Faculty Senate Evaluation of Dean Davis

Bloggie apologizes for format changes required to post the document.  No further comments.

University of Toledo
Faculty Senate Report on the Administrative Performance of1
Dean Debra Davis
evaluated by the faculty of
The College of Communication and the Arts

Number of respondents: 13 Number of eligible respondents: 56
1.00 = Unsuccessful
2.00 = Needs Improvement

Spring 2015
􏰀

23% response rate
Range of scores

3.00 = Meets Expectations 4.00 = Exceeds Expectations

5.00 = Role Model

Dean Davis’s overall performance score .................................................... 3.05 Area Page

Administrative Areas Score

Number

1. Academic Integrity, Transparency, and Credibility 2.77 1
   
2. Leadership 2.77 3
   
3. Responsibility and Accountability 3.42 5
   
4. Communication/Interpersonal Skills 3.08 6
   
5. Diversity and Inclusion 3.20 8
   
6. Recruitment and Retention of Faculty and Staff 3.18 9
   
7. External Relations 2.82 11
   
8. Program Development 3.00 13
   
9. Problem Solving and Decision-Making 3.08 15
   
10. Planning & Organizing 3.18 17
    
11. Financial Management 3.09 18
    

Comments on overall administrative performance

19

1 This assessment would not have been possible without the invaluable service provided by the individuals at The Center for Creative Instruction, including, but not limited to, Bobbi Vaughan and Brian Szabo. This evaluation was administered by the 2014–15 Faculty Senate Executive Committee:

Karen Hoblet, President Kristen Keith, Vice President Linda Rouillard, Past President

Lucy Duhon, Executive Secretary Mike Dowd, at-large MC rep Scott Molitor, at-large MC rep

Marlene Porter, at-large HSC rep, Frederick Williams, at-large HSC rep. Mary Humphrys, OFC Representative

Faculty Senate: 3320 University Hall, University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft St., Toledo, OH 43606 Telephone: 419.530.2112; Fax: 419.530.2114; Email: facultysenate@utoledo.edu

Area 1 Dean Davis Academic Integrity, Transparency, and Credibility
Please consider the following issues when assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area.
(a) Does the dean adhere to principles of academic freedom and shared governance? (b) Are processes open and transparent?
(c) Do past decisions indicate credible future leadership?
Dean Davis’s score in Area 1................................................... 2.77
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 3

• The dean demonstrates consistent leadership and respect for academic freedom and shared governance, to produce first-best solutions to academic issues and to insure the academic integrity of all college programs.
  
• Transparency is a hallmark: the dean actively engages faculty and staff to address issues facing the college and incorporates their input into solutions so that decisions have a college- wide foundation. Decisions are based on core values and serve to guarantee academic in- tegrity throughout the college.
  
• Past actions leave no doubt that the dean’s future actions will be trustworthy, and will be made in the best interest of students, faculty, and staff.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 1
  
  • The dean acts in a way to nurture the understanding of academic freedom and shared
    governance among faculty as a way to preserve the long-term integrity of academic programs.
    
  • Decision processes of the dean are professional and transparent. Faculty and staff are in- cluded in each stage of the decision-making process. Academic integrity is a key component of each decision. The dean openly accepts responsibility for the ethics and fairness of each decision.
    
  • Past actions of the dean have been consistent, producing trust in faculty and staff that the dean’s future actions will be ethical and fair.
    Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3
    
    • The dean makes decisions with an uncompromising commitment to the principles of aca- demic freedom and shared governance, thus promoting academic integrity across all college programs.
      
    • Faculty and staff are consistently encouraged by the dean to provide input on the issues facing the college and, once decisions are made, the dean openly discusses the rationale for each decision. The dean’s decisions are ethical and fair. Decisions are made for the right reasons and serve to promote academic integrity.
      
    • The dean’s past actions instill confidence that future actions will be worthy of faculty and staff trust.
      Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 2
      
      • The dean does not adhere to principles of academic freedom and shared governance on a
        consistent basis, raising doubts about the commitment to academic integrity.
        
