Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Agriculture
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 50 (46.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of 50
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
50
4.24
5
5
1
1.05
0.15
50
4.08
5
4
1
1.06
0.15
50
4.08
5
4
1
1.11
0.16
50
4.12
5
5
1
1.24
0.18
50
4.32
5
5
1
1.14
0.16
50
4.12
5
5
1
1.21
0.17
49
4.35
5
5
1
1.15
0.16
43
4.26
5
5
1
1.10
0.17
47
4.28
5
4
1
0.92
0.13
50
4.10
5
5
1
1.28
0.18
47
3.96
5
5
1
1.38
0.20
50
3.74
5
4
1
1.26
0.18
48
4.27
5
4
2
0.86
0.12
50
4.06
5
4
1
1.17
0.17
50
4.12
5
4
1
1.03
0.15
46
4.15
5
5
1
1.25
0.18
780
4.14
5
5
1
1.14
0.04
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
2%
7
14%
3
6%
0
0%
3
6%
0
0%
2
4%
0
0%
0
0%
4
8%
20
3%
2
3
2
17
26
50
2
3
5
19
21
50
3
2
5
18
22
50
4
2
6
10
28
50
3
2
3
10
32
50
3
4
4
12
27
50
4
0
3
10
32
49
2
2
4
10
25
43
1
2
3
18
23
47
4
4
3
11
28
50
4
6
4
7
26
47
4
4
12
11
19
50
0
3
4
18
23
48
4
1
6
16
23
50
2
2
6
18
22
50
4
2
3
11
26
46
46
42
73
216
403
780
4.0%
6.0%
4.0%
34.0%
52.0%
100%
4.0%
6.0%
10.0%
38.0%
42.0%
100%
6.0%
4.0%
10.0%
36.0%
44.0%
100%
8.0%
4.0%
12.0%
20.0%
56.0%
100%
6.0%
4.0%
6.0%
20.0%
64.0%
100%
6.0%
8.0%
8.0%
24.0%
54.0%
100%
8.2%
0.0%
6.1%
20.4%
65.3%
100%
4.7%
4.7%
9.3%
23.3%
58.1%
100%
2.1%
4.3%
6.4%
38.3%
48.9%
100%
8.0%
8.0%
6.0%
22.0%
56.0%
100%
8.5%
12.8%
8.5%
14.9%
55.3%
100%
8.0%
8.0%
24.0%
22.0%
38.0%
100%
0.0%
6.3%
8.3%
37.5%
47.9%
100%
8.0%
2.0%
12.0%
32.0%
46.0%
100%
4.0%
4.0%
12.0%
36.0%
44.0%
100%
8.7%
4.3%
6.5%
23.9%
56.5%
100%
5.9%
5.4%
9.4%
27.7%
51.7%
100%
8.6
8.0
8.0
6.3
8.4
5.6
10.5
8.8
13.7
4.9
3.3
3.8
13.7
7.8
10.0
6.2
7.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College Ag Sci and Natural Resource
Agricultural and Applied Economics
Chair: Phillip N. Johnson
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 10 (76.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
10
3.80
5
4
2
1.08
0.34
10
3.80
5
4
1
1.25
0.39
10
4.00
5
4
2
1.10
0.35
10
3.80
5
4
1
1.17
0.37
10
4.20
5
4
2
0.87
0.28
10
4.10
5
4.5
2
1.14
0.36
10
4.00
5
4
1
1.18
0.37
10
4.00
5
4.5
2
1.18
0.37
9
4.33
5
4
3
0.67
0.22
10
3.70
5
4
1
1.27
0.40
10
3.30
5
3.5
1
1.62
0.51
10
3.30
5
3
1
1.35
0.43
10
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.24
10
4.10
5
4.5
1
1.22
0.39
10
4.20
5
4
2
0.87
0.28
7
4.14
5
4
3
0.83
0.31
156
3.94
5
4
1
1.10
0.09
No-Response out of 10
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
10%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
30%
4
3%
0
2
1
4
3
10
1
1
0
5
3
10
0
2
0
4
4
10
1
0
2
4
3
10
0
1
0
5
4
10
0
2
0
3
5
10
1
0
1
4
4
10
0
2
1
2
5
10
0
0
1
4
4
9
1
1
1
4
3
10
2
2
1
1
4
10
1
2
3
1
3
10
0
0
2
4
4
10
1
0
1
3
5
10
0
1
0
5
4
10
0
0
2
2
3
7
8
16
16
55
61
156
0.0%
20.0%
10.0%
40.0%
30.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
0.0%
50.0%
30.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
30.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
50.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
30.0%
50.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
10.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
44.4%
44.4%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
40.0%
30.0%
100%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
40.0%
100%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
10.0%
30.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
30.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
50.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
28.6%
42.9%
100%
5.1%
10.3%
10.3%
35.3%
39.1%
100%
3.5
4.0
4.0
7.0
9.0
4.0
8.0
3.5
No low
ratings
3.5
1.3
1.3
No low
ratings
8.0
9.0
No low
ratings
4.8
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College Ag Sci and Natural Resource
Ag Education and Communications
Chair: Steven D. Fraze
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 6 (37.5%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
6
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.15
6
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.19
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
4.50
5
4.5
4
0.50
0.20
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.19
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
6
4.50
5
4.5
4
0.50
0.20
6
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.15
6
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.19
6
4.50
5
5
3
0.76
0.31
6
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.19
96
4.80
5
5
3
0.27
0.03
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
1
5
6
0
0
0
2
4
6
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
3
3
6
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
2
4
6
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
3
3
6
0
0
0
1
5
6
0
0
0
2
4
6
0
0
1
1
4
6
0
0
0
2
4
6
0
0
1
17
78
96
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
16.7%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
17.7%
81.3%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College Ag Sci and Natural Resource
Animal and Food Sciences
Chair : Michael W. Orth
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 9 (34.6%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
`
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
9
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
9
3.89
5
4
1
1.20
0.40
9
4.00
5
4
2
1.15
0.38
9
3.67
5
4
1
1.56
0.52
9
3.44
5
4
1
1.64
0.55
9
3.56
5
5
1
1.71
0.57
9
3.56
5
4
1
1.64
0.55
9
3.78
5
5
1
1.62
0.54
8
4.00
5
4.5
1
1.32
0.47
9
4.00
5
4
2
1.05
0.35
9
3.33
5
4
1
1.70
0.57
9
3.67
5
5
1
1.70
0.57
9
3.11
5
3
1
1.37
0.46
9
3.78
5
4
2
1.13
0.38
9
3.56
5
4
1
1.34
0.45
9
3.67
5
4
1
1.15
0.38
9
3.56
5
4
1
1.64
0.55
143
3.66
5
4
1
1.43
0.12
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
11%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
1
0
1
4
3
9
0
2
0
3
4
9
2
0
1
2
4
9
2
1
1
1
4
9
2
1
1
0
5
9
2
1
0
2
4
9
2
0
1
1
5
9
1
0
1
2
4
8
0
1
2
2
4
9
2
2
0
1
4
9
2
1
0
1
5
9
2
0
4
1
2
9
0
2
1
3
3
9
1
1
2
2
3
9
1
0
2
4
2
9
2
1
0
2
4
9
22
13
17
31
60
143
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
44.4%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
22.2%
0.0%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
22.2%
0.0%
11.1%
22.2%
44.4%
100%
22.2%
11.1%
11.1%
11.1%
44.4%
100%
22.2%
11.1%
11.1%
0.0%
55.6%
100%
22.2%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
44.4%
100%
22.2%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
55.6%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
12.5%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
22.2%
22.2%
44.4%
100%
22.2%
22.2%
0.0%
11.1%
44.4%
100%
22.2%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
55.6%
100%
22.2%
0.0%
44.4%
11.1%
22.2%
100%
0.0%
22.2%
11.1%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
11.1%
11.1%
22.2%
22.2%
33.3%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
44.4%
22.2%
100%
22.2%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
44.4%
100%
15.4%
9.1%
11.9%
21.7%
42.0%
100%
7.0
3.5
3.0
1.7
1.7
2.0
3.0
6.0
6.0
1.3
2.0
1.5
3.0
2.5
6.0
2.0
2.6
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College Ag Sci and Natural Resource
Landscape Architecture
Chair: Charles H. Klein
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 5 (83.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
3.20
5
4
1
1.47
0.66
5
3.20
5
3
1
1.33
0.59
5
3.40
5
4
1
1.36
0.61
5
3.00
5
3
1
1.41
0.63
5
3.40
5
3
1
1.50
0.67
5
3.00
5
3
1
1.41
0.63
5
3.80
5
4
1
1.47
0.66
4
3.00
5
3
1
1.41
0.71
5
3.60
5
4
1
1.36
0.61
5
3.20
5
4
1
1.47
0.66
4
3.50
5
3.5
2
1.12
0.56
5
2.60
5
2
1
1.36
0.61
4
3.50
5
3.5
2
1.12
0.56
5
2.80
5
3
1
1.60
0.72
5
3.60
5
4
1
1.50
0.67
5
3.00
5
3
1
1.79
0.80
77
3.24
5
3.25
1
1.42
0.16
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
4%
1
1
0
2
1
5
1
0
2
1
1
5
1
0
1
2
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
0
2
0
2
5
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
0
0
2
2
5
1
0
2
0
1
4
1
0
0
3
1
5
1
1
0
2
1
5
0
1
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
0
1
5
0
1
1
1
1
4
2
0
1
1
1
5
1
0
1
1
2
5
2
0
1
0
2
5
16
8
15
18
20
77
20.0%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
0.0%
40.0%
100%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
50.0%
0.0%
25.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
100%
20.0%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
100%
40.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
40.0%
100%
40.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
100%
20.8%
10.4%
19.5%
23.4%
26.0%
100%
1.5
2.0
3.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
4.0
1.0
4.0
1.5
2.0
0.3
2.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
1.6
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College Ag Sci and Natural Resource
Natural Resources Management
Chair: Mark C. Wallace
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 9 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
9
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
9
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.16
9
4.22
5
4
3
0.63
0.21
9
4.33
5
4
3
0.67
0.22
9
4.56
5
5
3
0.68
0.23
9
4.89
5
5
4
0.31
0.10
9
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
9
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
8
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.15
9
4.44
5
4
4
0.50
0.17
9
4.67
5
5
3
0.67
0.22
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
9
4.22
5
4
3
0.79
0.26
9
4.56
5
5
4
0.50
0.17
9
4.56
5
5
4
0.50
0.17
9
4.22
5
4
3
0.63
0.21
9
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.16
141
4.59
5
5
3
0.48
0.04
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
11%
0
0%
0
0%
2
22%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
2%
0
0
0
3
6
9
0
0
1
5
3
9
0
0
1
4
4
9
0
0
1
2
6
9
0
0
0
1
8
9
0
0
0
0
9
9
0
0
0
0
9
9
0
0
0
2
6
8
0
0
0
5
4
9
0
0
1
1
7
9
0
0
0
2
5
7
0
0
2
3
4
9
0
0
0
4
5
9
0
0
0
4
5
9
0
0
1
5
3
9
0
0
0
3
6
9
0
0
7
44
90
141
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
55.6%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
44.4%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
88.9%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
55.6%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
44.4%
55.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
44.4%
55.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
55.6%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
31.2%
63.8%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College Ag Sci and Natural Resource
Plant and Soil Science
Chair: Eric F. Hequet
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 11 (39.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
11
4.64
5
5
4
0.48
0.15
11
4.27
5
4
3
0.75
0.23
11
4.27
5
4
3
0.75
0.23
11
4.64
5
5
3
0.64
0.19
11
4.64
5
5
4
0.48
0.15
11
4.18
5
4
3
0.83
0.25
10
4.50
5
5
3
0.67
0.21
7
4.43
5
4
4
0.49
0.19
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
11
4.55
5
5
3
0.66
0.20
11
3.91
5
4
2
1.16
0.35
11
4.36
5
5
3
0.77
0.23
10
4.50
5
4.5
4
0.50
0.16
11
4.27
5
4
3
0.75
0.23
11
4.36
5
5
2
0.98
0.30
10
4.50
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
167
4.40
5
5
2
0.74
0.06
No-Response out of 11
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
9%
4
36%
2
18%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
9%
0
0%
0
0%
1
9%
9
5%
0
0
0
4
7
11
0
0
2
4
5
11
0
0
2
4
5
11
0
0
1
2
8
11
0
0
0
4
7
11
0
0
3
3
5
11
0
0
1
3
