the academic administrator being reviewed to discuss the supervisor's analysis of these comments and any recommended actions as a result of the review.
- Following the immediate supervisor's meeting with the academic administrator being reviewed, the supervisor will convene a meeting to communicate his/her response to the review to the faculty members and direct report staff in the relevant academic or administrative unit. In the case of a review of the Dean of Graduate Education, Dean of Undergraduate Education, the deans of the schools, the Dean of the Hobson Wildenthal Honors College, and the Dean of Libraries, the Provost's response will be communicated to the Academic Senate and to Staff Council. The review of the Vice President for Research and Innovation and the Provost will be reported to the Senate and to the Staff Council by the President of the University.
- Upon the completion of reviews of School Deans, Department or Program Heads, and Associate Deans, these administrators will meet with the faculties of the relevant academic units to discuss issues raised by faculty in the review process. Direct report staff will also meet with the administrators.
- At the conclusion of the review process, the supervisor will forward the academic administrator's review file and the supervisor's written report containing the substance of the review to her/his own immediate supervisor.
- A summary of the report will be provided to the administrator under review and to the administrator's supervisor and will be made available to The University of Texas System's Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Once a year, the Provost will report to the Academic Senate regarding any reviews of academic administrators that have been conducted in the preceding year.
- Faculty Evaluation of Academic Administrators Survey Form
- Immediate supervisors will distribute, at a minimum, the relevant university survey forms that are attached to this policy in the review of an academic administrator under this policy.
- Any deletion or modification of the questions in the attached survey forms requires approval by the Academic Senate and by the Staff Council for staff questions.
- Issued: 1996-04-18
- Revised: 1996-06-04
- Revised: 1999-09-16
- Revised: 2007-08-23
- Revised: 2014-07-29
- Editorial Amendments: 2018-12-05
- Revised: 2022-01-03
- Editorial Amendments: 2022-02-28
- Editorial Amendments: 2022-03-25