      • Informs faculty and staff of issues faced by the college, but does so inconsistently and typi- cally after decisions are made. The dean typically does not provide the rationale for her/his decisions. The dean needs coaching to improve impartiality.
        
      • Past actions of the dean have been inconsistent and do not serve as a credible predictor of future actions.
        

1

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 1: Academic Integrity, Transparency, and Credibility

Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 4

• The dean shows little or no respect for either academic freedom or shared governance, and
  little or no regard for academic integrity.
  
• The dean does not routinely inform faculty and staff of issues facing the college and does not openly communicate decisions that have been made. No rationale is provided for such decisions other than appearing to suit the dean’s preferences only. The dean does not exhibit a propensity to match words with corresponding actions.
  
• Past actions of the dean produce little or no trust that future actions will be ethical or fair. Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 1 ...................................... 0
  • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area. Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 1 (verbatim)
  

1. 1.1  The Dean is sensitive to the concerns of faculty and is open to meetings/discussions. When there are concerns, she is quick to address - offering solutions and diffusing potentially difficult situations.
   
2. 1.2  Information arrives in departments at last-minute speeds. Requests from Dean’s office for information is often also last-minute. Meetings are sometimes announced and organized last minute. It is difficult to anticipate what is needed and operate with clarity when calls for information and action are initiated in this fashion.
   
3. 1.3  Unless you are part of a small clique of individuals, there is no shared governance. Even when there are majority votes on certain issues, she often goes against the faculty’s vote.
   
4. 1.4  A. The Dean ignores shared governance almost completely, nor does she follow ethical means, proper protocol or CBA rules. B. It appears nothing is transparent. Most everything is being done behind closed doors, When faculty are informed of things to considered, it is usually followed by, “and the decision has been made to do it this way”. C. Past decisions do NOT indicate a credible future as leader.
   
5. 1.5  There is no transparency and though she may talk to our Chair about some things they are almost never brought to the faculty. Also, there have been a lot of decisions made in the last couple of years that should have had faculty input and did not. She made many decisions unilaterally and on her own.
   

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 2 of 19

Area 2 Dean Davis Leadership
When assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area, traditional leadership attributes should be considered along with attributes that include, but are not limited to the extent to which . . .

1. (a)  the dean demonstrates insight and motivation as departments and faculty build, strengthen, and refine a cohesive set of academic and research programs,
   
2. (b)  the dean’s actions and resource allocations are demonstrably free of favoritism or bias,
   
3. (c)  the dean effectively represents and advocates for the mission and visibility of the college within
   the university,
   
4. (d)  the dean publicly recognizes the contributions of others in successful college-level performance
   and actions, and
   
5. (e)  the dean’s professional and social behavior serve as an exemplar for faculty, staff and students.
   

Dean Davis’s score in Area 2................................................... 2.77
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 2

• The dean is a proven leader in all aspects of job described above.
  
• Faculty, students, and chairs consistently look to the dean to provide inspiration and exper- tise throughout the development of a project.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 2
  
  • Clearly stands out as a leader in most or all aspects of job described above.
    
  • Faculty, staff or students recognize the significant benefit from dean’s contribution to a project.
    Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3 • The dean consistently demonstrates a leadership role in most aspects of job described above.
    Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 3 • The dean shows some interest in and talent for the leadership role described above, though
    he/she will not be effective without coaching.
    Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 3
    • The dean shows little or no interest or ability in providing above mentioned leadership to faculty, staff, or students.
    Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 2 ...................................... 0 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
    Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 2 (verbatim)
    

1. 2.1  Efforts to champion all aspects of the college sometimes seem to be lacking and/or pinned on the faculty, as if the Dean’s office were unaware of the importance and/or value of various programs in the departments in the college. Dean’s office often gives the impression that faculty are not working hard enough when in fact there is hardly enough time to get the work done. Sometimes feel a disconnect between classroom experience and university administration.
   
2. 2.2  While she understands the art department, she lacks a real understanding of other departments of the college and tries to make other departments conform to how things are done in the art department. She plays favorites with certain faculty and does not treat all faculty equally. I have not observed her praise individual faculty either in e-mail communication to the college faculty, or in meetings of the college.
   

