Did you know? When administrators are evaluated, faculty are supposed to provide input for those evaluations.
Facts:
Faculty evaluation of administrators is called for in the California Education Code (ARTICLE 4. Evaluations and Discipline <87660 - 87683>):
“Governing boards shall establish and disseminate written evaluation procedures for administrators. It is the intent of the Legislature that evaluation of administrators include, to the extent possible, faculty evaluation.”
The language calling for faculty evaluation of administrators that is used in Ed Code mirrors the language calling for student evaluation of faculty; this means, per Ed Code, it is as proper to include the faculty voice in administrator evaluations as it is the student voice in faculty evaluations.
Evaluations that include the voices of an administrator’s direct reports, staff, and faculty (known as 360 evaluations) are common practice at other community colleges; however, that is not standard practice at Palomar College. Many administrators wish it were.
Following Ed Code and providing a mechanism for faculty to evaluate an administrator’s work is useful because, in the aggregate, patterns can be detected that could lead to commendation or necessary improvement - a benefit to the college.
Following Ed Code and providing public, detailed criteria by which to evaluate an administrator is useful because (much like in faculty evaluations) the administrator will know exactly how they are to be assessed—via which process, with which documentation, etc. The process would be fairer for administrators.
There was once a process in the Faculty Senate to provide faculty feedback of administrators, since no process pursuant to Ed Code had been put into place, but the Faculty Senate process was called out by ACCJC early last decade to be improper, and the process was scrapped. However, no proper process was then implemented to ensure faculty evaluation of administrators pursuant to Ed Code.
The Faculty of the Tenure and Evaluations Review Board (TERB) wrote and presented a letter to the Governing Board in September of 2019 asking after the “written evaluation procedures for administrators” and the role faculty currently play in administrator evaluations. TERB has yet to receive an official response.
TERB strongly supports bringing the process of evaluating administrators in line with Ed Code.
Bottom Line: Having this feedback helps administrators to see where their weaknesses and strengths lie, just as student feedback does for faculty. It can be a powerful tool in improving job performance. As well, it helps administrators in that their job performance can be viewed through many lenses instead of only the lens of their supervisor.