6
10
0
0
0
4
3
7
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
0
1
3
7
11
0
2
2
2
5
11
0
0
2
3
6
11
0
0
0
5
5
10
0
0
2
4
5
11
0
1
1
2
7
11
0
1
0
2
7
10
0
5
17
51
94
167
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
36.4%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
36.4%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
36.4%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
72.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
36.4%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
27.3%
27.3%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
27.3%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
18.2%
18.2%
18.2%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
27.3%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
36.4%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
9.1%
18.2%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
20.0%
70.0%
100%
0.0%
3.0%
10.2%
30.5%
56.3%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
8.0
No low ratings
3.5
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
9.0
9.0
29.0
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 201 (40.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of 201
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
193
4.12
5
4
1
1.03
0.07
198
4.05
5
4
1
0.97
0.07
191
3.93
5
4
1
1.00
0.07
197
3.84
5
4
1
1.25
0.09
199
4.00
5
4
1
1.24
0.09
200
3.87
5
4
1
1.32
0.09
197
4.10
5
5
1
1.13
0.08
169
3.86
5
4
1
1.26
0.10
188
3.91
5
4
1
1.14
0.08
200
3.74
5
4
1
1.37
0.10
181
4.07
5
4
1
1.07
0.08
192
3.59
5
4
1
1.35
0.10
187
3.79
5
4
1
1.33
0.10
200
3.83
5
4
1
1.36
0.10
200
4.02
5
4
1
1.18
0.08
193
3.78
5
4
1
1.17
0.08
3085
3.91
5
4
1
1.20
0.02
8
4%
3
1%
10
5%
4
2%
2
1%
1
0%
4
2%
32
16%
13
6%
1
0%
20
10%
9
4%
14
7%
1
0%
1
0%
8
4%
131
4%
4
15
22
64
88
193
3
11
38
67
79
198
3
13
45
63
67
191
12
23
31
49
82
197
15
13
23
54
94
199
18
19
25
47
91
200
7
15
31
43
101
197
12
12
40
29
76
169
7
17
38
50
76
188
22
20
29
46
83
200
7
6
37
48
83
181
21
23
37
44
67
192
19
14
32
44
78
187
18
26
19
47
90
200
10
18
23
56
93
200
10
17
46
52
68
193
188
262
516
803
1316
3085
2.1%
7.8%
11.4%
33.2%
45.6%
100%
1.5%
5.6%
19.2%
33.8%
39.9%
100%
1.6%
6.8%
23.6%
33.0%
35.1%
100%
6.1%
11.7%
15.7%
24.9%
41.6%
100%
7.5%
6.5%
11.6%
27.1%
47.2%
100%
9.0%
9.5%
12.5%
23.5%
45.5%
100%
3.6%
7.6%
15.7%
21.8%
51.3%
100%
7.1%
7.1%
23.7%
17.2%
45.0%
100%
3.7%
9.0%
20.2%
26.6%
40.4%
100%
11.0%
10.0%
14.5%
23.0%
41.5%
100%
3.9%
3.3%
20.4%
26.5%
45.9%
100%
10.9%
12.0%
19.3%
22.9%
34.9%
100%
10.2%
7.5%
17.1%
23.5%
41.7%
100%
9.0%
13.0%
9.5%
23.5%
45.0%
100%
5.0%
9.0%
11.5%
28.0%
46.5%
100%
5.2%
8.8%
23.8%
26.9%
35.2%
100%
6.1%
8.5%
16.7%
26.0%
42.7%
100%
8.0
10.4
8.1
3.7
5.3
3.7
6.5
4.4
5.3
3.1
10.1
2.5
3.7
3.1
5.3
4.4
4.7
Institutional Research, 2/10/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Biological Sciences
Chair: Ron K. Chesser
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 13 (31%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
11
3.82
5
4
2
0.94
0.28
11
3.45
5
3
1
1.08
0.32
11
3.55
5
4
2
0.78
0.24
11
3.64
5
4
2
0.88
0.27
12
4.00
5
4
3
0.82
0.24
12
3.67
5
4
2
0.85
0.25
12
3.42
5
3
2
0.95
0.28
5
3.60
5
3
3
0.80
0.36
12
3.33
5
3
2
1.11
0.32
12
3.75
5
3.5
2
1.01
0.29
11
3.45
5
3
1
1.08
0.32
10
3.40
5
3.5
1
1.20
0.38
8
3.50
5
3
1
1.32
0.47
12
3.75
5
4
2
0.92
0.27
13
2.69
5
3
1
1.14
0.32
11
3.36
5
3
1
0.98
0.30
174
3.52
5
3.25
1
0.99
0.08
No-Response out of 13
2
15%
2
15%
2
15%
2
15%
1
8%
1
8%
1
8%
8
62%
1
8%
1
8%
2
15%
3
23%
5
38%
1
8%
0
0%
2
15%
34
16%
0
1
3
4
3
11
1
0
5
3
2
11
0
1
4
5
1
11
0
1
4
4
2
11
0
0
4
4
4
12
0
1
4
5
2
12
0
2
5
3
2
12
0
0
3
1
1
5
0
3
5
1
3
12
0
1
5
2
4
12
1
0
5
3
2
11
1
1
3
3
2
10
1
0
4
0
3
8
0
1
4
4
3
12
2
4
4
2
1
13
1
0
5
4
1
11
7
16
67
48
36
174
0.0%
9.1%
27.3%
36.4%
27.3%
100%
9.1%
0.0%
45.5%
27.3%
18.2%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
36.4%
45.5%
9.1%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
36.4%
36.4%
18.2%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
33.3%
41.7%
16.7%
100%
0.0%
16.7%
41.7%
25.0%
16.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
25.0%
41.7%
8.3%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
41.7%
16.7%
33.3%
100%
9.1%
0.0%
45.5%
27.3%
18.2%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
30.0%
30.0%
20.0%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
50.0%
0.0%
37.5%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
33.3%
33.3%
25.0%
100%
15.4%
30.8%
30.8%
15.4%
7.7%
100%
9.1%
0.0%
45.5%
36.4%
9.1%
100%
4.0%
9.2%
38.5%
27.6%
20.7%
100%
7.0
5.0
6.0
6.0
No low
ratings
7.0
2.5
No low
ratings
1.3
6.0
5.0
2.5
3.0
7.0
0.5
5.0
3.7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Chemistry
Chair: Joachim H. Weber
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 16 (45.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
16
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
14
3.93
5
4
2
0.80
0.21
16
3.88
5
4
3
0.78
0.20
14
3.71
5
3.5
3
0.80
0.21
16
3.75
5
4
2
0.97
0.24
15
4.13
5
4
2
0.88
0.23
16
4.19
5
4
3
0.81
0.20
15
4.20
5
5
2
1.17
0.30
12
3.92
5
4
3
0.86
0.25
15
3.27
5
3
2
0.93
0.24
16
3.75
5
4
2
0.90
0.23
15
4.13
5
4
2
0.81
0.21
15
3.20
5
3
2
0.83
0.21
15
3.73
5
4
1
1.06
0.27
16
4.25
5
4.5
2
0.90
0.23
16
3.69
5
4
1
1.10
0.28
15
3.53
5
4
2
0.88
0.23
241
3.83
5
4
1
0.91
0.06
2
13%
0
0%
2
13%
0
0%
1
6%
0
0%
1
6%
4
25%
1
6%
0
0%
1
6%
1
6%
1
6%
0
0%
0
0%
1
6%
15
6%
0
1
2
8
3
14
0
0
6
6
4
16
0
0
7
4
3
14
0
2
4
6
4
16
0
1
2
6
6
15
0
0
4
5
7
16
0
2
3
0
10
15
0
0
5
3
4
12
0
3
7
3
2
15
0
2
3
8
3
16
0
1
1
8
5
15
0
3
7
4
1
15
1
0
5
5
4
15
0
1
2
5
8
16
1
2
1
9
3
16
0
2
5
6
2
15
2
20
64
86
69
241
0.0%
7.1%
14.3%
57.1%
21.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
37.5%
37.5%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
28.6%
21.4%
100%
0.0%
12.5%
25.0%
37.5%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
6.7%
13.3%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
31.3%
43.8%
100%
0.0%
13.3%
20.0%
0.0%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
41.7%
25.0%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
46.7%
20.0%
13.3%
100%
0.0%
12.5%
18.8%
50.0%
18.8%
100%
0.0%
6.7%
6.7%
53.3%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
46.7%
26.7%
6.7%
100%
6.7%
0.0%
33.3%
33.3%
26.7%
100%
0.0%
6.3%
12.5%
31.3%
50.0%
100%
6.3%
12.5%
6.3%
56.3%
18.8%
100%
0.0%
13.3%
33.3%
40.0%
13.3%
100%
0.8%
8.3%
26.6%
35.7%
28.6%
100%
11.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
5.0
12.0
No low
ratings
5.0
No low
ratings
1.7
5.5
13.0
1.7
9.0
13.0
4.0
4.0
7.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Classical and Modern Lang and Lit
Chair: Erin M. Collopy
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 31 (57.4%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
31
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
30
4.03
5
4
1
1.02
0.19
30
4.07
5
4
1
1.00
0.18
30
4.10
5
4
2
0.87
0.16
31
3.68
5
4
1
1.38
0.25
31
3.87
5
5
1
1.48
0.26
31
3.74
5
4
1
1.54
0.28
31
4.10
5
5
1
1.23
0.22
28
3.64
5
4
1
1.49
0.28
31
4.29
5
5
2
0.85
0.15
31
3.65
5
4
1
1.38
0.25
29
3.86
5
4
1
1.20
0.22
31
3.32
5
3
1
1.28
0.23
31
3.52
5
4
1
1.24
0.22
31
3.84
5
4
1
1.35
0.24
30
4.10
5
4
2
0.98
0.18
31
3.77
5
4
1
1.07
0.19
487
3.85
5
4
1
1.21
0.05
1
3%
1
3%
1
3%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
10%
0
0%
0
0%
2
6%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
3%
0
0%
9
2%
1
1
6
10
12
30
1
1
5
11
12
30
0
1
7
10
12
30
3
4
6
5
13
31
4
3
3
4
17
31
5
4
0
7
15
31
2
1
7
3
18
31
4
3
5
3
13
28
0
1
5
9
16
31
4
3
4
9
11
31
2
1
8
6
12
29
3
5
10
5
8
31
3
3
8
9
8
31
3
4
1
10
13
31
0
3
4
10
13
30
1
3
7
11
9
31
36
41
86
122
202
487
3.3%
3.3%
20.0%
33.3%
40.0%
100%
3.3%
3.3%
16.7%
36.7%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
3.3%
23.3%
33.3%
40.0%
100%
9.7%
12.9%
19.4%
16.1%
41.9%
100%
12.9%
9.7%
9.7%
12.9%
54.8%
100%
16.1%
12.9%
0.0%
22.6%
48.4%
100%
6.5%
3.2%
22.6%
9.7%
58.1%
100%
14.3%
10.7%
17.9%
10.7%
46.4%
100%
0.0%
3.2%
16.1%
29.0%
51.6%
100%
12.9%
9.7%
12.9%
29.0%
35.5%
100%
6.9%
3.4%
27.6%
20.7%
41.4%
100%
9.7%
16.1%
32.3%
16.1%
25.8%
100%
9.7%
9.7%
25.8%
29.0%
25.8%
100%
9.7%
12.9%
3.2%
32.3%
41.9%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
13.3%
33.3%
43.3%
100%
3.2%
9.7%
22.6%
35.5%
29.0%
100%
7.4%
8.4%
17.7%
25.1%
41.5%
100%
11.0
11.5
22.0
2.6
3.0
2.4
7.0
2.3
25.0
2.9
6.0
1.6
2.8
3.3
7.7
5.0
4.2
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
English
Chair: Bruce C. Clarke
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 23 (30.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
`
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
23
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
23
3.78
5
4
1
0.98
0.20
23
3.57
5
4
2
1.01
0.21
23
3.35
5
3
2
0.91
0.19
22
2.86
5
3
1
1.22
0.26
23
3.26
5
4
1
1.29
0.27
23
3.09
5
3
1
1.32
0.27
23
3.48
5
4
1
1.10
0.23
22
3.14
5
3
1
1.36
0.29
22
2.95
5
2.5
1
1.36
0.29
23
2.61
5
2
1
1.31
0.27
22
3.59
5
3.5
1
1.03
0.22
23
2.74
5
3
1
1.33
0.28
23
2.70
5
3
1
1.30
0.27
23
3.00
5
3
1
1.35
0.28
23
3.35
5
4
1
1.34
0.28
23
3.13
5
3
1
1.39
0.29
364
3.16
5
3
1
1.22
0.06
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
4%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
4%
1
4%
0
0%
1
4%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
4
1%
1
1
5
11
5
23
0
4
7
7
5
23
0
4
10
6
3
23
4
4
7
5
2
22
3
4
4
8
4
23
3
5
7
3
5
23
1
4
5
9
4
23
3
5
5
4
5
22
3
8
2
5
4
22
6
6
4
5
2
23
1
1
9
6
5
22
6
3
8
3
3
23
6
4
6
5
2
23
4
5
5
5
4
23
3
4
3
8
5
23
3
7
2
6
5
23
47
69
89
96
63
364
4.3%
4.3%
21.7%
47.8%
21.7%
100%
0.0%
17.4%
30.4%
30.4%
21.7%
100%
0.0%
17.4%
43.5%
26.1%
13.0%
100%
18.2%
18.2%
31.8%
22.7%
9.1%
100%
13.0%
17.4%
17.4%
34.8%
17.4%
100%
13.0%
21.7%
30.4%
13.0%
21.7%
100%
4.3%
17.4%
21.7%
39.1%
17.4%
100%
13.6%
22.7%
22.7%
18.2%
22.7%
100%
13.6%
36.4%
9.1%
22.7%
18.2%
100%
26.1%
26.1%
17.4%
21.7%
8.7%
100%
4.5%
4.5%
40.9%
27.3%
22.7%
100%
26.1%
13.0%
34.8%
13.0%
13.0%
100%
26.1%
17.4%
26.1%
21.7%
8.7%
100%
17.4%
21.7%
21.7%
21.7%
17.4%
100%
13.0%
17.4%
13.0%
34.8%
21.7%
100%
13.0%
30.4%
8.7%
26.1%
21.7%
100%
12.9%
19.0%
24.5%
26.4%
17.3%
100%
8.0
3.0
2.3
0.9
1.7
1.0
2.6
1.1
0.8
0.6
5.5
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.9
1.1
1.4
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Geosciences
Chair: Jeffrey A. Lee
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 15 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
15
3.00
5
3
1
1.26
0.33
15
3.27
5
3
2
1.00
0.26
13
3.23
5
3
2
0.89
0.25
15
2.67
5
2
1
1.25
0.32
15
3.40
5
3
2
0.95
0.25
15
3.40
5
4
1
1.20
0.31
15
3.27
5
3
1
1.12
0.29
14
3.29
5
3
1
1.10
0.29
13
3.62
5
4
1
1.00
0.28
15
2.80
5
2
1
1.33
0.34
14
3.64
5
3
3
0.81
0.22
15
2.53
5
2
1
1.54
0.40
13
2.77
5
3
1
1.58
0.44
15
3.07
5
3
1
1.39
0.36
15
4.40
5
5
2
0.88
0.23
15
3.40
5
3
1
1.08
0.28
232
3.23
5
3
1
1.15
0.08
No-Response out of 15
0
0%
0
0%
2
13%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
7%
2
13%
0
0%
1
7%
0
0%
2
13%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
8
3%
1
6
3
2
3
15
0
4
5
4
2
15
0
3
5
4
1
13
2
7
2
2
2
15
0
3
5
5
2
15
1
3
3
5
3
15
1
3
4
5
2
15
1
2
5
4
2
14
1
0
4
6
2
13
2
6
3
1
3
15
0
0
8
3
3
14
6
3
0
4
2
15
5
1
1
4
2
13
2
5
1
4
3
15
0
1
1
4
9
15
1
1
7
3
3
15
23
48
57
60
44
232
6.7%
40.0%
20.0%
13.3%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
26.7%
33.3%
26.7%
13.3%
100%
0.0%
23.1%
38.5%
30.8%
7.7%
100%