3

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 2: Leadership

2.3 A. The Dean has limited or no understanding of many of the disciplines in the College...and how they need to function for success. She appears to listen, but her actions demonstrate that she does not listen. B. The Dean’s allocations and actions appear to be biased toward a select group/s or individuals. The available funds do not appear to be equitably distributed. Cronism is word that comes to mind. C. The Dean does not adequately represent the College’s mission and visibility, she does not how to advocate for the Arts or Art education. She misses many opportunities and it appears she is unaware of the opportunities. I am truly sorry to feel that way, but she is a leftover from the Lloyd/Scarborough admin. and she is still trying to do their destructive policies instead modeling the policies after similar Colleges that are successful. D. The Dean begrudgingly admonishes in public most success, but behind closed doors she is undermines some programs. E. She is well-dressed, but does not have the professional demeanor to glad hand, or appropriately contribute to conversations in the circles that she should be traveling in, to promote the College and raise funds

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 4 of 19

Area 3 Dean Davis Responsibility and Accountability
When assigning degree ratings in this area, please consider the extent of deans responsibility and accountability for decisions, resource allocations, and outcomes.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 3................................................... 3.42
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 4

• The dean takes on tasks outside of normal job without being asked. Able to recognize the need and fill in the gap. A demonstrated leader in modeling professional behavior and
  demeanor to others.
  
• The dean accepts responsibility for unsatisfactory decisions, resource allocations, or out- comes and then proactively works with faculty, chairs, and staff to develop plans to move the college forward.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 2
  
  • The dean can always be depended upon to follow through with assigned tasks. Takes on
    tasks outside of normal job with enthusiasm when asked.
    
  • The dean accepts responsibility for unsatisfactory decisions, resource allocations, or out- comes and welcomes constructive feedback from others.
    Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 2
    
    • The dean usually follows through with assigned tasks by ensuring accuracy and timeliness.
      Always acts in a professional manner when dealing with others.
      
    • The dean accepts responsibility for unsatisfactory decisions, resource allocations, or out- comes.
      Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 3
      
      • The dean cannot be depended upon to follow through with assigned tasks because of quality
        or timeliness. Does not display professional behavior consistently.
        
      • The dean denies responsibility for unsatisfactory decisions, resource allocations, or outcomes.
        Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 1
        
    • The dean takes no responsibility for task accuracy, quality, or deadlines. Becomes defensive
      when given feedback about performance.
      
    • The dean blames subordinates for unsatisfactory decisions, resource allocations, or outcomes.
      Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 3 ...................................... 1 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
      Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 3 (verbatim)
      

1. 3.1  Aside from issue mentioned already, about last-minute arrangements and requests for informa- tion, generally this is true (Dean meets expectations).
   
2. 3.2  She often infers that budget problems are caused by higher administration decisions. She is sometimes terse and curt with faculty in both verbal and email communication. During the past 2 years, there has been no forward movement of the college even though a new strategic plan was developed last year. The plan is not communicated to faculty consistently nor are any objectives for the college are articulated to the faculty at large.
   
3. 3.3  A. The first bullet in unsuccessful says it all. She likes to delegate and get things “off her desk” so to speak, delegating to others to take care of without regard to how the task is completed. She is gets defensive, if a problem is presented to her, and appears to be unwilling to admit her mistakes. B. The Dean tends to avoid sensitive issues, and does not take responsibility for her failed decisions.
   

5

Area 4 Dean Davis
Communication/Interpersonal Skills
Please consider the following issues when assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area.
(a) The extent to which the job requires the dean to explain, describe, persuade, negotiate, and generally convey intended meanings and information to faculty, students, chairs, and staff. (b) The extent to which the dean uses appropriate media to convey particular messages or infor-
mation.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 4................................................... 3.08
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 1
• Takes on responsibility to initiate communication with faculty, chairs, staff, or students. Works consistently to develop team effectiveness.
Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 4

• The dean shows concern and commitment to ensuring excellent communication practices.
  
• The dean demonstrates teamwork capabilities and makes suggestions on how faculty, chairs, and staff can work together more effectively.
  Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3
  
  • The dean provides and presents verbal communication accurately and professionally.
    
  • The dean does not require assistance to resolve interpersonal conflicts.
    
