Ohio Administrative Code
Title 3342 - Kent State University
Chapter 3342-6 - Administrative Policy on Awards and Compensation for University Employees
Section 3342-6-05.3 - Administrative policy regarding academic administrative
Universal Citation: OH Admin Code 3342-6-05.3
Current through all regulations passed and filed through September 16, 2024
(A) General goals of an administrative review.
(1)
Gauge
accomplishment. A proper review requires the officer to make a thorough
self-evaluation, as well as a program assessment, highlighting accomplishments,
problems, solutions, and prognoses for future operations.
(2)
Display success.
The review affords an opportunity for focusing the university's attention on
the real successes of the administrator's tenure. If properly handled, the
response and report portion of the review can contribute to increased awareness
of accomplishments.
(3)
Expose hidden problems. In any administrator's daily
exercise of authority, misunderstandings as well as problems of real substance
can occur but never be brought to the administrator's attention. A review
should create an environment in which reviewers can reveal hidden problems and
potentially disruptive ones. The ultimate goal is the resolution of those
problems in a way that best serves the interests of the university
community.
(B) Specific objectives of the review. Principal efforts should be directed toward ascertaining the officer's administrative performance in terms of management effectiveness and leadership capacity: for example, quality and competence of work, use of resources and ability to give direction to the unit while encouraging the scholarly interests of the unit. In both management and leadership, the officer's concrete accomplishments should be elicited from the individual being reviewed, as well as from those surveyed.
(C) Persons to be reviewed and evaluated.
(1)
The academic
administrative officers to be reviewed are the provost, the the dean of the
regional college, the deans of the colleges and independent schools, the dean
for undergraduate studies, the dean of graduate studies, the dean of the honors
college, dean of the university libraries, and the deans of the regional
campuses.
(2)
Evaluation of the performance of the president is the
responsibility of the Kent state university board of trustees.
(3)
The reviews of
the academic administrative officers listed in paragraph (C)(1) of this rule
shall be conducted according to the following procedures:
(D) Procedures.
(1)
Frequency.
(a)
Regular reviews. The periodic review process shall
normally occur in the fourth year but no later than the fifth year unless it is
initiated earlier by special request. The office of the provost shall maintain
a review calendar for deans and associate provosts and shall notify the faculty
senate committee on administrative officers at the start of the academic year
of the reviews scheduled within the next twelve months. When a review is
scheduled, the administrator scheduling the review shall also notify the
faculty members of the unit involved.
(b)
Early reviews.
The administrator to be reviewed, a member of the administration to whom the
administrator reports, or one or more members of the faculty of the
administrator's unit may request an early review when circumstances warrant it.
Any circumstances that lead to a request for an early review are expected to be
unusual and of a serious nature. The decision to proceed with an early review
and the scheduling of either an early or regular review are the sole
responsibility of the president, or the provost, or the dean of the regional
college after consultation with the provost as appropriate. When a review is
scheduled, the administrator scheduling the review shall notify the faculty of
the unit involved.
(2)
Documentary
requirements. At the onset of the review, the committee shall be provided with
the following documentary information:
(a)
The
administration's published job description for the position.
(b)
A self-study by
the administrator being reviewed, detailing accomplishments of management and
leadership, problems encountered and solutions provided thereto, and other
matters that the administrator perceives as important for the understanding of
the administrator's function since the last review.
(3)
Committee
operations.
(a)
It shall be the responsibility of the review committee to
ensure as wide as possible a base of input to the review. In particular, it
shall provide ample opportunity for the faculty and staff of the unit to
express their views. To this end, the review committee may:
(i)
Invite signed
written statements from faculty, staff, students, and alumni concerning the
performance of the administrator under review.
(ii)
Interview
individuals and/or groups whose input appears specially relevant; e.g., staff
members, alumni groups, advisory committees, curricular bodies, past members of
such bodies, others with whom the administrator works on a peer level and
administrators who report directly to the administrator being
reviewed.
(iii)
Interview student committees that work with the
administrator and students who may serve on faculty/student committees under
his/her purview.
(b)
Nothing in the
above language is meant to limit the range of input that the committee may seek
nor shall it be used to limit input that members, be they faculty, staff,
students, or alumni, wish to make to the review committee.
(c)
It shall be the
responsibility of the review committee to ensure that all communications to the
committee are treated in a confidential manner. The committee shall further
allow the administrator being reviewed the opportunity to discuss issues and
concerns that are identified during the review process and to review and
respond to all documentary evidence, including any formal minutes of
interviews. This opportunity should come reasonably late in the process. The
committee members shall take care not to reveal the names of the authors of
statements or of individuals involved in particular interviews.
(4)
Report. Following the completion of the committee's review,
a written report shall be submitted to the administrator who scheduled the
review. The report shall contain a description of the process, data collected,
and specific recommendations. Following receipt of this report, the
administrator who scheduled the review shall evaluate it and forward a copy of
the report along with his/her own written comments to the reviewed officer.
