Faculty Governance Committee Report

COMMENTS FOR SENATE MEETING OF 10/9/2007

 

As Dr. Ballard rightfully states in the framework for the Leadership development taskforce: “East Carolina University is a major national doctoral university. High quality, bold leadership is instrumental to the future of ECU”. In his document, Dr. Ballard points out the components necessary to draft a sound policy to ensure such leadership:

  • Selection and hiring
  • Annual evaluations
  • Retention
  • Five year review
  • Termination
  • Leadership succession

 

I will speak here only about number 4 in his list.

 

In March 18, 2003 Bob Morrison, then chair of the Faculty, asked the Faculty Governance committee to review the current ECU Policy on Review of Administrative Officers to address issues of membership in the committee, both of faculty and administrators, confidential or anonymous material, the need for a reasonable, well-published time frame.

 

It was not until March 1, 2006 that Faculty Governance was able to address this request. According to the Faculty Constitution: “The Faculty Senate and the various committees on which the faculty serve shall be the primary media for the essential joint effort of faculty and administration in the government of East Carolina University.” The Faculty Governance Charge furthers states that “The committee considers matters relating to Appendix C. Personnel Policies and Procedures for the Faculty of East Carolina University, Appendix L. East Carolina University Code, and other governance documents not specified in other committee charges.”. Based then on the appropriate existing mechanisms, Faculty Governance started a comprehensive review of the existing ECU Policy on Review of Administrative Officers.

 

As it is our regular procedure, we examined materials regarding best practices for review of administrative officers, in particular recommendations by AAUP, existing approved policies in our GA approved peer institutions, Chapel Hill, NCState and Charlotte.

 

The following elements emerged from our examination of all these documents:

  • The Chancellor or his representatives is responsible for reviewing the administrative performance of the academic officers.
  • The evaluation of administrators should be drawing on all informed sectors of the university community
  • The evaluation needs to be done periodically
  • The evaluation should be a collaborative endeavor involving the faculty, the administration and other campus constituencies
  • The evaluation must be constructive and developmental; its ultimate purpose should be to offer guidance on improving performance.
  • There should be a commitment of all parties to a generally understood and agreed-upon procedure to carrying the review.
  • According to the nature of the administrative post, there should be a distinction of the appropriate level of faculty involvement.
  • The voice of the faculty is to be weightiest at the departmental and decanal level, and more diluted by the necessary presence of other institutional constituencies in the review of administrators above the level of dean.
  • Faculty need to have reason to believe that their participation in the review has been meaningfully taken into consideration in the outcome.

 

Using all these broad principles, the Faculty Governance committee drafted a policy for the Faculty Input in the Evaluation of Administrators. As members of the committee, then Provost Smith was instrumental in helping us think about confidentiality issues, Vice Chancellor Horns reminded us that the review of administrators should be a joint effort, Vice Chancellor Mageean shared her expertise in drafting surveys and defining constituencies. All the members of the committee were concerned of the need to create a policy that was scrupulous and fair.

 

The chancellor received a first draft in April 2007; the ECU community received it in June 2007. Using input received over the summer, the Faculty Governance drafted a second version, which was circulated in September. We held three open hearings regarding this second draft. The feedback received in the open hearings was overwhelmingly positive, but attendance was lower than expected.

 

We are here today with a double purpose,

  • First, to inform you the principles behind the policy that you have in front of you.
  • Second, Faculty Governance will present this policy to the Leadership Development Task Force on October 15, so it can be included in the final report of the task force. Before this deadline, it is our intention to draft a third version of the document using the input form the hearings and today. It is our hope to present this policy for approval and inclusion in the Faculty Manual at a later meeting.

 

Whatever the results of today’s discussion or the conclusions of the task force, one thing is certain: at the end of this academic year may be even this semester, thanks to a multitude of efforts, ECU will finally have a 360 degrees evaluation of administrators and with that we will be a step closer to become the leadership university that Dr. Ballard and all of us want to be.