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