Academic Policy  1407.10

Academic Affairs Administrators: Appointment, Service, and Performance Review

The original PDF version of this policy is linked from the revised date below.

Academic administrators such as chairs, directors, deans, and vice provosts serve at the pleasure of the administrator who appoints them. Typically, for chairs and deans, an appointment term is established at the time of initial appointment. Toward the end of the term, should an additional term be considered based on mutual agreement between appointee and the person making the appointment, a performance evaluation will be conducted consistent with or comparable to that defined in Academic Policy 1407.20 as a basis for a reappointment decision. In addition, findings from annual performance reviews will be utilized in this process.

All other academic administrators such as associate or assistant chairs, deans, and directors also serve at the pleasure of the administrator who appoints them but typically do not have a term of service identified.

An annual evaluation will be conducted of all academic administrators. The specific nature of the evaluation process will be determined by the administrative officer to whom the administrator reports. The format for the evaluation will be provided to those to be evaluated at the beginning of each appointment period.

The format for the annual evaluation for professional administrative staff who report to the provost – the Administrator’s Annual Evaluation (attached) – is one example that may be chosen. Administrators and evaluators are also encouraged to seek input from representative constituents such as by means of the IDEA Center Feedback Systems for College and University Administrators. Information regarding the process, cost, and how to begin can be found at If this process is used, it is recommended that it be put in place by January 15 to allow sufficient time to get the process started and results back by the deadline for the annual review statements.

The annual evaluation for professional administrative staff who report to the provost will be conducted each year using the Administrator’s Annual Evaluation format. The review statements should be submitted no later than March 15 of each year. Following receipt of the statements, the provost will schedule separate meetings with individuals to learn of their accomplishments during the preceding calendar year and aspirations for the following calendar year.

Professionals are encouraged to solicit views of their own performance during individual annual review conferences held with their direct reports. The provost will likewise be asking—during review conferences—for suggestions regarding how he or she may better serve the units and deans and other professional staff in their personal professional development.

Reformatted for Web October 2, 2014