quote:

---

Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"I just re-read the HA article comparing USM's situation with SACS to Auburn's situation, and I had a question.  Has USM ever had any sort of university-wide evaluation of administrators (Thames included)?  I saw that this was cited as one of the issues at Auburn, but I don't ever remember an evaluation of this sort happening while I was working at USM (1995-2003).  If someone knows differently, please inform us."

---

Yes, the Faculty Senate has an Administration Evaluation Committee that conducts the faculty evaluation of Chairs, Deans, Provosts and President.   Last year was the first time in several years that both the Provost and President were evaluated.  Results are sent to the person evaluated and their superior.  The President's evaluation was sent to him and the IHL Board.  The Faculty Senate President also gets copies of the evaluation of the Provosts and the President.  Evaluations of faculty and administrators are done with the stipulation that the results are not to be made public.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: RF
" Yes, the Faculty Senate has an Administration Evaluation Committee that conducts the faculty evaluation of Chairs, Deans, Provosts and President.   Last year was the first time in several years that both the Provost and President were evaluated.  Results are sent to the person evaluated and their superior.  The President's evaluation was sent to him and the IHL Board.  The Faculty Senate President also gets copies of the evaluation of the Provosts and the President.  Evaluations of faculty and administrators are done with the stipulation that the results are not to be made public."

---

Shouldn't the results be made public in some aggregate form (so that individual depts/people could not be identified)?  What is the purpose of keeping the results a secret?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: truth4usm/AH
"Shouldn't the results be made public in some aggregate form (so that individual depts/people could not be identified)?  What is the purpose of keeping the results a secret?"

---

I recall a time when the students at some other universities took it upon themselves to conduct evaluations of the faculty. They published the results and made them available to the university community. The faculty member's name appeared along with the quantitative or qualitative evaluation. Some of those attempts amounted to not much more than popularity contests, but they were interesting. All of the faculty grabbed one of those booklets to read about themseves when the results were published. I can't recall that any administrators were evaluated in that manner but I suppose that the administrators performance is usually of little concern to students. I am surprised that there has been no consideration of the faculty here taking it upon themselves to conduct formal evaluations of their administrators - and making those evaluations available to the university community. Hmmmm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Biography
"<snip> I am surprised that there has been no consideration of the faculty here taking it upon themselves to conduct formal evaluations of their administrators - and making those evaluations available to the university community. Hmmmm."

---

Best practices at good (accredited) universities include the periodic evaluation of administrators by faculty, staff, and students alike.  The process is transparent, and the results are shared with those doing the evaluating (after removing identifying information, etc.).  This is not a personnel matter, as those doing the evaluating are not the immediate superiors of the administrators.  Again, one more area where USM is deficient.