His/her comments shall also be made available to the members of the review
committee. The transmission of the report to the administrator being reviewed
should be accompanied by an in-depth oral explanation of the findings. The
faculty in the unit of the administrator being reviewed shall receive a timely
written report from the administrator who scheduled the review.
(5)
Follow up. The
administrator who has been reviewed will comment specifically on the progress
being made toward fulfilling the plan of action in his or her subsequent annual
reports, which will be made available to the faculty of the specific
unit.
(6)
Legal restrictions. All aspects of the review process
must be consistent with the requirements of state and federal law and with
University policy
(7)
Review of the procedures. Each review committee is
charged with recommending any desirable change in the procedures to the
committee on administrative officers.
(E) Composition of review committees.
(1)
Provost.
(a)
One member of the executive committee of the faculty
senate.
(b)
Four senior faculty members (including one regional
campus faculty member) nominated by the committee on administrative
officers.
(c)
Two associate provosts or deans chosen from any of the
colleges or independent schools.
(d)
One department
chair/school director.
(2)
Dean of the
regional college.
(a)
One associate provost or dean, chosen from any of the
colleges or independent schools.
(b)
Three senior
faculty members, each faculty member from a different campus under the auspices
of the regional college.
(c)
One senior faculty member from the Kent
campus.
(d)
One regional campus dean.
(3)
Deans of
colleges, independent schools, and regional campuses.
(a)
One dean for
colleges and independent schools, representative must be a dean of a college or
independent school: for regional campuses, representative must be a dean of a
regional campus.
(b)
Three senior faculty members: representatives must be
from the unit; for regional campuses representatives, two are to be from the
same campus as the dean and one from another regional campus.
(c)
For colleges and
independent schools in which there are a significant number of faculty members
whose appointment is at the regional campus, as determined by the provost, one
representative shall be from the regional campuses.
(d)
One senior
faculty member: representative must be from outside the unit. In the case of
regional campus deans, this representative must be from the Kent
campus.
(e)
One department chairperson or school director from the
unit (if appropriate).
(4)
Dean of
undergraduate studies.
(a)
One associate provost or dean, chosen from any of the
colleges and independent schools.
(b)
Three senior
faculty members, each faculty member from a different college or independent
school.
(c)
One department chair/school director.
(d)
One undergraduate
studies professional staff member.
(5)
Dean of graduate
studies.
(a)
One associate provost or dean, chosen from any of the colleges and independent
schools.
(b)
Three senior faculty members, nominated by the members
of the research council, each faculty member from a different college or
independent school.
(c)
One department chair/school director.
(d)
One member of the
staff of the office of research and graduate studies.
(6)
Dean
of the university libraries.
(a)
One dean.
(b)
Three senior
faculty members: representatives must be from library
administration.
(c)
One senior faculty member: representative must be from
outside the unit.
(d)
One department chairperson or school
director.
(7)
Dean of the honors college.
(a)
One
dean.
(b)
Three senior faculty members, who have taught at least
two honors courses during the term of the dean under review, nominated by the
honors college policy council.
(c)
One senior
faculty member: representative must be from outside the unit.
(d)
One department
chairperson or school director.
(F) Selection process guidelines.
(1)
The person to be reviewed shall not participate in the
selection process. To the extent possible, members of the review committee
should have been members of the university for the five years preceding the
review of the person to be reviewed.
(2)
Faculty from the
unit include regional campus faculty so that regional campus faculty belong to
two units, one academic and one geographic.
(3)
Senior faculty
are defined as those with associate or full professorial rank (this requirement
may be waived by the provost for review of regional campus
deans).
(G) Selection Process. Review committee members will be nominated by the following groups and the final selection of the committee will be made from the list of nominees by the administrator conducting the review except that additional members, possibly from outside the university, may be added if, in his/her opinion, they are needed. The number of these additional appointments shall be limited to a maximum of fifty percent of the committee membership. Should the administrator conducting the review find one or more of the lists of nominees to be unacceptable, that person may return the list(s) in question to the nominating group(s) together with a written explanation of this action and request that a new list(s) be established. The administrator conducting the review shall appoint the chairperson of the review committee.
(1)
Faculty members from the unit.
(a)
Deans of college,
independent school, or library administration. College advisory committee
nominates six.
(b)
Deans of regional campuses.
(i)
Faculty council
on the campus nominates four.
(ii)
Regional campus
faculty advisory council nominates two from other campuses.
(c)
Other
administrative officers. The regional campus faculty advisory committee will
nominate six for the dean of the regional college. In the case of all others,
unless specified above, the faculty senate committee on administrative officers
will nominate faculty who have involvement with the unit's
programming.
(2)
Faculty from outside the unit. In each case where the
faculty outside the unit are designated, the committee on administrative
officers will nominate three senior faculty from outside the unit. These
faculty must come from at least two different units.
(3)
Department
chairpersons or school directors. The chairs and directors council will
nominate three chairs and/or directors.
(4)
Deans. The
academic affairs administrative council will nominate two Kent campus deans or
regional campuses, as appropriate.
Replaces: 3342-6- 05.3
Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. Ohio may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
