THE UNIVERSITY OF
NORTH CAROLINA AT ASHEVILLE
FACULTY SENATE
Senate
Document Number 2512S
Date
of Senate Approval 02/09/12
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Statement
of Faculty Senate Action:
FWDC
3: Annual
Evaluation of Chairs and Program Directors
(Faculty
Handbook Sections 3.4.4; 3.3.4.; 3.3.5)
Effective date: Immediately
Summary:
This document introduces procedures for annual evaluation of chairs and program
directors that will be incorporated into the Faculty Record and annual
evaluation procedures.
Rationale:
This document addresses two issues:
1) As a
university, we have historically not provided department chairs and program
directors (CPDs) formal feedback on their performance other than at the time of
reappointment. As a result, CPDs do not
have a basis for knowing how the administration views their performance on an
ongoing basis.
2) We have
never defined how the work that CPDs do should be incorporated into the faculty
record and annual merit evaluation. Some
simply report in the service category that they served in that capacity without
any detail; others report all of their activities, both routine and episodic;
others simply state that they had reassigned time in order to serve as chair or
program director and make no mention of their work as a CPD in the faculty
record.
To address
these issues, this document institutes a formal process of annual review of
chairs and program directors which is incorporated into the annual evaluation
of faculty and establishes a separate component of annual evaluation for
administrative work, distinct from service, for those who have administrative
assignments of this kind. This document
does not seek to provide guidelines for incorporating administrative work in
other personnel evaluations such as reappointment, tenure, promotion, and
post-tenure review.
The process
for review of the administrative performance of CPDs is described below in item
1; items 2-3 are to avoid confusion between annual evaluation and evaluation
for reappointment.
Changes in Faculty Handbook
1. Insert section
3.4.4 as follows:
3.4.4
Annual Evaluation of Chairs and Program Directors
1)
By May 1, each department chair/program director (CPD) completes an Annual
Administrative Review, developed by Academic Affairs. This form allows CPDs to report their work in
this capacity beyond routine tasks, including curriculum review and revision,
faculty/staff searches, department initiatives, and community projects. The form is submitted to the Dean who is
responsible for that department or program.
2)
By May 15, the Dean completes an evaluation of the performance of the CPD with
both qualitative descriptors and a narrative evaluation. The Annual Administrative Review, with Dean’s
evaluation, is attached to the Faculty Record of the CPD before it is submitted
according to the procedures outlined in Section 3.4.2 and is
incorporated into the annual evaluation of that faculty member by being
evaluated as a separate category in addition to teaching, scholarship/creative
activity, and service.
3)
This administrative evaluation is incorporated in the determination of the
merit evaluation of the CPD’s work as a faculty member as defined in Section 3.4.3.
2. Change title of 3.3.4 from “Evaluation of Department Chairs” to “Reappointment of Department
Chairs”
3. Change title of 3.3.5 from “Evaluation of Program Directors” to “Reappointment of Program
Directors”