Handbook of Operating Procedures
Chapter 1 - Personnel - Administration
Previous Publication Date: November 16, 2023
Publication Date: April 16, 2024
Policy Reviewed Date: 10/18/2022
Policy Owner: VP for Academic Affairs

1.03 Evaluation of Academic Administrators

I. POLICY STATEMENT

This policy supports The University of Texas System (UT System) Regents’ Rules and Regulations 31101 Evaluation of Administrators, which states that faculty members at institutions in the UT System shall have a major role in the governance of their respective institutions.

II. RATIONALE

This policy sets out those processes and procedures for evaluation of academic administrators, specifically, the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs, Deans, and Department Chairs/School Directors. The evaluation process is designed as a collaborative process involving the students, staff, faculty, Department Chairs/School Directors, Deans, and the Provost.

III. SCOPE

This policy applies to academic administrators, specifically, the Provost, Deans, and Department Chairs/School Directors.

IV. WEBSITE ADDRESS FOR THIS POLICY

http://www.utsa.edu/hop/chapter1/1.03.html

V. RELATED STATUTES, POLICIES, REQUIREMENTS OR STANDARDS

UTSA or UT System Policies or the Board of Regents' Rules & Regulations

UT System Policy 182 - Selection, Appointment, Roles and Responsibilities, Evaluation, and Training of Department Chairs at Academic Institutions
UT System Board of Regents' Rule 31101 - Evaluation of Administrators
UT System Board of Regetns' Rule 30501 - Employee Evaluations

VI. CONTACTS

If you have any questions about HOP Policy 1.03, Evaluation of Academic Administrators, contact the following office:

Academic Affairs
210-458-4110

You may also contact the Office of the Dean of the Respective College or the Respective Academic Department/School.

VII. DEFINITIONS

Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs: The Provost reports directly to the President and is the chief academic officer who provides guidance and leadership for all of the university's academic community. The Provost is responsible for overseeing the academic colleges and academic support areas, including initiatives that support the academic mission. The Provost is charged with ensuring the quality of academic programs offered; supporting the hiring of faculty who excel in their field, managing the recruitment of academic leadership at the college and department levels, and facilitating the growth of the university. A high priority of this office is to guide the university toward the achievement of its strategic goals.

Dean: Deans of academic colleges report directly to the Provost. They have the responsibility under the Provost for the operation of their college and are expected to provide effective leadership and organizational management, actively seek input from their Department Chairs and faculty, maintain an environment of collegiality and shared governance, effectively interact with students, faculty, and staff, engage in external fundraising and outreach activities appropriate to the college as needed, engage in strategic planning, provide leadership in faculty and staff recruitment and development and engage in academic program development.

Department Chair/School Director: The heads of the academic departments of the colleges report directly to the Dean of the college. The Department Chair/School Director is responsible for representing the interests of their faculty on policies, plans, and procedures that affect their areas. They have the responsibility under the Dean for the operation of their departments/schools and are expected to provide sound organizational management, actively seek input from their faculty, maintain an environment of collegiality and shared governance, initiate and support activities that promote student success, engage in external fundraising and outreach appropriate to the department/school as needed, contribute to strategic planning, provide leadership in faculty and staff recruitment and professional development and, engage in academic program development.

VIII. RESPONSIBILITIES

President
1. Evaluates Provost no later than the end of a six-year period.
2. Consults with Deans, other executive officers, Department Chairs/School Directors, faculty, students, and staff who have direct knowledge of the Provost's performance.
Provost
1. Evaluates Deans no later than the end of a six-year period.
2. Consults with Department Chairs/School Directors, faculty, students, and staff in the college and in other colleges as appropriate, as well as other Deans and people deemed appropriate.
3. Reviews and approves Dean's recommendation to remove Department Chair/School Directors.
Dean
1. Engages department faculty on the needs and expectations for Department Chairs/School Directors.
2. Evaluates Department Chairs/School Directors annually.
3. Evaluates Department Chairs/School Directors no later than the end of a three-year period of service for purposes of reappointment.
4. Is responsible for conducting periodic meetings with Department Chairs/School Directors to ensure roles and responsibilities are being met and needs of the department are being addressed.

IX. PROCEDURES

Evaluation Criteria
1. Criteria for an academic administrator evaluation should reflect job descriptions and duties performed at the level of the position.
2. Criteria may include such managerial quality 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.
3. The assessment of academic administrators should also include
  1. Support for quality teaching, research, service,
  2. Academic program development,
  3. Shared governance,
  4. The fair resolution of student concerns,
  5. Enrollment management,
  6. Faculty workload and course scheduling,
  7. Involvement in university affairs and
  8. The recruitment, evaluation, and development of highly qualified and talented faculty and staff.
Evaluation of the Provost
1. The evaluation of the Provost is a continuing process and is the responsibility of the President.
2. The President may seek such formal or informal faculty, student, staff and administrator consultations as he or she deems advisable.
3. The Provost shall be formally evaluated not later than the end of a six-year period of service.
4. The President follows the evaluative principles and criteria identified in IX.A and shall consult with:
  1. The Deans of the colleges and others directly reporting to the Provost,
  2. Other executive officers
  3. Academic Department Chairs/School Directors,
  4. Faculty, students, staff who have direct knowledge of the Provost's performance and the position's tasks, to include an opportunity for additional commentary by other faculty,
  5. Others as the President may deem appropriate, and
  6. The Provost on his or her self-evaluation.
Evaluation of Deans
1. The evaluation of the Dean is a continuing process and is the responsibility of the Provost, to whom they directly report.
2. The Provost may engage in such informal faculty, student, staff, and administrator consultation as he or she deems advisable.
3. Each Dean shall be formally evaluated not later than the end of a six-year period of service.
4. Normally, formal evaluation shall be conducted during the fall semester.
5. In a formal evaluation, the Provost follows the evaluative principles and criteria identified in IX.A and shall consult with:
  1. The Department Chairs/School Directors in the college,
  2. Faculty, students, and staff in the college and in other colleges as appropriate, including providing an opportunity for input by all faculty members in the affected college,
  3. The Deans of other colleges,
  4. Other persons as the Provost may deem appropriate, and
  5. The Dean on his or her written self-evaluation.
6. A developmental review shall also be conducted by the Provost 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.
7. The decision concerning reappointment, non-reappointment, or reassignment is made by the President upon the recommendation of the Provost.
Evaluation of Department Chair/School Directorss
1. Department Chairs/School Directors shall be evaluated by Deans as part of the regular annual evaluation process.
2. In addition to annual reviews, Deans shall conduct periodic meetings with Department Chairs/School Directors to ensure that roles and responsibilities are being met and areas of department, school/college, and institution priority are being addressed.
3. A Department Chair’s/School Directors performance should be reviewed relative to the assigned roles and responsibilities in Section 5, UTS182.
4. Formal review
  1. At the beginning of the final year of their term, a Department Chair/School Director should undergo an in-depth review process, including input from department faculty and staff.
  2. In a formal evaluation, the Dean follows the evaluative principles and criteria identified in IX.A and shall consult with
    1. the voting members of the deparment faculty,
    2. students and staff in the department,
    3. faculty and students in other colleges as appropriate,
    4. such other persons as the Dean may deem appropriate, and
    5. the Department Chair/School Director on his or her self-evaluation.
  3. Following the formal evaluation, the Dean shall report the results of the evaluation and his or her recommendation to the Provost.
  4. The Provost will make the final decision concerning reappointment, non-reappointment, or reassignment of the Department Chair/School Director.

X. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION

None

XI. FORMS AND TOOLS/ONLINE PROCESSES