13.3%
46.7%
13.3%
13.3%
13.3%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
33.3%
33.3%
13.3%
100%
6.7%
20.0%
20.0%
33.3%
20.0%
100%
6.7%
20.0%
26.7%
33.3%
13.3%
100%
7.1%
14.3%
35.7%
28.6%
14.3%
100%
7.7%
0.0%
30.8%
46.2%
15.4%
100%
13.3%
40.0%
20.0%
6.7%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
21.4%
21.4%
100%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
26.7%
13.3%
100%
38.5%
7.7%
7.7%
30.8%
15.4%
100%
13.3%
33.3%
6.7%
26.7%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
6.7%
6.7%
26.7%
60.0%
100%
6.7%
6.7%
46.7%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
9.9%
20.7%
24.6%
25.9%
19.0%
100%
0.7
1.5
1.7
0.4
2.3
2.0
1.8
2.0
8.0
0.5
No low ratings
0.7
1.0
1.0
13.0
3.0
1.5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
HEAF SASW
Chair: Brett A. Houk
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 18 (62.1%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of 18
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
17
4.82
5
5
4
0.38
0.09
18
4.67
5
5
4
0.47
0.11
16
4.69
5
5
3
0.58
0.15
18
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.09
18
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.09
18
4.78
5
5
4
0.42
0.10
17
4.82
5
5
4
0.38
0.09
14
4.64
5
5
3
0.61
0.16
17
4.53
5
5
3
0.70
0.17
18
4.78
5
5
4
0.42
0.10
16
4.69
5
5
3
0.58
0.15
16
4.75
5
5
3
0.56
0.14
16
4.81
5
5
4
0.39
0.10
18
4.72
5
5
2
0.73
0.17
18
4.78
5
5
4
0.42
0.10
17
4.53
5
5
3
0.70
0.17
272
4.73
5
5
2
0.50
0.03
1
6%
0
0%
2
11%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
6%
4
22%
1
6%
0
0%
2
11%
2
11%
2
11%
0
0%
0
0%
1
6%
16
6%
0
0
0
3
14
17
0
0
0
6
12
18
0
0
1
3
12
16
0
0
0
3
15
18
0
0
0
3
15
18
0
0
0
4
14
18
0
0
0
3
14
17
0
0
1
3
10
14
0
0
2
4
11
17
0
0
0
4
14
18
0
0
1
3
12
16
0
0
1
2
13
16
0
0
0
3
13
16
0
1
0
2
15
18
0
0
0
4
14
18
0
0
2
4
11
17
0
1
8
54
209
272
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
17.6%
82.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
6.3%
18.8%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
17.6%
82.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
7.1%
21.4%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.8%
23.5%
64.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
6.3%
18.8%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
6.3%
12.5%
81.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
18.8%
81.3%
100%
0.0%
5.6%
0.0%
11.1%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.8%
23.5%
64.7%
100%
0.0%
0.4%
2.9%
19.9%
76.8%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
17.0
No low ratings
No low
ratings
263.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Health Exercise and Sport Sciences
Chair: Angela Lumpkin
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 12 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
12
3.58
5
4
1
1.38
0.40
12
4.58
5
5
4
0.49
0.14
12
3.33
5
4
1
1.37
0.40
12
3.58
5
4.5
1
1.61
0.46
12
3.08
5
3.5
1
1.71
0.49
12
3.17
5
4
1
1.72
0.50
12
3.67
5
4.5
1
1.65
0.48
12
3.50
5
4.5
1
1.71
0.49
11
3.09
5
3
1
1.56
0.47
12
3.00
5
3.5
1
1.78
0.51
12
3.58
5
4
1
1.55
0.45
12
3.50
5
4.5
1
1.66
0.48
12
3.58
5
4.5
1
1.61
0.46
12
2.92
5
2.5
1
1.71
0.49
12
4.00
5
5
1
1.47
0.42
12
3.08
5
3.5
1
1.44
0.42
191
3.45
5
4
1
1.53
0.11
No-Response out of 12
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
1
3
0
4
4
12
0
0
0
5
7
12
2
2
0
6
2
12
2
2
1
1
6
12
4
1
1
2
4
12
4
1
0
3
4
12
3
0
1
2
6
12
3
1
1
1
6
12
3
1
2
2
3
11
5
0
1
2
4
12
2
2
0
3
5
12
2
3
0
1
6
12
2
2
1
1
6
12
4
2
1
1
4
12
2
0
1
2
7
12
3
1
2
4
2
12
42
21
12
40
76
191
8.3%
25.0%
0.0%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
41.7%
58.3%
100%
16.7%
16.7%
0.0%
50.0%
16.7%
100%
16.7%
16.7%
8.3%
8.3%
50.0%
100%
33.3%
8.3%
8.3%
16.7%
33.3%
100%
33.3%
8.3%
0.0%
25.0%
33.3%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
50.0%
100%
25.0%
8.3%
8.3%
8.3%
50.0%
100%
27.3%
9.1%
18.2%
18.2%
27.3%
100%
41.7%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
33.3%
100%
16.7%
16.7%
0.0%
25.0%
41.7%
100%
16.7%
25.0%
0.0%
8.3%
50.0%
100%
16.7%
16.7%
8.3%
8.3%
50.0%
100%
33.3%
16.7%
8.3%
8.3%
33.3%
100%
16.7%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
58.3%
100%
25.0%
8.3%
16.7%
33.3%
16.7%
100%
22.0%
11.0%
6.3%
20.9%
39.8%
100%
2.0
No low
ratings
2.0
1.8
1.2
1.4
2.7
1.8
1.3
1.2
2.0
1.4
1.8
0.8
4.5
1.5
1.8
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
History
Chair: Sean P. Cunningham
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 12 (34.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
12
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.11
12
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.11
12
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.13
12
4.92
5
5
4
0.28
0.08
12
4.92
5
5
4
0.28
0.08
12
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
12
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
11
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
12
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.11
12
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
11
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
12
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.13
12
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.11
12
4.92
5
5
4
0.28
0.08
12
4.75
5
5
3
0.60
0.17
12
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.13
190
4.88
5
5
3
0.26
0.02
No-Response out of 12
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
1%
0
0
0
2
10
12
0
0
0
2
10
12
0
0
0
3
9
12
0
0
0
1
11
12
0
0
0
1
11
12
0
0
0
0
12
12
0
0
0
0
12
12
0
0
0
0
11
11
0
0
0
2
10
12
0
0
0
0
12
12
0
0
0
0
11
11
0
0
0
3
9
12
0
0
0
2
10
12
0
0
0
1
11
12
0
0
1
1
10
12
0
0
0
3
9
12
0
0
1
21
168
190
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
8.3%
91.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
8.3%
91.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
8.3%
91.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
8.3%
8.3%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
11.1%
88.4%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Mathematics and Statistics
Chair: Magdalena Toda
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 15 (25.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
`
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
15
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
14
4.64
5
5
4
0.48
0.13
15
4.53
5
5
2
0.88
0.23
15
4.40
5
5
3
0.71
0.18
15
3.80
5
4
1
1.28
0.33
15
4.13
5
5
1
1.36
0.35
15
4.27
5
5
1
1.24
0.32
14
4.50
5
5
3
0.63
0.17
11
4.36
5
5
3
0.77
0.23
13
4.31
5
5
2
0.99
0.27
15
3.73
5
4
1
1.48
0.38
9
4.44
5
5
3
0.68
0.23
14
4.00
5
4.5
1
1.36
0.36
13
4.31
5
5
1
1.20
0.33
15
4.07
5
5
1
1.48
0.38
15
4.27
5
5
3
0.85
0.22
14
4.36
5
5
3
0.81
0.22
222
4.26
5
5
1
1.01
0.07
1
7%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
7%
4
27%
2
13%
0
0%
6
40%
1
7%
2
13%
0
0%
0
0%
1
7%
18
8%
0
0
0
5
9
14
0
1
1
2
11
15
0
0
2
5
8
15
1
2
2
4
6
15
2
0
1
3
9
15
1
1
1
2
10
15
0
0
1
5
8
14
0
0
2
3
6
11
0
1
2
2
8
13
2
2
1
3
7
15
0
0
1
3
5
9
2
0
1
4
7
14
1
0
2
1
9
13
2
1
1
1
10
15
0
0
4
3
8
15
0
0
3
3
8
14
11
8
25
49
129
222
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
35.7%
64.3%
100%
0.0%
6.7%
6.7%
13.3%
73.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
13.3%
33.3%
53.3%
100%
6.7%
13.3%
13.3%
26.7%
40.0%
100%
13.3%
0.0%
6.7%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
6.7%
6.7%
6.7%
13.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
7.1%
35.7%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
27.3%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
15.4%
15.4%
61.5%
100%
13.3%
13.3%
6.7%
20.0%
46.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
55.6%
100%
14.3%
0.0%
7.1%
28.6%
50.0%
100%
7.7%
0.0%
15.4%
7.7%
69.2%
100%
13.3%
6.7%
6.7%
6.7%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
26.7%
20.0%
53.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
21.4%
21.4%
57.1%
100%
5.0%
3.6%
11.3%
22.1%
58.1%
100%
No low
ratings
13.0
No low
ratings
3.3
6.0
6.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
10.0
2.5
No low ratings
5.5
10.0
3.7
No low ratings
No low
ratings
9.4
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Dept: Philosophy
Chair: Mark O. Webb
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 5 (38.5%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.00
5
4
3
0.63
0.28
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.00
5
4
3
0.89
0.40
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
3.80
5
4
2
0.98
0.44
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.40
5
4
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.40
5
5
2
1.20
0.54
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
80
4.33
5
5
2
0.74
0.08
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
3
1
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
2
1
2
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
1
0
3
1
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
0
3
2
5
0
1
0
0
4
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
2
11
26
41
80
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
60.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
20.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
60.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
0.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
2.5%
13.8%
32.5%
51.3%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
4.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
4.0
No low
ratings
33.5
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Dept: Physics
Chair: Nural Akchurin
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 8 (32%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
8
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
7
3.71
5
4
2
0.88
0.33
8
3.50
5
4
1
1.12
0.40
7
3.43
4
4
2
0.73
0.28
8
3.75
4
4
2
0.66
0.23
8
3.75
5
4
1
1.09
0.39
8
3.75
5
4
2
0.83
0.29
8
3.88
5
4
2
0.93
0.33
3
3.33
4
3
3
0.47
0.27
4
4.00
5
4
3
0.71
0.35
8
4.00
5
4
1
1.22
0.43
4
4.00
5
4
3
0.71
0.35
7
3.71
5
4
1
1.16
0.44
7
3.71
5
4
2
0.88
0.33
8
3.38
4
4
1
0.99
0.35
8
2.88
5
3
1
1.36
0.48
6
3.50
5
3.5
2
0.96
0.39
109
3.64
5
4
1
0.92
0.09
1
13%
0
0%
1
13%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
5
63%
4
50%
0
0%
4
50%
1
13%
1
13%
0
0%
0
0%
2
25%
19
15%
0
1
1
4
1
7
1
0
2
4
1
8
0
1
2
4
0
7
0
1
0
7
0
8
1
0
0
6
1
8
0
1
1
5
1
8
0
1
1
4
2
8
0
0
2
1
0
3
0
0
1
2
1
4
1
0
0
4
3
8
0
0
1
2
1
4
1
0
0
5
1
7
0
1
1
4
1
7
1
0
2
5
0
8
2
1
2
2
1
8
0
1
2
2
1
6
7
8
18
61
15
109
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
57.1%
14.3%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
50.0%
12.5%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
57.1%
0.0%
100%
0.0%
12.5%
0.0%
87.5%
0.0%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
0.0%
75.0%
12.5%
100%
0.0%
12.5%
12.5%
62.5%
12.5%
100%
0.0%
12.5%
12.5%
50.0%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
66.7%
33.3%
0.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
50.0%
25.0%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
37.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
50.0%
25.0%
100%
14.3%
0.0%
0.0%
71.4%
14.3%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
57.1%
14.3%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
62.5%
0.0%
100%
25.0%
12.5%
25.0%
25.0%
12.5%
100%
0.0%
16.7%
33.3%
33.3%
16.7%
100%
6.4%
7.3%
16.5%
56.0%
13.8%
100%
5.0
5.0
4.0
7.0
7.0
6.0
