Triennial Faculty Evaluation of Heads of Academic Units: Policies and Procedures

Purpose

Section III.B. (Triennial Evaluation of Heads of Academic units) of the RCB Bylaws states:

In accordance with Article X, Section 3, of the Statutes of Georgia State University:

The chair (head of academic unit) shall be evaluated by the faculty of the department (academic unit) at least every three years. This evaluation shall be conducted by the Dean who shall notify the President of the results of this evaluation which shall be used in the overall evaluations of the chair’s (head of academic unit’s) performance.

Consistent with this requirement of the University Statutes, the Dean will develop policies and procedures in consultation with the Executive Committee and Faculty Affairs Committee. Policies and procedures which have been reviewed and recommended by both of these committees will be incorporated in the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual.

Board of Regents policy requires that performance evaluations be conducted of all faculty members at least annually. In accordance with RCB policy, these annual evaluations are conducted for purposes of planning and development purposes in addition to evaluation (see section F (10) “Faculty Performance: Planning, Development and Evaluation” of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual). The purpose of the triennial faculty evaluation of the head of the academic unit is to provide an additional source of information to the Dean in measuring managerial performance and in improving the managerial effectiveness of the head of the academic unit.

Evaluation Process

Development and Revision of Evaluation Instrument

The Faculty Affairs Committee is responsible for developing and revising the evaluation instrument used for the triennial faculty evaluation of heads of academic units, subject to the review and approval of the Executive Committee.

In accordance with University policy on post-tenure review (as contained in Section V1I. (C) of the RCB promotion and tenure policies and procedures document), heads of academic units are excluded from the five-year post-tenure review. However, in order to accomplish the spirit of post-tenure review which is to provide for continual professional development of all faculty, the evaluation instrument used for the triennial review must address academic and professional activities as well as managerial and leadership performance.

Time and Frequency of Administration

The administration of the triennial faculty evaluation instrument is coordinated with the annual performance evaluation process by distributing, completing and summarizing the evaluation forms during the winter quarter of the third year of the appointment of the head of an academic unit and each third year thereafter. As a result, this permits the Dean time to incorporate the results of the triennial evaluation in to the normal annual faculty performance evaluation process.

Faculty Eligible to Complete Evaluation

For those academic units that have faculty budgetarily appointed to them, the evaluation instrument is distributed to all full-time tenure track and non-tenure track faculty budgetarily appointed in the academic unit. (Full-time faculty is defined to include non-tenure track faculty at any rank appointed at .60 EFT to teach a full load.) For the evaluation of those heads of academic units that do not have faculty budgetarily appointed to them (e.g., Institute of International Business), the Dean will determine whether a triennial faculty review should be conducted and the group of full-time faculty affiliated with the academic unit that would be in a position to complete the triennial evaluation.

Confidentiality and Compilation of Summary of Responses

Each evaluation form must be signed by the faculty member completing it. The evaluation form will be returned in a sealed envelope marked “personal and confidential” to the Dean. The evaluation form will remain confidential with the Dean and associate deans. Signed responses will be summarized in a manner where a summary can be provided to the head of the academic unit without breach of confidentiality. In any case, no part of any evaluation response will be photocopied and provided to the head of the academic unit.

Although University policy excludes heads of academic units from five-year post-tenure review, the results of the triennial review must be sent for comment to the Provost’s Office (per memorandum of March 2, 1995 from the Provost titled “Pre-tenure and Post-tenure Review Implementation”).

Alternative Forms of Response

In order to facilitate compilation of evaluation results, the only acceptable type of response by a faculty member is the completion of the triennial evaluation instrument as approved by the Faculty Affairs Committee and Executive Committee.

(Recommended November 1994 and revised October 1995 by the Executive Committee and the Faculty Affairs Committee)