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