6.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
7.0
No low ratings
6.0
5.0
5.0
1.0
3.0
5.1
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Political Science
Chair: Dennis P. Patterson
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 11 (40.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
11
4.91
5
5
4
0.29
0.09
11
4.00
5
4
2
0.95
0.29
11
4.27
5
4
3
0.75
0.23
11
4.73
5
5
4
0.45
0.13
11
4.55
5
5
3
0.66
0.20
11
3.64
5
4
1
1.55
0.47
11
4.64
5
5
4
0.48
0.15
11
4.00
5
5
1
1.41
0.43
11
4.18
5
4
3
0.72
0.22
11
4.27
5
5
3
0.86
0.26
11
4.36
5
5
1
1.15
0.35
10
3.90
5
4.5
2
1.22
0.39
11
4.09
5
4
2
1.08
0.33
11
3.82
5
5
1
1.47
0.44
11
4.45
5
5
3
0.78
0.24
11
3.91
5
4
2
1.00
0.30
175
4.23
5
5
1
0.93
0.07
No-Response out of 11
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
9%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
0
0
0
1
10
11
0
1
2
4
4
11
0
0
2
4
5
11
0
0
0
3
8
11
0
0
1
3
7
11
2
1
1
2
5
11
0
0
0
4
7
11
1
1
2
0
7
11
0
0
2
5
4
11
0
0
3
2
6
11
1
0
0
3
7
11
0
2
2
1
5
10
0
2
0
4
5
11
1
2
1
1
6
11
0
0
2
2
7
11
0
1
3
3
4
11
5
10
21
42
97
175
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
90.9%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
36.4%
36.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
36.4%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
27.3%
72.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
27.3%
63.6%
100%
18.2%
9.1%
9.1%
18.2%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
36.4%
63.6%
100%
9.1%
9.1%
18.2%
0.0%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
45.5%
36.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
27.3%
18.2%
54.5%
100%
9.1%
0.0%
0.0%
27.3%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
18.2%
0.0%
36.4%
45.5%
100%
9.1%
18.2%
9.1%
9.1%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
18.2%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
27.3%
27.3%
36.4%
100%
2.9%
5.7%
12.0%
24.0%
55.4%
100%
No low
ratings
8.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
2.3
No low
ratings
3.5
No low
ratings
No low ratings
10.0
3.0
4.5
2.3
No low ratings
7.0
9.3
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Arts and Sciences
Psychology
Chair: Robert D. Morgan
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as evaluated by Faculty
Survey participation: 9 (45%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
9
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
9
4.78
5
5
4
0.42
0.14
9
4.33
5
5
3
0.82
0.27
9
4.00
5
4
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.56
5
5
3
0.68
0.23
9
4.22
5
5
2
1.03
0.34
9
4.22
5
5
2
1.03
0.34
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
9
4.33
5
5
3
0.94
0.31
9
4.56
5
5
3
0.68
0.23
9
4.22
5
5
1
1.31
0.44
9
4.22
5
4
3
0.79
0.26
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
9
4.33
5
5
2
1.05
0.35
9
4.33
5
5
2
1.25
0.42
9
4.56
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
9
4.11
5
5
1
1.37
0.46
144
4.35
5
5
1
0.97
0.08
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
0
2
7
9
0
0
2
2
5
9
1
0
1
3
4
9
0
0
1
2
6
9
0
1
1
2
5
9
0
1
1
2
5
9
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
0
3
0
6
9
0
0
1
2
6
9
1
0
1
1
6
9
0
0
2
3
4
9
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
1
1
1
6
9
0
2
0
0
7
9
0
1
0
1
7
9
1
0
2
0
6
9
3
8
16
25
92
144
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
22.2%
55.6%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
22.2%
55.6%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
22.2%
55.6%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
0.0%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
11.1%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
22.2%
0.0%
0.0%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
77.8%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
0.0%
66.7%
100%
2.1%
5.6%
11.1%
17.4%
63.9%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
7.0
No low
ratings
7.0
7.0
8.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
7.0
No low ratings
8.0
7.0
3.5
8.0
6.0
10.6
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Survey participation: 43(41%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of 43
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
42
4.38
5
5
2
0.95
0.15
43
4.14
5
5
1
1.27
0.19
42
4.17
5
5
1
1.11
0.17
43
4.12
5
5
1
1.32
0.20
43
4.19
5
5
1
1.33
0.20
43
3.93
5
4
1
1.39
0.21
43
4.30
5
5
1
1.15
0.18
28
4.14
5
5
1
1.33
0.25
42
4.24
5
5
1
1.11
0.17
43
4.09
5
5
1
1.36
0.21
38
4.16
5
5
1
1.25
0.20
43
3.91
5
4
1
1.22
0.19
39
4.31
5
5
2
0.91
0.15
43
3.88
5
4
1
1.38
0.21
41
4.56
5
5
2
0.77
0.12
41
4.05
5
5
1
1.32
0.21
657
4.16
5
5
1
1.20
0.05
1
2%
0
0%
1
2%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
15
35%
1
2%
0
0%
5
12%
0
0%
4
9%
0
0%
2
5%
2
5%
31
5%
0
4
2
10
26
42
3
4
2
9
25
43
1
4
5
9
23
42
4
3
2
9
25
43
5
1
2
8
27
43
6
1
4
11
21
43
2
4
0
10
27
43
3
1
2
5
17
28
1
4
4
8
25
42
6
0
2
11
24
43
3
2
3
8
22
38
3
3
7
12
18
43
0
3
3
12
21
39
5
3
5
9
21
43
0
1
4
7
29
41
4
2
5
7
23
41
46
40
52
145
374
657
0.0%
9.5%
4.8%
23.8%
61.9%
100%
7.0%
9.3%
4.7%
20.9%
58.1%
100%
2.4%
9.5%
11.9%
21.4%
54.8%
100%
9.3%
7.0%
4.7%
20.9%
58.1%
100%
11.6%
2.3%
4.7%
18.6%
62.8%
100%
14.0%
2.3%
9.3%
25.6%
48.8%
100%
4.7%
9.3%
0.0%
23.3%
62.8%
100%
10.7%
3.6%
7.1%
17.9%
60.7%
100%
2.4%
9.5%
9.5%
19.0%
59.5%
100%
14.0%
0.0%
4.7%
25.6%
55.8%
100%
7.9%
5.3%
7.9%
21.1%
57.9%
100%
7.0%
7.0%
16.3%
27.9%
41.9%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
7.7%
30.8%
53.8%
100%
11.6%
7.0%
11.6%
20.9%
48.8%
100%
0.0%
2.4%
9.8%
17.1%
70.7%
100%
9.8%
4.9%
12.2%
17.1%
56.1%
100%
7.0%
6.1%
7.9%
22.1%
56.9%
100%
9.0
4.9
6.4
4.9
5.8
4.6
6.2
5.5
6.6
5.8
6.0
5.0
11.0
3.8
36.0
5.0
6.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Accounting
Chair: Robert C. Ricketts
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 5 (23.8%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.00
5
4
3
0.63
0.28
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
4
4.25
5
4.5
3
0.83
0.41
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.40
5
4
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
4
4.25
5
4.5
3
0.83
0.41
5
3.60
5
3
2
1.20
0.54
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
78
4.43
5
5
2
0.63
0.07
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
3%
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
3
1
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
1
2
4
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
3
2
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
1
2
4
0
1
2
0
2
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
1
9
23
45
78
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
60.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
0.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
1.3%
11.5%
29.5%
57.7%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
2.0
No low ratings
No low
ratings
68.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Finance
Chair: Jeffrey M. Mercer
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 5 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.60
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
4
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
4
4.50
5
4.5
4
0.50
0.25
78
4.76
5
5
3
0.39
0.04
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
2
3%
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
0
4
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
2
2
4
0
0
2
15
61
78
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
2.6%
19.2%
78.2%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
ISQS
Chair: Glenn J. Browne
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 7 (43.8%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
7
4.00
5
5
2
1.20
0.45
7
3.57
5
5
1
1.76
0.67
7
3.57
5
4
1
1.50
0.57
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
3.57
5
5
1
1.68
0.63
6
3.17
5
3.5
1
1.86
0.76
7
3.57
5
3
2
1.29
0.49
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
6
3.17
5
3.5
1
1.86
0.76
7
3.43
5
5
1
1.84
0.70
7
4.00
5
5
2
1.20
0.45
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
4.14
5
5
2
1.12
0.43
7
3.43
5
5
1
1.84
0.70
110
3.50
5
5
1
1.69
0.16
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
2%
0
1
2
0
4
7
2
0
1
0
4
7
1
1
1
1
3
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
1
2
0
0
4
7
2
1
0
0
3
6
0
2
2
0
3
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
2
1
0
0
3
6
2
1
0
0
4
7
0
1
2
0
4
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
0
1
1
1
4
7
2
1
0
0
4
7
27
12
9
2
60
110
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
28.6%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
14.3%
28.6%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
33.3%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
28.6%
28.6%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
33.3%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
57.1%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
24.5%
10.9%
8.2%
1.8%
54.5%
100%
4.0
2.0
2.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0
1.5
1.3
1.0
1.3
4.0
1.3
5.0
1.3
1.6
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Management
Yitzhak I. Fried
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 9 (42.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
9
4.22
5
4
2
0.92
0.31
9
4.33
5
5
2
0.94
0.31
9
4.00
5
4
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.33
5
5
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.11
5
4
1
1.20
0.40
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
1
4.00
4
4
4
0.00
0.00
9
4.33
5
5
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.22
5
5
1
1.23
0.41
7
4.43
5
4
4
0.49
0.19
9
3.56
5
4
2
0.83
0.28
7
4.00
5
4
2
0.93
0.35
9
4.00
5
4
1
1.25
0.42
8
4.75
5
5
3
0.66
0.23
8
3.88
5
4
1
1.27
0.45
130
4.19
5
4
1
0.96
0.08
No-Response out of 9
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
8
89%
0
0%
0
0%
2
22%
0
0%
2
22%
0
0%
1
11%
1
11%
14
10%
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
1
0
4
4
9
0
1
0
3
5
9
1
0
1
3
4
9
1
0
0
2
6
9
1
0
0
4
4
9
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
2
6
9
1
0
0
3
5
9
0
0
0
4
3
7
0
1
3
4
1
9
0
1
0
4
2
7
1
0
1
3
4
9
0
0
1
0
7
8
1
0
1
3
3
8
7
6
7
44
66
130
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
44.4%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
33.3%
55.6%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
44.4%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
0.0%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
55.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
11.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
57.1%
28.6%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
0.0%
87.5%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
12.5%
37.5%
37.5%
100%
5.4%
4.6%
5.4%
33.8%
50.8%
100%
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
No low
ratings
8.0
8.0
No low ratings
5.0
6.0
7.0
No low ratings
6.0
8.5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Marketing
Chair: Dennis B. Arnett
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 10 (71.4%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
10
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
10
4.40
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
10
3.80
5
4.5
1
1.47
0.46
10
3.90
5
4.5
2
1.22
0.39
10
4.10
5
5
2
1.22
0.39
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.00
0.32
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.00
