3.3.1 Evaluation of Academic Administrators

A. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the annual and periodic evaluation of academic administrators at The University of Texas at Tyler. The information from the evaluation process will be used to assist in making decisions regarding:

  1. improving the academic administrator's job performance;
  2. awarding merit increases; and
  3. continuing the administrator in his/her position.

B. Persons Affected

Academic administrators, Faculty, Administrators.

C. Definitions

Academic administrators at UT Tyler include the provost, deans of colleges, chairs, directors, and assistant or associate deans who have management responsibilities for an academic unit/department/school.

In this document, when the term “chair,” is used, it also refers to the unit head of an academic department as well as director, who is the head of an organized school/unit/program.

D. Policy

All Academic Administrators shall be evaluated annually. 

E. Responsibilities

The Office of the Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs is responsible for the administration of this policy.

F. Procedures

The supervisor of an Academic Administrator shall evaluate annually each Academic Administrator he/she oversees. The evaluations of deans of colleges, chairs, directors, and assistant or associate deans who have management responsibilities for an academic unit/department/school must include an opportunity for anonymous input from all faculty in that unit in addition to a review of administrative performance, teaching (if appropriate), research/creative scholarship (if appropriate), and service.

Results of the annual evaluations will be communicated in writing to the administrator being evaluated and to the Provost/President for review.

Every academic administrator shall have a comprehensive evaluation every four years following initial appointment to the position. The comprehensive evaluation of academic administrators is focused on administrative activities. The evaluation is intended to assist in identifying those areas of performance which are strong; those areas of performance in which improvement is needed; and those aspects of the position which contribute to or hinder administrative performance.

The comprehensive evaluation of each academic administrator is the responsibility of the individual's immediate supervisor. In addition, the comprehensive evaluation will be more extensive and must provide an opportunity for significant anonymous input by all faculty members in the administrator’s unit(s).

The manner of the review of deans of colleges, chairs, directors, and assistant or associate deans who have management responsibilities for an academic unit/department/school should be agreed upon in advance by the administrator and the supervisor. While the opinions and participation of the faculty are required, the supervisor may solicit input from any source, including staff, students, and campus peers he/she believes may contribute to the evaluation.

After completion of the evaluation, the supervisor will prepare a draft of the report, discuss it with the administrator, make revisions if appropriate and forward it to the Provost/President for review. Consistent with the purpose of the evaluation, the final report will be distributed only to the person being evaluated and to those administrative officials to and through whom the report is submitted.

G. Review

The Divisional Head for this policy is the Provost. This policy shall be reviewed every five years or sooner if necessary by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the Faculty Senate.

ORIGINALLY APPROVED: 12/01/2001 

LAST AMENDED: 11/09/2011

AMENDED: 02/2019