  • The dean consistently demonstrates teamwork capabilities when working with faculty, chairs,
    and staff.
    Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 3
    
    • The dean shows limited effort to communicate and to respond to complaints, but does so inconsistently. Information stated is not understood by others and is often incorrect.
      
    • The dean often requires assistance to resolve interpersonal conflicts.
      
    • The dean shows limited effort working with faculty, chairs, or staff, but does so inconsistently.
      Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 1
      
  • The dean shows little or no effort to communicate to faculty, students, chairs, and staff on
    a consistent basis.
    
  • The dean does not effectively respond to complaints. Unable to resolve interpersonal con- flicts.
    
  • The dean demonstrates little or no effort toward working with faculty, chairs, or staff. Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 4 ...................................... 1
    • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area. Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 4 (verbatim)
    

4.1 While Dean is very personable and shows genuine interest in one-on-one basis, feel that greater effort could be made to represent the college to the upper levels of administration in ways that reinforce the value of the college. Sometimes seems as if Dean struggles to do this, as if not herself convinced of the College’s value, or needing to see sea changes (i.e., technologically and/or “innovatively” speaking) in the College before extending full endorsement of College activities.

6

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 4: Communication/Interpersonal Skills

2. 4.2  To be a leader, a person must have influence on others. She is a positional leader and not one who has significant influence on all faculty. With the exception of a handful of faculty who want to follow her leadership, most faculty follow her because they have to due to her title as Dean. Communication also involves being a good listener. She seems to listen selectively for information that fits her point of view. There are few e-mail communications to faculty, no meeting with faculty during department meetings, and only 1 or 2 college meetings during the year- typically a back to school meeting and an awards night at the end of the year.
   
3. 4.3  This questions was tough to decide between unsuccessful or needs improvement, because the Dean does initially respond to complaints quickly, but is unsuccessful in resolving interpersonal conflicts. She needs improvement working with Department Chairs but she is unsuccessful working faculty. I do not know about staff.
   
4. 4.4  She is too blunt and often rude.
   
5. 4.5  The Dean has called meetings with little information on the agenda or topics to be discussed, then has presented problems in such a way as to blame faculty. Faculty sometimes can feel “ambushed” without a fair chance to respond.
   

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 7 of 19

Area 5 Dean Davis Diversity and Inclusion
Please consider the following issues when assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area.

1. (a)  The extent to which the dean promotes a diverse and inclusive culture throughout the college, including recruitment and retention of diverse mix of faculty, staff, and students.
   
2. (b)  Engages in strategies that encourage diversity of thought and participation.
   

Dean Davis’s score in Area 5................................................... 3.20
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 1

• The dean has clear strategic understanding of the benefits of diversity and inclusion in
  decision-making.
  
• The dean creates solid relationships with people who think and act differently from self.
  
• The dean includes diversity and inclusion goals in college planning.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 2 • The dean is able to objectively challenge assumptions about others based on their differences. • The dean encourages committees, groups, and departments to seek out diverse opinions.
  • The dean actively participates in campus diversity programs.
  Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 5
  
  • The dean makes an effort to provide forums and training to faculty, staff, and students on
    the importance and practice of diversity.
    
  • The dean models inclusive communication and diversity of thinking for others.
    Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 2
    
    • It appears the dean needs coaching on laws and university policies related to harassment
      and workplace discrimination, along with the enforcement of those laws and policies.
      
    • The dean does not always consider diverse opinions or the impact of decisions on diverse others.
      
    • The dean complies with university requirements on diversity, but makes little effort to enact the spirit of diversity in the college.
      Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 0
      
  • The dean may not recognize own biases and assumptions about others.
    
  • The dean does not have a clear grasp of the appropriateness of communication with others who are different from self.
    
  • The dean needs more understanding of benefits accruing from having a diverse college. Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 5 ...................................... 3
    • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area. Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 5 (verbatim)
    

1. 5.1  Meets expectations.
   
2. 5.2  She appears to selectively consider opinions – namely those that align with her own. She is somewhat unaware of university policies and contract language without consulting others.
   