0.32
10
4.40
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
10
4.20
5
5
1
1.25
0.39
10
4.10
5
4.5
2
1.14
0.36
10
4.10
5
4.5
1
1.22
0.39
9
4.44
5
5
2
1.07
0.36
10
3.90
5
4.5
1
1.37
0.43
10
4.40
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
10
4.30
5
5
1
1.19
0.38
10
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.15
10
4.00
5
5
1
1.41
0.45
159
4.20
5
5
1
1.11
0.09
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
10%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
0
1
0
3
6
10
1
2
0
2
5
10
0
2
2
1
5
10
0
2
1
1
6
10
0
1
1
2
6
10
0
1
1
2
6
10
0
1
0
3
6
10
1
0
1
2
6
10
0
2
0
3
5
10
1
0
1
3
5
10
0
1
1
0
7
9
1
1
1
2
5
10
0
1
0
3
6
10
1
0
0
3
6
10
0
0
0
4
6
10
1
1
1
1
6
10
6
16
10
35
92
159
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
30.0%
50.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
30.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
0.0%
77.8%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
60.0%
100%
3.8%
10.1%
6.3%
22.0%
57.9%
100%
9.0
2.3
3.0
3.5
8.0
8.0
9.0
8.0
4.0
8.0
7.0
3.5
9.0
9.0
No low ratings
3.5
5.8
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Education
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 59 (43.1%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
57
3.91
5
4
1
1.19
0.16
58
4.22
5
5
1
1.08
0.14
56
3.91
5
4
1
1.15
0.15
58
3.78
5
4
1
1.34
0.18
58
3.79
5
4
1
1.32
0.17
57
3.67
5
4
1
1.34
0.18
56
4.04
5
4
1
1.18
0.16
46
3.91
5
4
1
1.21
0.18
52
3.92
5
4
1
1.19
0.17
59
3.75
5
4
1
1.37
0.18
49
3.88
5
4
1
1.26
0.18
56
3.54
5
4
1
1.27
0.17
44
3.91
5
4
2
1.02
0.15
58
3.78
5
4
1
1.37
0.18
56
4.18
5
5
1
1.10
0.15
54
3.74
5
4
1
1.31
0.18
874
3.87
5
4
1
1.23
0.04
No-Response out of 59
2
3%
1
2%
3
5%
1
2%
1
2%
2
3%
3
5%
13
22%
7
12%
0
0%
10
17%
3
5%
15
25%
1
2%
3
5%
5
8%
70
7%
4
3
10
17
23
57
3
2
5
17
31
58
3
4
10
17
22
56
6
5
9
14
24
58
5
7
7
15
24
58
5
8
10
12
22
57
3
5
5
17
26
56
2
5
9
9
21
46
2
5
12
9
24
52
6
6
11
10
26
59
4
2
12
9
22
49
5
6
16
12
17
56
0
4
13
10
17
44
6
6
8
13
25
58
2
3
9
11
31
56
4
6
13
8
23
54
60
77
159
200
378
874
7.0%
5.3%
17.5%
29.8%
40.4%
100%
5.2%
3.4%
8.6%
29.3%
53.4%
100%
5.4%
7.1%
17.9%
30.4%
39.3%
100%
10.3%
8.6%
15.5%
24.1%
41.4%
100%
8.6%
12.1%
12.1%
25.9%
41.4%
100%
8.8%
14.0%
17.5%
21.1%
38.6%
100%
5.4%
8.9%
8.9%
30.4%
46.4%
100%
4.3%
10.9%
19.6%
19.6%
45.7%
100%
3.8%
9.6%
23.1%
17.3%
46.2%
100%
10.2%
10.2%
18.6%
16.9%
44.1%
100%
8.2%
4.1%
24.5%
18.4%
44.9%
100%
8.9%
10.7%
28.6%
21.4%
30.4%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
29.5%
22.7%
38.6%
100%
10.3%
10.3%
13.8%
22.4%
43.1%
100%
3.6%
5.4%
16.1%
19.6%
55.4%
100%
7.4%
11.1%
24.1%
14.8%
42.6%
100%
6.9%
8.8%
18.2%
22.9%
43.2%
100%
5.7
9.6
5.6
3.5
3.3
2.6
5.4
4.3
4.7
3.0
5.2
2.6
6.8
3.2
8.4
3.1
4.2
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Education
Curriculum and Instruction
Chair: Margaret A Price
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 14 (73.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
14
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
13
3.85
5
4
2
1.10
0.30
13
4.38
5
5
2
0.92
0.26
13
4.00
5
4
2
0.96
0.27
13
3.46
5
3
1
1.28
0.35
13
3.92
5
4
2
1.14
0.32
13
3.46
5
3
1
1.39
0.39
13
4.15
5
4
2
1.03
0.28
13
3.92
5
4
2
1.07
0.30
13
3.92
5
4
2
1.14
0.32
14
3.93
5
4.5
2
1.16
0.31
13
4.00
5
4
2
1.11
0.31
13
3.38
5
3
1
1.21
0.34
12
3.67
5
3.5
2
0.94
0.27
13
3.46
5
3
1
1.55
0.43
13
4.23
5
5
2
0.97
0.27
13
3.69
5
4
2
1.20
0.33
208
3.84
5
4
1
1.14
0.08
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
0
0%
1
7%
1
7%
2
14%
1
7%
1
7%
1
7%
16
7%
0
2
3
3
5
13
0
1
1
3
8
13
0
1
3
4
5
13
1
2
4
2
4
13
0
2
3
2
6
13
1
3
3
1
5
13
0
2
0
5
6
13
0
2
2
4
5
13
0
2
3
2
6
13
0
2
4
1
7
14
0
2
2
3
6
13
1
2
4
3
3
13
0
1
5
3
3
12
2
2
3
0
6
13
0
1
2
3
7
13
0
3
3
2
5
13
5
30
45
41
87
208
0.0%
15.4%
23.1%
23.1%
38.5%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
7.7%
23.1%
61.5%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
23.1%
30.8%
38.5%
100%
7.7%
15.4%
30.8%
15.4%
30.8%
100%
0.0%
15.4%
23.1%
15.4%
46.2%
100%
7.7%
23.1%
23.1%
7.7%
38.5%
100%
0.0%
15.4%
0.0%
38.5%
46.2%
100%
0.0%
15.4%
15.4%
30.8%
38.5%
100%
0.0%
15.4%
23.1%
15.4%
46.2%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
7.1%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
15.4%
15.4%
23.1%
46.2%
100%
7.7%
15.4%
30.8%
23.1%
23.1%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
41.7%
25.0%
25.0%
100%
15.4%
15.4%
23.1%
0.0%
46.2%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
15.4%
23.1%
53.8%
100%
0.0%
23.1%
23.1%
15.4%
38.5%
100%
2.4%
14.4%
21.6%
19.7%
41.8%
100%
4.0
11.0
9.0
2.0
4.0
1.5
5.5
4.5
4.0
4.0
4.5
2.0
6.0
1.5
10.0
2.3
3.7
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Education
Educational Psychology and Leadership
Chair: Janet G. Hicks
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 23 (41.8%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
23
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
23
3.83
5
4
1
1.27
0.27
23
3.96
5
4
1
1.27
0.26
21
3.86
5
4
1
1.28
0.28
23
3.96
5
5
1
1.40
0.29
23
4.04
5
4
1
1.23
0.26
22
4.05
5
4.5
1
1.15
0.24
21
4.10
5
5
1
1.31
0.28
17
4.24
5
5
3
0.88
0.21
18
4.28
5
5
2
0.93
0.22
23
3.83
5
4
1
1.34
0.28
16
4.19
5
5
1
1.13
0.28
21
3.62
5
4
1
1.40
0.30
16
4.31
5
5
3
0.85
0.21
23
4.13
5
5
1
1.19
0.25
22
4.32
5
5
1
1.14
0.24
20
3.70
5
4
1
1.42
0.32
332
4.02
5
4.75
1
1.20
0.07
0
0%
0
0%
2
9%
0
0%
0
0%
1
4%
2
9%
6
26%
5
22%
0
0%
7
30%
2
9%
7
30%
0
0%
1
4%
3
13%
36
10%
3
0
3
9
8
23
2
1
4
5
11
23
2
1
4
5
9
21
3
1
2
5
12
23
2
1
2
7
11
23
1
1
5
4
11
22
2
1
2
4
12
21
0
0
5
3
9
17
0
1
3
4
10
18
3
0
5
5
10
23
1
0
3
3
9
16
3
1
5
4
8
21
0
0
4
3
9
16
2
0
3
6
12
23
1
1
3
2
15
22
2
2
6
0
10
20
27
11
59
69
166
332
13.0%
0.0%
13.0%
39.1%
34.8%
100%
8.7%
4.3%
17.4%
21.7%
47.8%
100%
9.5%
4.8%
19.0%
23.8%
42.9%
100%
13.0%
4.3%
8.7%
21.7%
52.2%
100%
8.7%
4.3%
8.7%
30.4%
47.8%
100%
4.5%
4.5%
22.7%
18.2%
50.0%
100%
9.5%
4.8%
9.5%
19.0%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
29.4%
17.6%
52.9%
100%
0.0%
5.6%
16.7%
22.2%
55.6%
100%
13.0%
0.0%
21.7%
21.7%
43.5%
100%
6.3%
0.0%
18.8%
18.8%
56.3%
100%
14.3%
4.8%
23.8%
19.0%
38.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
18.8%
56.3%
100%
8.7%
0.0%
13.0%
26.1%
52.2%
100%
4.5%
4.5%
13.6%
9.1%
68.2%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
30.0%
0.0%
50.0%
100%
8.1%
3.3%
17.8%
20.8%
50.0%
100%
5.7
5.3
4.7
4.3
6.0
7.5
5.3
No low
ratings
14.0
5.0
12.0
3.0
No low
ratings
9.0
8.5
2.5
6.2
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Education
TechTeach
Chair: Douglas D. Hamman
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 21 (35.6%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
21
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
20
4.00
5
4
1
1.14
0.25
21
4.38
5
5
1
0.90
0.20
21
3.86
5
4
1
1.12
0.25
21
3.71
5
4
1
1.28
0.28
21
3.38
5
4
1
1.43
0.31
21
3.33
5
4
1
1.39
0.30
21
3.86
5
4
1
1.12
0.25
15
3.47
5
4
1
1.50
0.39
20
3.55
5
3.5
1
1.32
0.30
21
3.48
5
4
1
1.50
0.33
19
3.47
5
3
1
1.35
0.31
21
3.48
5
3
1
1.14
0.25
15
3.60
5
4
2
1.08
0.28
21
3.52
5
4
1
1.33
0.29
20
3.95
5
4
1
1.12
0.25
20
3.75
5
4
1
1.26
0.28
318
3.67
5
4
1
1.25
0.07
1
5%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
6
29%
1
5%
0
0%
2
10%
0
0%
6
29%
0
0%
1
5%
1
5%
18
5%
1
1
4
5
9
20
1
0
0
9
11
21
1
2
3
8
7
21
2
2
3
7
7
21
3
4
2
6
6
21
3
4
2
7
5
21
1
2
3
8
7
21
2
3
2
2
6
15
2
2
6
3
7
20
3
4
2
4
8
21
3
0
7
3
6
19
1
3
7
5
5
21
0
3
4
4
4
15
2
4
2
7
6
21
1
1
4
6
8
20
2
1
4
6
7
20
28
36
55
90
109
318
5.0%
5.0%
20.0%
25.0%
45.0%
100%
4.8%
0.0%
0.0%
42.9%
52.4%
100%
4.8%
9.5%
14.3%
38.1%
33.3%
100%
9.5%
9.5%
14.3%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
14.3%
19.0%
9.5%
28.6%
28.6%
100%
14.3%
19.0%
9.5%
33.3%
23.8%
100%
4.8%
9.5%
14.3%
38.1%
33.3%
100%
13.3%
20.0%
13.3%
13.3%
40.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
30.0%
15.0%
35.0%
100%
14.3%
19.0%
9.5%
19.0%
38.1%
100%
15.8%
0.0%
36.8%
15.8%
31.6%
100%
4.8%
14.3%
33.3%
23.8%
23.8%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
26.7%
26.7%
26.7%
100%
9.5%
19.0%
9.5%
33.3%
28.6%
100%
5.0%
5.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
100%
10.0%
5.0%
20.0%
30.0%
35.0%
100%
8.8%
11.3%
17.3%
28.3%
34.3%
100%
7.0
20.0
5.0
3.5
1.7
1.7
5.0
1.6
2.5
1.7
3.0
2.5
2.7
2.2
7.0
4.3
3.1
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 67 (41.1%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
67
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
67
3.76
5
4
1
1.21
0.15
67
3.91
5
4
1
1.19
0.15
67
3.75
5
4
1
1.20
0.15
65
3.68
5
4
1
1.33
0.16
66
3.68
5
4
1
1.38
0.17
66
3.73
5
4
1
1.49
0.18
64
3.80
5
4
1
1.26
0.16
59
3.66
5
4
1
1.32
0.17
62
3.77
5
4
1
1.18
0.15
67
3.55
5
4
1
1.46
0.18
57
3.44
5
4
1
1.35
0.18
64
3.44
5
4
1
1.33
0.17
60
3.82
5
4
1
1.12
0.14
67
3.57
5
4
1
1.51
0.18
67
4.03
5
4
1
1.04
0.13
63
3.49
5
4
1
1.38
0.17
1028
3.69
5
4
1
1.30
0.04
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
3%
1
1%
1
1%
3
4%
8
12%
5
7%
0
0%
10
15%
3
4%
7
10%
0
0%
0
0%
4
6%
44
4%
4
8
11
21
23
67
4
6
9
21
27
67
5
6
11
24
21
67
5
10
11
14
25
65
7
8
11
13
27
66
11
5
4
17
29
66
5
5
14
14
26
64
7
4
11
17
20
59
4
3
19
13
23
62
12
2
15
13
25
67
7
7
14
12
17
57
7
10
13
16
18
64
3
3
17
16
21
60
10
10
7
12
28
67
3
2
11
25
26
67
8
9
9
18
19
63
102
98
187
266
375
1028
6.0%
11.9%
16.4%
31.3%
34.3%
100%
6.0%
9.0%
13.4%
31.3%
40.3%
100%
7.5%
9.0%
16.4%
35.8%
31.3%
100%
7.7%
15.4%
16.9%
21.5%
38.5%
100%
10.6%
12.1%
16.7%
19.7%
40.9%
100%
16.7%
7.6%
6.1%
25.8%
43.9%
100%
7.8%
7.8%
21.9%
21.9%
40.6%
100%
11.9%
6.8%
18.6%
28.8%
33.9%
100%
6.5%
4.8%
30.6%
21.0%
37.1%
100%
17.9%
3.0%
22.4%
19.4%
37.3%
100%
12.3%
12.3%
24.6%
21.1%
29.8%
100%
10.9%
15.6%
20.3%
25.0%
28.1%
100%
5.0%
5.0%
28.3%
26.7%
35.0%
100%
14.9%
14.9%
10.4%
17.9%
41.8%
100%
4.5%
3.0%
16.4%
37.3%
38.8%
100%
12.7%
14.3%
14.3%
28.6%
30.2%
100%
9.9%
9.5%
18.2%
25.9%
36.5%
100%
3.7
4.8
4.1
2.6
2.7
2.9
4.0
3.4
5.1
2.7
2.1
2.0
6.2
2.0
10.2
2.2
3.2
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Chair: Sindee L. Simon
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 11 (64.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
11
4.82
5
5
3
0.57
0.17
11
4.55
5
5
2
0.89
0.27
11
4.36
5
5
2
0.88
0.27
11
4.64
5
5
3
0.64
0.19
10
4.40
5
5
3
0.92
0.29
10
3.90
5
4.5
1
1.37
0.43
11
4.27
5
5
2
1.05
0.32
9
4.78
5
5
4
0.42
0.14
11
4.64
5
5
3
0.64
0.19
11
4.27
5
5
2
1.05
0.32
10
4.30
5
5
3
0.90
0.28
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.10
0.35
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.10
0.35
11
3.91
5
5
1
1.38
0.42
11
4.45
5
5
3
0.78
0.24
11
3.91
5
5
2
1.31
0.40
169
4.36
5
5
1
0.94
0.07
No-Response out of 11
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
9%
1
9%
0
0%
2
18%
0
0%
0
0%
1
9%
1
9%
1
9%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
7
4%
0
0
1
0
10
11
0
1
0
2
8
11
0
1
0
4
6
11
0
0
1
2
8
11
0
0
3
0
7
10
1
1
1
2
5
10
0
1
2
1
7
11
0
0
0
2
7
9
0
0
1
2
8
11
0
1
2
1
7
11
0
0
3
1
6
10
0
1
2
0
7
10
0
1
2
0
7
10
1
1
2
1
6
11
0
0
2
2
7
11
0
3
1
1
6
11
2
11
23
21
112
169
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
0.0%
90.9%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
0.0%
18.2%
72.7%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
0.0%
36.4%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
72.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
0.0%
70.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
