1.02 Appointment and Evaluation of Vice Presidents, Deans, and Department Chairs
The Rules and Regulations of the Board of Regents, Part One, Chapter II, Section 17 state:
"The Board delegates to the Chancellor and the Executive Vice Chancellor having responsibility for the institution and they, in turn, delegate to the president of each component institution the responsibility for the appointment and dismissal of all other administrative officers of each component institution, including vice presidents, deans, directors and their equivalents. However, prior approval of the appropriate Executive Vice Chancellor shall be necessary for each such permanent or acting appointment and for each such dismissal whether from permanent or acting appointment. All such other administrative officers serve without fixed terms and subject to the pleasure of the chief administrative officer of the institution and the aforesaid approval of the Executive Vice Chancellor.""The Board delegates to the Chancellor and the Executive Vice Chancellor having responsibility for the institution and they, in turn, delegate to the president of each component institution the responsibility for the permanent or acting appointment of department chairmen, department heads, and their equivalents. Such department chairmen, department heads and their equivalents serve without fixed terms and subject to the pleasure of the chief administrative officer of the institution."
"The Board endorses the principle of reasonable faculty and student consultation in the selection of administrative officers of the component institutions, and the primary operating units, and expects the president, as he or she deems appropriate, to consult in the selection process with the representatives of the faculty and student body. However, the president of the component institution is responsible for executing the duties of the office and consequently shall not be bound by nominations to administrative positions by campus selection committees, and the Handbook of Operating Procedures of each component institution shall so state."
All vice presidents, deans and department chairs are evaluated on an annual basis, as required by System policy.
A. Procedure for Nominating Deans of Colleges
For advice on the appointment of a Dean of a College, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs shall appoint a search advisory committee composed of at least two tenured members of the college faculty selected in consultation with college faculty, two general faculty members, at least one of whom shall be from another college, one department chair, and other persons as the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs may deem appropriate. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs shall appoint the committee chairperson. Except for compelling reasons stated by the committee in its final report, three or more nominees shall be submitted to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs by the advisory committee. If the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs declines or, because of rejection of the post by all nominees, is unable to appoint any of the nominees, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs may request the committee to make additional nominations, submit nominations to the committee, or may invoke such different procedures for selection of the appointee as the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs deems appropriate, provided that such different procedures shall include consultation with the committee before the President offers the position to any candidate. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will submit the committee's final report, which shall include an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of finalists in terms of position-related criteria and qualifications, along with his or her recommendation, to the President, who will make the final selection and appointment.
B. Evaluation of Academic Administrators
The evaluation of academic administrators is the responsibility of their immediate supervisor. The individual to whom they report may also seek formal or informal faculty, student and staff consultation as he or she deems advisable, and shall, on a periodic basis as provided below, incorporate such views in an evaluation. When soliciting the views of others, the methods guiding this evaluative input emphasize career development and assessment, multi-rater participation using a team approach to obtain feedback, valid and reliable career assessment obtained through views from those most frequently in contact with, and highly familiar with tasks performed by, the administrator, and the responsibility of the direct supervisor to conduct the evaluation, not limited to the views of others. Those involved as raters should include the administrator under review (self assessment), peers and colleagues (lateral associates), members of one's support team (subordinate associates) and relevant others in the organization. Assessment is of actual performance of administrators as required by their particular position, based on rater observations and interaction with them at work. The immediate supervisor administers the solicitation of rater views; they are anonymous and raters should be provided guidelines that improve the quality of their performance as raters, including an option not to rate on factors with which they have limited familiarity, and/or a method for measuring knowledge of factors and their relative importance.
The criteria for academic administrator evaluation should reflect job descriptions and duties performed at the level of the position, as well as such central performance factors as leadership, communicating effectively, planning and organizing, problem analysis and decision making, administration, coordinating and controlling resources, internal control, courtesy and service support, creativity and innovation, crisis management, interpersonal skills, organizational skills, teamwork and team building, mentoring and developing, and external relations. Within this framework, the assessment of academic administrators should also include support for quality teaching, research, service, academic program development, and shared governance, the resolution of student concerns, enrollment management, faculty workload and course scheduling, involvement in university affairs and the recruitment, evaluation and development of quality and diverse faculty and staff.
Evaluation of Deans of Colleges is a continuing process and is the responsibility of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, to whom they immediately report. In the continuing process of evaluation of the administrative performance of Deans, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs may seek such formal or informal faculty, student, staff, and administrator consultation as he or she deems advisable.
Under normal circumstances a Dean shall be formally evaluated not later than the end of a six-year period of service. Normally, formal evaluation shall be conducted during the fall semester. In a formal evaluation, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs follows the evaluative principles and criteria enumerated above and shall (1) consult with the Department Chairs in the college, (2) consult with faculty, students and staff in the college and in other colleges as appropriate, to include an opportunity for input by all faculty members in the affected college, (3) consult with the Deans of other colleges, (4) consult with other persons as the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs may deem appropriate, and (5) consult with the Dean on his or her written self-evaluation. The decision concerning reappointment or non-reappointment is made by the President upon the recommendation of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
A developmental review may also be conducted by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs after the third year of service. It will normally be less extensive but shall consider the same performance elements as the formal review which is conducted in the sixth year.
Evaluation of academic Department Chairs is a continuing process and is the responsibility of the Dean of the College. In the continuing process of evaluation of the administrative performance of academic Department Chairs, the Dean may seek such formal or informal faculty, student, staff and administrator consultation as he or she deems advisable. At the request of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Dean shall prepare and submit to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs a report evaluating the administrative performance of an academic Department Chair.
Under normal circumstances a Department Chair shall be formally evaluated not later than the end of a three year period of service. Normally, formal evaluation shall be conducted during the fall semester. In a formal evaluation, the Dean follows the evaluative principles and criteria enumerated above and shall consult with (1) the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, (2) the voting members of the department faculty, (3) students and staff in the department, (4) faculty and students in other colleges as appropriate, (5) such other persons as the Dean may deem appropriate, and (6) the Department Chair on his or her written self-evaluation. Following the formal evaluation, the Dean shall report the results of the evaluation and his or her recommendation to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will submit the Dean's evaluation report, along with his or her recommendation, to the President, who will make the final decision concerning reappointment or non-reappointment of the Department Chair.
Evaluation of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs is a continuing process and is the responsibility of the President. In this continuing process of administrative performance review, the President may seek such formal or informal faculty, student, staff and administrator consultations as he or she deems advisable.
Under normal circumstances a Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs shall be formally evaluated not later than the end of a six year period of service. In a formal evaluation the President follows the evaluative principles and criteria enumerated above and shall (1) consult with the Deans of the Colleges and others directly reporting to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, (2) consult with other Executive Officers, (3) consult with academic Department Chairs, (4) consult with faculty, students and staff who have direct knowledge of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs' performance and the position's tasks, to include an opportunity for additional commentary by other faculty, (5) consult with others as the President may deem appropriate, and (6) consult with the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs on his or her self-evaluation. The decision concerning reappointment or non-reappointment is made by the President with the approval of the UT System Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.