3. 5.3  Discrimination is often cloaked and can be subtle, so subtle that the person committing the discrimination may not be aware of it. The Dean appears to be biased toward certain groups, and appears to be supportive of retaliation and harassment of certain faculty/group(s) within the College. This is evident in many aspects of the College.
   

8

Area 6 Dean Davis Recruitment and Retention of Faculty and Staff
When assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area, please consider the extent to which he/she issuccessful in the following activities:
(a) attracting, developing, and retaining high-quality faculty and staff, (b) conflict resolution, and
(c) recruitment of (or grooming) faculty members for administrative positions.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 6................................................... 3.18
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 4

• The dean, in consultation with faculty and chairs, advances the college by actively engaging stakeholders in strategic visioning, assessing and aligning faculty and staff needs with both students’ and college needs, and assigning such resources appropriately.
  
• The dean consistently demonstrates an ability to turn conflicts into opportunities.
  
• The dean takes explicit actions to identify and groom faculty for possible appointments to
  future openings in chair or associate dean positions.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 0
  
  • The dean is an active participant in recruitment and selection of faculty and staff. He/she sells the college to prospective recruits and devotes resources to retain high-quality faculty and staff.
    
  • The dean maintains openness and transparency in communication with faculty and staff; interpersonal skill set is strong.
    
  • The dean encourages faculty to self-identify as candidates for future opening in a chair or associate dean positions, and provides resources for training suitable candidates.
    Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3
    
    • The dean recognizes the importance of recruitment and retention of high-quality faculty and
      staff and takes steps to improve the processes.
      
    • The dean is able to adapt interpersonal communication styles to meet needs of faculty and staff. The dean is successful in resolving conflicts.
      
    • The dean looks for ways to groom faculty for possible openings in chair or associate dean positions.
      Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 2
      
      • The dean is involved in recruitment of personnel, but only limited effort is devoted toward
        retaining high-quality faculty and staff.
        
      • The dean needs coaching to improve related skills in conflict resolution, listening, emotional control, etc.
        
      • The dean displays some effort or interest in grooming faculty for chair or associate dean positions that are known to be vacated in the near future.
        Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 2
        
    • The dean is not actively involved in recruitment and retention of high-quality faculty and
      staff.
      
    • The dean’s interpersonal skill set is very weak. The dean is unsuccessful in conflict resolution.
      
    • When chair and associate dean positions are known to be vacated in the near future, the dean makes no timely effort to identify faculty as possible candidates for such positions.
      Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 6 ...................................... 2 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
      

9

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 6: Recruitment and Retention of Faculty and Staff

Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 6 (verbatim)

1. 6.1  The dean needs to convey more clearly the positive aspects of what faculty are achieving, not only a negative response to areas of effort that are felt to be less than effective.
   
2. 6.2  With a College that has gone through drastic changes since the separation of A&S, the Dean has been “out front” in strategically aligning faculty/staff to define the college’s strengths and purpose. The inclusion of motivated junior faculty and lecturers in the process has made a positive impact in both preparing future leaders and in developing a since of ownership within the departments.
   
3. 6.3  Meets expectations.
   
4. 6.4  There appears to be frequent advertisements in the Toledo Blade for art faculty positions but no adds for other departments within the college when there are other faculty openings within the college. She does not work to get faculty “on the same page” when an issue arises and permits the problem to go unresolved for lengthy periods of times. She lacks ability to mentor and coach others for future leadership roles. She fails to properly consult with faculty regarding open chair positions - even waiting until after the spring semester ends (during the summer) to address the issue of chair positions within the college. Rather than meeting with department faculty in a faculty meeting, she prefers to supposedly consult with faculty through an e-mail vote with no discussion with faculty.
   
5. 6.5  A. Instead of working to retain highly qualified faculty, the Dean does recognize or respect the senior faculty, appearing to effectively encourage the highest quality faculty to leave rather than be retained. B. The Dean either does not care to resolve conflicts or does not know how. Perhaps the University should have her attend some training classes.
   
6. 6.6  I disagree with this being a listed activity: c. recruitment of (or “grooming”) faculty members for administrative positions Faculty are not recruited to become future administrators. Faculty are teachers and researchers who are anxious to share their art with students and to progress and achieve in their field.
   