9.1%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
77.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
72.7%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
9.1%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
10.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
0.0%
70.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
0.0%
70.0%
100%
9.1%
9.1%
18.2%
9.1%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
18.2%
63.6%
100%
0.0%
27.3%
9.1%
9.1%
54.5%
100%
1.2%
6.5%
13.6%
12.4%
66.3%
100%
No low
ratings
10.0
10.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
3.5
8.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
8.0
No low ratings
7.0
7.0
3.5
No low ratings
2.3
10.2
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Computer Science
Chair: Rattikorn Hewett
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 8 (61.5%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
8
3.00
5
2.5
2
1.22
0.43
8
2.63
5
2.5
1
1.32
0.47
8
2.75
5
2.5
1
1.39
0.49
7
2.43
5
2
1
1.50
0.57
8
2.38
5
2
1
1.58
0.56
8
2.00
5
1
1
1.73
0.61
8
2.50
5
2
1
1.58
0.56
8
1.88
5
1
1
1.54
0.54
5
3.00
5
3
1
1.41
0.63
8
2.00
5
1
1
1.73
0.61
8
2.63
5
2
1
1.65
0.58
8
2.88
5
3
1
1.45
0.51
5
3.00
5
3
1
1.79
0.80
8
2.00
5
1
1
1.50
0.53
8
3.13
5
3.5
1
1.36
0.48
8
2.25
5
1.5
1
1.48
0.52
121
2.53
5
2
1
1.52
0.14
No-Response out of 8
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
13%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
38%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
38%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
7
5%
0
4
2
0
2
8
2
2
2
1
1
8
2
2
1
2
1
8
3
1
1
1
1
7
3
3
0
0
2
8
6
0
0
0
2
8
3
2
1
0
2
8
6
0
0
1
1
8
1
1
1
1
1
5
6
0
0
0
2
8
3
2
0
1
2
8
2
2
0
3
1
8
2
0
1
0
2
5
5
1
0
1
1
8
2
0
2
3
1
8
4
1
1
1
1
8
50
21
12
15
23
121
0.0%
50.0%
25.0%
0.0%
25.0%
100%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
12.5%
12.5%
100%
25.0%
25.0%
12.5%
25.0%
12.5%
100%
42.9%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
100%
37.5%
37.5%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
100%
75.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
100%
37.5%
25.0%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
100%
75.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
12.5%
100%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
75.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
100%
37.5%
25.0%
0.0%
12.5%
25.0%
100%
25.0%
25.0%
0.0%
37.5%
12.5%
100%
40.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
40.0%
100%
62.5%
12.5%
0.0%
12.5%
12.5%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
25.0%
37.5%
12.5%
100%
50.0%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
100%
41.3%
17.4%
9.9%
12.4%
19.0%
100%
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.3
1.0
0.3
0.6
1.0
1.0
0.3
2.0
0.4
0.5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Chair:Michael G. Giesselmann
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 12 (42.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
12
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
12
3.75
5
4
2
1.09
0.31
12
4.00
5
4
2
1.00
0.29
12
3.75
5
4
2
1.09
0.31
12
2.83
5
2
2
1.14
0.33
12
3.67
5
3.5
1
1.31
0.38
12
3.58
5
4
1
1.32
0.38
12
3.83
5
4
2
0.90
0.26
12
3.67
5
4
2
1.03
0.30
12
3.75
5
4
2
0.92
0.27
12
3.08
5
3
1
1.26
0.36
11
3.27
5
3
1
1.21
0.37
12
2.50
5
2
1
1.32
0.38
12
3.58
5
3.5
2
0.86
0.25
12
3.08
5
3
1
1.44
0.42
12
4.00
5
4
2
0.91
0.26
11
3.45
5
4
2
0.99
0.30
190
3.49
5
4
1
1.11
0.08
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
2
1%
0
2
3
3
4
12
0
1
3
3
5
12
0
2
3
3
4
12
0
7
2
1
2
12
1
1
4
1
5
12
1
2
2
3
4
12
0
1
3
5
3
12
0
2
3
4
3
12
0
1
4
4
3
12
2
1
5
2
2
12
1
2
3
3
2
11
3
5
0
3
1
12
0
1
5
4
2
12
2
3
2
2
3
12
0
1
2
5
4
12
0
3
1
6
1
11
10
35
45
52
48
190
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
25.0%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
25.0%
25.0%
41.7%
100%
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
25.0%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
58.3%
16.7%
8.3%
16.7%
100%
8.3%
8.3%
33.3%
8.3%
41.7%
100%
8.3%
16.7%
16.7%
25.0%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
25.0%
41.7%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
33.3%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
33.3%
33.3%
25.0%
100%
16.7%
8.3%
41.7%
16.7%
16.7%
100%
9.1%
18.2%
27.3%
27.3%
18.2%
100%
25.0%
41.7%
0.0%
25.0%
8.3%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
41.7%
33.3%
16.7%
100%
16.7%
25.0%
16.7%
16.7%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
41.7%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
27.3%
9.1%
54.5%
9.1%
100%
5.3%
18.4%
23.7%
27.4%
25.3%
100%
3.5
8.0
3.5
0.4
3.0
2.3
8.0
3.5
7.0
1.3
1.7
0.5
6.0
1.0
9.0
2.3
2.2
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Civil Environ Construct Engineering
Chair: David L. Ernst
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 12 (34.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
12
3.50
5
4
1
1.12
0.32
12
4.00
5
4
2
0.91
0.26
12
3.67
5
4
1
1.03
0.30
12
3.75
5
4
1
1.23
0.36
12
4.08
5
4.5
1
1.19
0.34
12
4.42
5
5
1
1.11
0.32
11
4.18
5
4
3
0.83
0.25
9
3.78
5
4
3
0.63
0.21
11
3.82
5
4
1
1.19
0.36
12
3.92
5
4
1
1.19
0.34
10
3.60
5
4
2
1.02
0.32
11
3.55
5
4
2
0.99
0.30
11
4.00
5
4
2
0.95
0.29
12
4.25
5
5
2
1.16
0.34
12
4.33
5
4.5
2
0.85
0.25
11
3.73
5
4
1
1.35
0.41
182
3.91
5
4
1
1.05
0.08
No-Response out of 12
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
3
25%
1
8%
0
0%
2
17%
1
8%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
10
5%
1
1
3
5
2
12
0
1
2
5
4
12
1
0
3
6
2
12
1
1
2
4
4
12
1
0
2
3
6
12
1
0
0
3
8
12
0
0
3
3
5
11
0
0
3
5
1
9
1
0
3
3
4
11
1
0
3
3
5
12
0
2
2
4
2
10
0
2
3
4
2
11
0
1
2
4
4
11
0
2
1
1
8
12
0
1
0
5
6
12
1
1
3
1
5
11
8
12
35
59
68
182
8.3%
8.3%
25.0%
41.7%
16.7%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
41.7%
33.3%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
25.0%
50.0%
16.7%
100%
8.3%
8.3%
16.7%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
27.3%
27.3%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
55.6%
11.1%
100%
9.1%
0.0%
27.3%
27.3%
36.4%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
41.7%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
40.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
18.2%
27.3%
36.4%
18.2%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
18.2%
36.4%
36.4%
100%
0.0%
16.7%
8.3%
8.3%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
0.0%
41.7%
50.0%
100%
9.1%
9.1%
27.3%
9.1%
45.5%
100%
4.4%
6.6%
19.2%
32.4%
37.4%
100%
3.5
9.0
8.0
4.0
9.0
11.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
7.0
8.0
3.0
3.0
8.0
4.5
11.0
3.0
6.4
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Industrial Engineering
Chair:Hong-Chao Zhang
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 7 (58.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
7
3.71
5
4
1
1.48
0.56
7
3.14
5
3
1
1.73
0.65
7
3.29
5
4
1
1.75
0.66
7
3.57
5
4
1
1.50
0.57
7
3.29
5
4
1
1.75
0.66
7
3.71
5
4
1
1.48
0.56
7
3.43
5
4
1
1.68
0.63
7
3.71
5
4
1
1.48
0.56
7
3.14
5
3
1
1.73
0.65
7
3.00
5
3
1
1.85
0.70
7
3.00
5
3
1
1.85
0.70
7
3.29
5
3
1
1.67
0.63
7
3.57
5
3
1
1.40
0.53
7
3.43
5
4
1
1.68
0.63
7
3.71
5
4
1
1.28
0.48
7
3.00
5
3
1
1.85
0.70
112
3.38
5
4
1
1.63
0.15
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1
0
2
3
7
2
1
1
0
3
7
2
1
0
1
3
7
1
1
1
1
3
7
2
1
0
1
3
7
1
1
0
2
3
7
2
0
1
1
3
7
1
1
0
2
3
7
2
1
1
0
3
7
3
0
1
0
3
7
3
0
1
0
3
7
2
0
2
0
3
7
1
0
3
0
3
7
2
0
1
1
3
7
1
0
1
3
2
7
3
0
1
0
3
7
29
8
14
14
47
112
14.3%
14.3%
0.0%
28.6%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
0.0%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
0.0%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
14.3%
14.3%
0.0%
28.6%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
14.3%
14.3%
0.0%
28.6%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
0.0%
28.6%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
28.6%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
14.3%
0.0%
14.3%
42.9%
28.6%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
25.9%
7.1%
12.5%
12.5%
42.0%
100%
2.5
1.0
1.3
2.0
1.3
2.5
2.0
2.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.5
3.0
2.0
5.0
1.0
1.6
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
Chair:Edward E. Anderson
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 13 (31.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
13
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
13
3.77
5
4
1
0.97
0.27
13
4.31
5
4
3
0.61
0.17
13
4.08
5
4
3
0.73
0.20
12
4.42
5
5
3
0.76
0.22
13
4.08
5
4
2
0.83
0.23
13
4.46
5
5
3
0.63
0.18
11
4.36
5
5
3
0.77
0.23
10
4.20
5
4.5
3
0.87
0.28
12
3.92
5
4
3
0.86
0.25
13
4.31
5
4
3
0.72
0.20
7
3.86
5
4
3
0.83
0.31
12
3.75
5
3.5
3
0.83
0.24
11
4.09
5
4
3
0.67
0.20
13
4.31
5
5
2
0.91
0.25
13
4.15
5
4
3
0.77
0.21
11
4.18
5
4
3
0.57
0.17
190
4.14
5
4
1
0.77
0.06
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
2
15%
3
23%
1
8%
0
0%
6
46%
1
8%
2
15%
0
0%
0
0%
2
15%
18
9%
1
0
2
8
2
13
0
0
1
7
5
13
0
0
3
6
4
13
0
0
2
3
7
12
0
1
1
7
4
13
0
0
1
5
7
13
0
0
2
3
6
11
0
0
3
2
5
10
0
0
5
3
4
12
0
0
2
5
6
13
0
0
3
2
2
7
0
0
6
3
3
12
0
0
2
6
3
11
0
1
1
4
7
13
0
0
3
5
5
13
0
0
1
7
3
11
1
2
38
76
73
190
7.7%
0.0%
15.4%
61.5%
15.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
7.7%
53.8%
38.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
23.1%
46.2%
30.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
58.3%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
7.7%
53.8%
30.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
7.7%
38.5%
53.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
27.3%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
41.7%
25.0%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
15.4%
38.5%
46.2%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
42.9%
28.6%
28.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
25.0%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
54.5%
27.3%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
7.7%
30.8%
53.8%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
23.1%
38.5%
38.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
9.1%
63.6%
27.3%
100%
0.5%
1.1%
20.0%
40.0%
38.4%
100%
10.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
11.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
11.0
No low ratings
No low
ratings
49.7
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 50 (45.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
50
4.18
5
4
1
0.93
0.13
50
3.86
5
4
1
1.17
0.16
48
4.02
5
4
1
1.05
0.15
49
4.18
5
5
1
0.98
0.14
50
4.00
5
4.5
1
1.26
0.18
50
3.90
5
4
1
1.28
0.18
49
4.14
5
4
1
1.09
0.16
37
4.08
5
4
1
1.12
0.18
46
4.02
5
4
1
1.03
0.15
50
3.96
5
4
1
1.13
0.16
41
3.88
5
4
1
1.19
0.19
50
3.80
5
4
1
1.33
0.19
47
4.13
5
4
2
0.98
0.14
50
3.68
5
4
1
1.38
0.19
50
3.98
5
4
1
0.99
0.14
47
3.98
5
4
1
1.02
0.15
764
3.99
5
4
1
1.12
0.04
No-Response out of 50
0
0%
0
0%
2
4%
1
2%
0
0%
0
0%
1
2%
13
26%
4
8%
0
0%
9
18%
0
0%
3
6%
0
0%
0
0%
3
6%
36
5%
1
2
6
19
22
50
4
2
8
19
17
50
2
2
8
17
19
48
1
1
11
11
25
49
4
3
7
11
25
50
4
4
8
11
23
50
3
0
8
14
24
49
2
1
7
9
18
37
1
3
9
14
19
46
2
5
6
17
20
50
3
2
8
12
16
41
6
1
11
11
21
50
0
4
8
13
22
47
7
3
7
15
18
50
2
1
10
20
17
50
2
1
10
17
17
47
44
35
132
230
323
764
2.0%
4.0%
12.0%
38.0%
44.0%
100%
8.0%
4.0%
16.0%
