Resolution on Review of Administrators

Be it resolved that the New Brunswick Faculty Council recommends the creation of a Committee consisting of members of the Council and other faculty governance groups, and of representatives of the university administration to develop a system for reviewing the performance and activities of administrators. This Committee should complete its work within one year, with implementation of administrator review to begin in the academic year 2001-2002. The system developed should include the following characteristics:

Designation of administrators to be reviewed. The system should include (at a minimum) all faculty administrators (e.g., directors, deans) and other campus-wide and system-wide administrators whose performance directly inpacts the critical university missions of teaching research and service.

Reviewers. Faculty, administrators and students should all provide input to the review process. It may be appropriate to have individuals from outside the administrative unit (even from outside the university) provide input in some cases. The scope of inclusion will be a function of the administrator being reviewed. While a committee may be the appropriate structure for the actual review, input should be sought from the largest relevant group available. The use of a scanned rating form similar to that used for student evaluation would make the process administratively feasible.

Basis for Review. A number of criteria emerged from the study of other AAU public systems. Several areas that might be included in the scanned rating system are:

• Familiarity with performance in position (as a screen)
• Faculty and program development
• Fairness and ethics
• Leadership
• Communication
• Functional Competence
• Openness to Diverse Points of View
• Commitment to Cultural Diversity
• Interpersonal Skills

At the same time, a narrative should be developed based on the goals of the administrative unit and the degree to which the administrator has facilitated the achievement of those goals. (Indiana University and the University of Iowa both provide examples of a review approach that would be appropriate).

Review Timing. A minimal review should occur annually. An in-depth review is appropriate prior to reappointment to administrative office, or at a minimum of five year intervals. In-depth reviews should also be triggered by request of the administrator, request of the administrator's appointing officer or faculty petition.

Uses of the System. Review results should be used both for administrative and developmental purposes at the individual administrator level. Administrative uses should include input to reappointment or continuance in office decisions, and to rewards decisions. Developmental uses should include input to mentoring processes. Reviews should also provide input to improvement of administrative processes of the University.