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