38.0%
34.0%
100%
4.2%
4.2%
16.7%
35.4%
39.6%
100%
2.0%
2.0%
22.4%
22.4%
51.0%
100%
8.0%
6.0%
14.0%
22.0%
50.0%
100%
8.0%
8.0%
16.0%
22.0%
46.0%
100%
6.1%
0.0%
16.3%
28.6%
49.0%
100%
5.4%
2.7%
18.9%
24.3%
48.6%
100%
2.2%
6.5%
19.6%
30.4%
41.3%
100%
4.0%
10.0%
12.0%
34.0%
40.0%
100%
7.3%
4.9%
19.5%
29.3%
39.0%
100%
12.0%
2.0%
22.0%
22.0%
42.0%
100%
0.0%
8.5%
17.0%
27.7%
46.8%
100%
14.0%
6.0%
14.0%
30.0%
36.0%
100%
4.0%
2.0%
20.0%
40.0%
34.0%
100%
4.3%
2.1%
21.3%
36.2%
36.2%
100%
5.8%
4.6%
17.3%
30.1%
42.3%
100%
13.7
6.0
9.0
18.0
5.1
4.3
12.7
9.0
8.3
5.3
5.6
4.6
8.8
3.3
12.3
11.3
7.0
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Comm Family Addict Services CFAS
Chair: Sterling T Shumway
Survey participation: 8 (53.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
8
4.88
5
5
4
0.33
0.12
8
4.63
5
5
4
0.48
0.17
8
4.63
5
5
4
0.48
0.17
8
4.88
5
5
4
0.33
0.12
8
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
8
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.15
8
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.15
6
4.83
5
5
4
0.37
0.15
8
4.63
5
5
4
0.48
0.17
8
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.15
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
8
4.88
5
5
4
0.33
0.12
8
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
8
4.88
5
5
4
0.33
0.12
8
4.75
5
5
4
0.43
0.15
8
4.63
5
5
4
0.48
0.17
125
4.78
5
5
4
0.36
0.03
No-Response out of 8
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
25%
0
0%
0
0%
1
13%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
2%
0
0
0
1
7
8
0
0
0
3
5
8
0
0
0
3
5
8
0
0
0
1
7
8
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
0
0
2
6
8
0
0
0
2
6
8
0
0
0
1
5
6
0
0
0
3
5
8
0
0
0
2
6
8
0
0
0
2
5
7
0
0
0
1
7
8
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
0
0
1
7
8
0
0
0
2
6
8
0
0
0
3
5
8
0
0
0
27
98
125
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
87.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
37.5%
62.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
37.5%
62.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
87.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
83.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
37.5%
62.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
87.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
87.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
75.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
37.5%
62.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
21.6%
78.4%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Department of Design (DOD)
Chair:Sharran F. Parkinson
Survey participation: 5 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
4.40
5
4
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.60
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.20
5
4
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.20
5
5
2
1.17
0.52
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
3.40
5
4
1
1.36
0.61
5
3.40
4
3
3
0.49
0.22
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
80
4.30
5
5
1
0.70
0.08
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0
0
3
2
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
0
4
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
4
1
5
0
1
0
1
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
1
0
1
2
1
5
0
0
3
2
0
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
1
1
11
27
40
80
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
80.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
40.0%
0.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
1.3%
1.3%
13.8%
33.8%
50.0%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
4.0
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
3.0
No low ratings
No low
ratings
33.5
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Hospitality Retail Management
Chair: Shane C. Blum
Survey participation: 8 (44.4%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
8
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
8
3.50
5
3.5
1
1.22
0.43
8
3.25
5
4
1
1.56
0.55
8
3.63
5
4
1
1.41
0.50
8
3.75
5
4
1
1.30
0.46
8
3.50
5
4
1
1.50
0.53
8
3.50
5
4
1
1.58
0.56
8
3.88
5
4.5
1
1.36
0.48
8
3.25
5
3.5
1
1.20
0.42
8
3.50
5
3.5
1
1.41
0.50
8
3.25
5
3.5
1
1.20
0.42
8
3.00
5
3.5
1
1.41
0.50
8
3.25
5
3.5
1
1.48
0.52
8
3.63
5
4
2
1.11
0.39
8
3.13
4
4
1
1.27
0.45
8
3.38
4
4
1
0.99
0.35
8
3.00
4
3
1
1.00
0.35
128
3.40
5
4
1
1.31
0.12
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
0
3
2
2
8
2
1
0
3
2
8
1
1
1
2
3
8
1
0
2
2
3
8
2
0
0
4
2
8
2
0
1
2
3
8
1
0
2
1
4
8
1
1
2
3
1
8
1
1
2
1
3
8
1
1
2
3
1
8
2
1
1
3
1
8
2
0
2
2
2
8
0
2
1
3
2
8
2
0
1
5
0
8
1
0
2
5
0
8
1
1
3
3
0
8
21
9
25
44
29
128
12.5%
0.0%
37.5%
25.0%
25.0%
100%
25.0%
12.5%
0.0%
37.5%
25.0%
100%
12.5%
12.5%
12.5%
25.0%
37.5%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
37.5%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
25.0%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
12.5%
25.0%
37.5%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
12.5%
50.0%
100%
12.5%
12.5%
25.0%
37.5%
12.5%
100%
12.5%
12.5%
25.0%
12.5%
37.5%
100%
12.5%
12.5%
25.0%
37.5%
12.5%
100%
25.0%
12.5%
12.5%
37.5%
12.5%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
25.0%
12.5%
37.5%
25.0%
100%
25.0%
0.0%
12.5%
62.5%
0.0%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
62.5%
0.0%
100%
12.5%
12.5%
37.5%
37.5%
0.0%
100%
16.4%
7.0%
19.5%
34.4%
22.7%
100%
4.0
1.7
2.5
5.0
3.0
2.5
5.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.3
2.0
2.5
2.5
5.0
1.5
2.4
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Human Develop and Family Studies
Chair: Ann M. Mastergeorge
Survey participation: 9 (33.3%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
9
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
9
3.78
5
4
2
1.13
0.38
9
3.00
5
3
1
1.05
0.35
8
3.63
5
4
1
1.22
0.43
8
3.50
5
3.5
2
0.87
0.31
9
2.67
5
3
1
1.25
0.42
9
2.44
4
3
1
0.96
0.32
8
3.63
5
4
1
1.11
0.39
0
0.00
0
0
0
0.00
0.00
7
3.00
4
3
2
0.76
0.29
9
3.11
5
3
1
1.20
0.40
3
3.33
4
3
3
0.47
0.27
9
3.33
5
4
1
1.41
0.47
8
3.25
5
3
2
0.97
0.34
9
2.56
5
3
1
1.50
0.50
9
4.00
5
4
3
0.67
0.22
6
4.00
5
4
3
0.82
0.33
120
3.08
5
3
0
0.96
0.09
0
0%
0
0%
1
11%
1
11%
0
0%
0
0%
1
11%
9
100%
2
22%
0
0%
6
67%
0
0%
1
11%
0
0%
0
0%
3
33%
24
17%
0
2
1
3
3
9
1
1
5
1
1
9
1
0
2
3
2
8
0
1
3
3
1
8
2
2
3
1
1
9
2
2
4
1
0
9
1
0
1
5
1
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
2
0
7
1
2
2
3
1
9
0
0
2
1
0
3
2
0
2
3
2
9
0
2
3
2
1
8
4
0
2
2
1
9
0
0
2
5
2
9
0
0
2
2
2
6
14
14
37
37
18
120
0.0%
22.2%
11.1%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
11.1%
11.1%
55.6%
11.1%
11.1%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
25.0%
37.5%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
12.5%
37.5%
37.5%
12.5%
100%
22.2%
22.2%
33.3%
11.1%
11.1%
100%
22.2%
22.2%
44.4%
11.1%
0.0%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
12.5%
62.5%
12.5%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0%
0.0%
28.6%
42.9%
28.6%
0.0%
100%
11.1%
22.2%
22.2%
33.3%
11.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
66.7%
33.3%
0.0%
100%
22.2%
0.0%
22.2%
33.3%
22.2%
100%
0.0%
25.0%
37.5%
25.0%
12.5%
100%
44.4%
0.0%
22.2%
22.2%
11.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
55.6%
22.2%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
11.7%
11.7%
30.8%
30.8%
15.0%
100%
3.0
1.0
5.0
4.0
0.5
0.3
6.0
No low
ratings
1.0
1.3
No low ratings
2.5
1.5
0.8
No low ratings
No low
ratings
2.0
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Nutritional Sciences
Chair: Nikhil V. Dhurandhar
Survey participation: 12 (57.1%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
12
4.25
5
4
3
0.72
0.21
12
3.83
5
4
1
1.07
0.31
11
3.91
5
4
2
1.00
0.30
12
4.08
5
4
3
0.86
0.25
12
4.00
5
4
2
1.00
0.29
12
4.17
5
4.5
2
0.99
0.28
12
3.67
5
3.5
1
1.18
0.34
10
3.80
5
4
1
1.25
0.39
11
4.36
5
5
3
0.77
0.23
12
4.08
5
4
2
0.95
0.28
10
3.80
5
4
1
1.25
0.39
12
3.33
5
3
1
1.43
0.41
10
4.20
5
4.5
3
0.87
0.28
12
3.83
5
4
2
1.14
0.33
12
4.42
5
5
3
0.76
0.22
12
3.83
5
4
1
1.14
0.33
184
3.97
5
4
1
1.02
0.08
No-Response out of 12
0
0%
0
0%
1
8%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
17%
1
8%
0
0%
2
17%
0
0%
2
17%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
8
4%
0
0
2
5
5
12
1
0
2
6
3
12
0
1
3
3
4
11
0
0
4
3
5
12
0
1
3
3
5
12
0
1
2
3
6
12
1
0
5
2
4
12
1
0
3
2
4
10
0
0
2
3
6
11
0
1
2
4
5
12
1
0
3
2
4
10
2
1
4
1
4
12
0
0
3
2
5
10
0
2
3
2
5
12
0
0
2
3
7
12
1
0
3
4
4
12
7
7
46
48
76
184
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
41.7%
41.7%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
16.7%
50.0%
25.0%
100%
0.0%
9.1%
27.3%
27.3%
36.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
25.0%
41.7%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
25.0%
25.0%
41.7%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
41.7%
16.7%
33.3%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
20.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
18.2%
27.3%
54.5%
100%
0.0%
8.3%
16.7%
33.3%
41.7%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
20.0%
40.0%
100%
16.7%
8.3%
33.3%
8.3%
33.3%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
16.7%
41.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
25.0%
58.3%
100%
8.3%
0.0%
25.0%
33.3%
33.3%
100%
3.8%
3.8%
25.0%
26.1%
41.3%
100%
No low
ratings
9.0
7.0
No low
ratings
8.0
9.0
6.0
6.0
No low
ratings
9.0
6.0
1.7
No low
ratings
3.5
No low ratings
8.0
8.9
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Human Sciences
Personal Financial Planning
Chair: Vickie L. Hampton
Survey participation: 7 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
7
4.43
5
4
4
0.49
0.19
7
4.43
5
4
4
0.49
0.19
7
4.14
5
4
3
0.64
0.24
7
4.57
5
5
3
0.73
0.28
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
7
4.43
5
5
2
1.05
0.40
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
7
4.43
5
5
3
0.73
0.28
6
4.17
5
4.5
3
0.90
0.37
7
4.43
5
4
4
0.49
0.19
7
4.14
5
4
2
0.99
0.37
7
4.14
5
4
3
0.83
0.31
7
4.57
5
5
4
0.49
0.19
7
4.29
5
5
2
1.03
0.39
7
3.43
5
4
1
1.40
0.53
7
4.14
5
4
3
0.83
0.31
111
4.32
5
4.25
1
0.75
0.07
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
0
0
0
4
3
7
0
0
0
4
3
7
0
0
1
4
2
7
0
0
1
1
5
7
0
0
0
2
5
7
0
1
0
1
5
7
0
0
0
2
5
7
0
0
1
2
4
7
0
0
2
1
3
6
0
0
0
4
3
7
0
1
0
3
3
7
0
0
2
2
3
7
0
0
0
3
4
7
0
1
0
2
4
7
1
1
1
2
2
7
0
0
2
2
3
7
1
4
10
39
57
111
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
57.1%
28.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
16.7%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
42.9%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
28.6%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
42.9%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
28.6%
57.1%
100%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
28.6%
28.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
28.6%
42.9%
100%
0.9%
3.6%
9.0%
35.1%
51.4%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
6.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
6.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
6.0
2.0
No low
ratings
19.2
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Media and Communication
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 20 (37.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
20
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
20
4.85
5
5
4
0.36
0.08
20
4.80
5
5
3
0.51
0.11
20
4.80
5
5
3
0.51
0.11
20
4.80
5
5
2
0.68
0.15
20
4.85
5
5
3
0.48
0.11
20
4.90
5
5
4
0.30
0.07
20
4.80
5
5
3
0.60
0.13
15
4.60
5
5
3
0.80
0.21
19
4.58
5
5
3
0.75
0.17
20
4.80
5
5
3
0.60
0.13
18
4.78
5
5
3
0.63
0.15
20
4.75
5
5
3
0.62
0.14
20
4.70
5
5
2
0.78
0.17
20
4.85
5
5
3
0.48
0.11
17
4.29
5
5
1
1.18
0.29
20
4.80
5
5
3
0.51
0.11
309
4.75
5
5
1
0.61
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
5
25%
1
5%
0
0%
2
10%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
3
15%
0
0%
11
3%
0
0
0
3
17
20
0
0
1
2
17
20
0
0
1
2
17
20
0
1
0
1
18
20
0
0
1
1
18
20
0
0
0
2
18
20
0
0
2
0
18
20
0
0
3
0
12
15
0
0
3
2
14
19
0
0
2
0
18
20
0
0
2
0
16
18
0
0
2
1
17
20
0
1
1
1
17
20
0
0
1
1
18
20
1
1
1
3
11
17
0
0
1
2
17
20
1
3
21
21
263
309
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
15.0%
85.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
85.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
85.0%
100%
0.0%
5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
90.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
5.0%
90.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
90.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
90.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
15.8%
10.5%
73.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
90.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
88.9%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
5.0%
85.0%
100%
0.0%
5.0%
5.0%
5.0%
85.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
5.0%
90.0%
100%
5.9%
5.9%
5.9%
17.6%
64.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
85.0%
100%
0.3%
1.0%
6.8%
6.8%
85.1%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
18.0
No low
ratings
7.0
No low
ratings
71.0
0.03
`
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
19.0
No low
ratings
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Media and Communication
Media and Communication
Chair: Brian Ott
Survey participation: 7 (38.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
7
4.57
5
5
3
0.73
0.28
7
4.57
5
5
3
0.73
0.28
7
4.43
5
5
2
1.05
0.40
7
4.57
5
5
3
0.73
0.28
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
7
4.43
5
5
3
0.90
0.34
6
4.33
5
5
3
0.94
0.38
7
4.29
5
5
3
0.88
0.33
7
4.43
5
5
3
0.90
0.34
5
4.60
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
7
4.43
5
5
3
0.90
0.34
7
4.29
5
5
2
1.16
0.44
7
4.57
5
5
3
0.73
0.28
6
3.83
5
5
1
1.67
0.68
7
4.71
5
5
4
0.45
0.17
108
4.47
5
5
1
0.84
0.08
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
0
0%
2
29%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
4
4%
0
0
0
2
5
7
0
0
1
1
5
7
0
0
1
1
5
7
0
1
0
1
5
7
0
0
1
1
5
7
0
0
0
2
5
7
0
0
2
0
5
7
0
0
2
0
4
6
0
0
2
1
4
7
0
0
2
0
5
7
0
0
1
0
4
5
0
0
2
0
5
7
0
1
1
0
5
7
0
0
1
1
5
7
1
1
0
0
4
6
0
0
0
2
5
7
1
3
16
12
76
108
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
0.0%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
0.0%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
14.3%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
0.0%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
0.0%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
0.0%
71.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
71.4%
100%
16.7%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
28.6%
71.4%
100%
0.9%
2.8%
14.8%
11.1%
70.4%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
6.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
5.0
No low
ratings
2.0
No low
ratings
22.0
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Media and Communication
Public Relations
Chair: Trent Seltzer
Survey participation: 5 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
4
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
4
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
78
4.99
5
5
4
0.03
0.00
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
3%
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
1
77
78
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.3%
98.7%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Institutional Research, 1/26/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Visual and Performing Arts
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Survey participation: 59 (48.4%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
59
3.97
5
5
1
1.35
0.18
59
4.24
5
5
1
1.14
0.15
59
4.34
5
5
1
0.91
0.12
59
4.02
5
5
1
1.33
0.17
59
3.78
5
4
1
1.35
0.18
59
3.61
5
4
1
1.53
0.20
59
4.05
5
5
1
1.27
0.17
57
4.07
5
5
1
1.18
0.16
57
4.05
5
5
1
1.23
0.16
59
3.80
5
4
1
1.48
0.19
55
3.89
5
4
1
1.36
0.18
59
3.66
5
4
1
1.43
0.19
59
3.88
5
5
1
1.40
0.18
59
3.53
5
4
1
1.56
0.20
59
4.02
5
4
1
1.20
0.16
58
3.86
5
4
1
1.31
0.17
935
3.92
5
4.5
1
1.32
0.04
No-Response out of 59
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
3%
2
3%
0
0%
4
7%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
2%
9
1%
5
7
4
12
31
59
3
3
6
12
35
59
1
1
9
14
34
59
5
6
4
12
32
59
5
8
8
12
26
59
9
8
7
8
27
59
4
6
4
14
31
59
3
4
8
13
29
57
4
3
9
11
30
57
9
4
6
11
29
59
5
6
6
11
27
55
8
6
8
13
24
59
6
7
5
11
30
59
11
7
5
12
24
59
4
4
6
18
27
59
5
4
12
10
27
58
87
84
107
194
463
935
8.5%
11.9%
6.8%
20.3%
52.5%
100%
5.1%
5.1%
10.2%
20.3%
59.3%
100%
1.7%
1.7%
15.3%
23.7%
57.6%
100%
8.5%
10.2%
6.8%
20.3%
54.2%
100%
8.5%
13.6%
13.6%
20.3%
44.1%
100%
15.3%
13.6%
11.9%
13.6%
45.8%
100%
6.8%
10.2%
6.8%
23.7%
52.5%
100%
5.3%
7.0%
14.0%
22.8%
50.9%
100%
7.0%
5.3%
15.8%
19.3%
52.6%
100%
15.3%
6.8%
10.2%
18.6%
49.2%
100%
9.1%
10.9%
10.9%
20.0%
49.1%
100%
13.6%
10.2%
13.6%
22.0%
40.7%
100%
10.2%
11.9%
8.5%
18.6%
50.8%
100%
18.6%
11.9%
8.5%
20.3%
40.7%
100%
6.8%
6.8%
10.2%
30.5%
45.8%
100%
8.6%
6.9%
20.7%
17.2%
46.6%
100%
9.3%
9.0%
11.4%
20.7%
49.5%
100%
3.6
7.8
24.0
4.0
2.9
2.1
4.5
6.0
5.9
3.1
3.5
2.6
3.2
2.0
5.6
4.1
3.8
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Visual and Performing Arts
School of Art
Chair: Lydia C. Thompson
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 22 (53.7%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
22
3.32
5
3.5
1
1.52
0.32
22
3.86
5
4
1
1.25
0.27
22
3.86
5
4
2
0.92
0.20
22
3.36
5
4
1
1.49
0.32
22
3.27
5
3.5
1
1.39
0.30
22
3.36
5
4
1
1.55
0.33
22
3.50
5
4
1
1.41
0.30
20
3.80
5
4
2
0.98
0.22
21
4.10
5
5
1
1.23
0.27
22
3.23
5
4
1
1.62
0.35
19
3.89
5
4
1
1.29
0.30
22
2.95
5
3
1
1.43
0.30
22
3.32
5
3.5
1
1.39
0.30
22
3.14
5
3
1
1.58
0.34
22
3.68
5
4
1
1.29
0.28
22
3.45
5
4
1
1.56
0.33
346
3.51
5
4
1
1.37
0.07
No-Response out of 22
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
9%
1
5%
0
0%
3
14%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
6
2%
3
6
2
3
8
22
1
3
4
4
10
22
0
1
8
6
7
22
4
3
3
5
7
22
4
2
5
6
5
22
4
4
2
4
8
22
3
3
3
6
7
22
0
2
6
6
6
20
2
0
3
5
11
21
6
2
2
5
7
22
2
1
2
6
8
19
5
4
4
5
4
22
3
4
4
5
6
22
5
4
3
3
7
22
2
3
2
8
7
22
4
3
3
3
9
22
48
45
56
80
117
346
13.6%
27.3%
9.1%
13.6%
36.4%
100%
4.5%
13.6%
18.2%
18.2%
45.5%
100%
0.0%
4.5%
36.4%
27.3%
31.8%
100%
18.2%
13.6%
13.6%
22.7%
31.8%
100%
18.2%
9.1%
22.7%
27.3%
22.7%
100%
18.2%
18.2%
9.1%
18.2%
36.4%
100%
13.6%
13.6%
13.6%
27.3%
31.8%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
30.0%
30.0%
30.0%
100%
9.5%
0.0%
14.3%
23.8%
52.4%
100%
27.3%
9.1%
9.1%
22.7%
31.8%
100%
10.5%
5.3%
10.5%
31.6%
42.1%
100%
22.7%
18.2%
18.2%
22.7%
18.2%
100%
13.6%
18.2%
18.2%
22.7%
27.3%
100%
22.7%
18.2%
13.6%
13.6%
31.8%
100%
9.1%
13.6%
9.1%
36.4%
31.8%
100%
18.2%
13.6%
13.6%
13.6%
40.9%
100%
13.9%
13.0%
16.2%
23.1%
33.8%
100%
1.2
3.5
13.0
1.7
1.8
1.5
2.2
6.0
8.0
1.5
4.7
1.0
1.6
1.1
3.0
1.7
2.1
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 2/8/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Visual and Performing Arts
School of Music
Chair: William L. Ballenger
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 27 (46.6%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
27
4.37
5
5
1
1.09
0.21
27
4.56
5
5
1
1.07
0.21
27
4.70
5
5
1
0.81
0.16
27
4.67
5
5
1
0.82
0.16
27
4.37
5
5
1
1.09
0.21
27
4.15
5
5
1
1.27
0.24
27
4.59
5
5
1
0.95
0.18
27
4.44
5
5
1
1.20
0.23
27
4.37
5
5
1
0.99
0.19
27
4.48
5
5
1
1.10
0.21
26
4.35
5
5
1
1.07
0.21
27
4.52
5
5
1
0.96
0.18
27
4.70
5
5
1
0.81
0.16
27
4.26
5
5
1
1.11
0.21
27
4.33
5
5
1
1.05
0.20
26
4.42
5
5
3
0.79
0.16
430
4.46
5
5
1
1.01
0.05
No-Response out of 27
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
4%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
4%
2
0%
2
0
1
7
17
27
2
0
0
4
21
27
1
0
0
4
22
27
1
0
0
5
21
27
1
2
1
5
18
27
2
1
5
2
17
27
1
1
0
4
21
27
2
1
1
2
21
27
1
0
4
5
17
27
2
0
1
4
20
27
1
1
3
4
17
26
1
1
0
6
19
27
1
0
0
4
22
27
2
0
2
8
15
27
1
1
3
5
17
27
0
0
5
5
16
26
21
8
26
74
301
430
7.4%
0.0%
3.7%
25.9%
63.0%
100%
7.4%
0.0%
0.0%
14.8%
77.8%
100%
3.7%
0.0%
0.0%
14.8%
81.5%
100%
3.7%
0.0%
0.0%
18.5%
77.8%
100%
3.7%
7.4%
3.7%
18.5%
66.7%
100%
7.4%
3.7%
18.5%
7.4%
63.0%
100%
3.7%
3.7%
0.0%
14.8%
77.8%
100%
7.4%
3.7%
3.7%
7.4%
77.8%
100%
3.7%
0.0%
14.8%
18.5%
63.0%
100%
7.4%
0.0%
3.7%
14.8%
74.1%
100%
3.8%
3.8%
11.5%
15.4%
65.4%
100%
3.7%
3.7%
0.0%
22.2%
70.4%
100%
3.7%
0.0%
0.0%
14.8%
81.5%
100%
7.4%
0.0%
7.4%
29.6%
55.6%
100%
3.7%
3.7%
11.1%
18.5%
63.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
19.2%
19.2%
61.5%
100%
4.9%
1.9%
6.0%
17.2%
70.0%
100%
12.0
12.5
26.0
26.0
7.7
6.3
12.5
7.7
22.0
12.0
10.5
12.5
26.0
11.5
11.0
No low
ratings
12.9
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 2/8/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
College of Visual and Performing Arts
Department of Theatre and Dance
Chair: Mark J. Charney
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 10 (43.5%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.00
0.32
10
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.24
10
4.40
5
4.5
3
0.66
0.21
10
3.70
5
4
2
1.27
0.40
10
3.30
5
3
2
1.27
0.40
10
2.70
5
2
1
1.55
0.49
10
3.80
5
4
2
1.08
0.34
10
3.60
5
4
1
1.20
0.38
9
3.00
5
3
1
1.33
0.44
10
3.20
5
3
1
1.25
0.39
10
2.70
5
2
1
1.42
0.45
10
2.90
5
3
1
1.22
0.39
10
2.90
5
2.5
1
1.45
0.46
10
2.40
5
2
1
1.56
0.49
10
3.90
5
4
1
1.14
0.36
10
3.30
5
3
1
1.19
0.38
159
3.39
5
3
1
1.21
0.10
No-Response out of 10
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
10%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
0
1
1
2
6
10
0
0
2
4
4
10
0
0
1
4
5
10
0
3
1
2
4
10
0
4
2
1
3
10
3
3
0
2
2
10
0
2
1
4
3
10
1
1
1
5
2
10
1
3
2
1
2
9
1
2
3
2
2
10
2
4
1
1
2
10
2
1
4
2
1
10
2
3
1
2
2
10
4
3
0
1
2
10
1
0
1
5
3
10
1
1
4
2
2
10
18
31
25
40
45
159
0.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
10.0%
40.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
30.0%
10.0%
20.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
40.0%
20.0%
10.0%
30.0%
100%
30.0%
30.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
10.0%
40.0%
30.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
50.0%
20.0%
100%
11.1%
33.3%
22.2%
11.1%
22.2%
100%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
40.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
100%
20.0%
10.0%
40.0%
20.0%
10.0%
100%
20.0%
30.0%
10.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
40.0%
30.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
50.0%
30.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
40.0%
20.0%
20.0%
100%
11.3%
19.5%
15.7%
25.2%
28.3%
100%
8.0
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
2.0
1.0
0.7
3.5
3.5
0.8
1.3
0.5
1.0
0.8
0.4
8.0
2.0
1.7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 2/8/2016, page 1 of 1