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 10 of 19

Area 7 Dean Davis External Relations
When assigning degree ratings in this area, please consider the attributes described below and also the degree to which your dean promotes college programs and your students to outside constituen- cies.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 7................................................... 2.82
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 1

• The dean relates effectively with external stakeholders to advance the mission of the uni- versity. Effectively recruits students, enriches relationships with past donors, cultivates new donors and solicits gifts for both college and department activities.
  
• The dean forges very productive relationships with other important stakeholders such as government officials and media representatives. The dean demonstrates prowess in raising funds for capital improvements, scholarships, and other long-term projects that span all departments and programs.
  
• The dean handles difficult personalities with ease and grace.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 2
  
  • The dean balances his/her schedule to spend appropriate amounts of time on the devel- opment of critically important external relationships (alumni, prospective students, past and potential donors, government officials and media representatives), resulting in increased external funding of activities across most departments and programs.
    
  • The dean’s relationships are productive and conflicts are few and relatively minor in nature. Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3
    
    • The dean makes a concerted effort to engage important external stakeholders and form constructive relationships with alumni, prospective students, past and potential donors, government officials, media representatives and other important community leaders. The dean is successful is securing external funding to support the activities of most departments and programs.
      
    • The dean’s relationships are constructive and moderately productive. Conflicts with external parties are few.
      Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 4
      
      • The dean understands the importance of external relationships, but spends little time or effort on developing these relationships. The dean has some involvement in raising money for specific projects or purposes, but does not routinely engage in fundraising for projects or purposes spanning most departments and programs.
        
      • The dean’s relationships with external stakeholders are weak and unproductive and will continue to be unsuccessful without coaching.
        Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 1
        
    • The dean is unsuccessful in fundraising or donor development of important external stake-
      holders (alumni, prospective students, past and potential donors, government officials, etc.).
      
    • The dean’s relationships with external stakeholders are strained and unproductive. Is un- successful in securing external funds to support college/department activities.
      Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 7 ...................................... 2 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
      

11

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 7: External Relations

Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 7 (verbatim)

1. 7.1  Outstanding effort.
   
2. 7.2  Until the College of Communication and the Arts has a dedicated, long-term advancement officer in the Foundation, the Dean can only do so much to engage donors and nurture those relationships. I believe her efforts are as effective as they can be, given our current lack of Foundation support.
   
3. 7.3  Appreciated the Dean’s efforts to coordinate with the Toledo Museum of Art in co-sponsoring the International Visual Literacy Association conference last year.
   
4. 7.4  The dean has not raised any funds for the college with outside donors to my knowledge (at least it is not communicated if she does). Further, her focus of developing relationships with outside groups focuses on the visual arts and not the other arts including communication arts. She does not take a leadership role in promoting the arts either through guest editorials in the newspaper or through speaking at community organizations such as the Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce, etc. or with state officials. Even when the arts are under consideration for cuts within local school districts, she does not publicly advocate for the arts.
   
5. 7.5  Needs Improvement is being optimistic. The Dean is aware of the need for external relations, but she does not know how to (or willing to?) execute and cultivate the outside relations and fundraising. Quite often she listens to the wrong people and draws conclusions that are either unproductive or damaging to the College. I do not believe she has the ability or demeanor to be successful without a major makeover of her skill set and knowledge.
   

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 12 of 19

Area 8 Dean Davis Program Development
When assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area, please consider the extent to which she/he is successful in insuring viability and growth, financial stability, and relevance for academic and research programs.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 8................................................... 3.00
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 4

• The dean clearly stands out as a leader in academic and research program development and growth.
  
• The dean is a strong advocate of faculty’s professional development leading to program devel- opment. Financial investments in programs are based on both relevant data and leadership decisions of the dean, made in consultation with faculty and chairs.
  
• The dean works constantly to raise the relevance, image, viability, and vibrance of all aca- demic and research program, and devotes resources to achieve the college’s long-term aca- demic and research goals.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 0
  
  • The dean is a leader in promoting academic and research programs and insuring their sustain- ability by assigning adequate resources for program needs and for professional development of faculty.
    
  • The dean utilizes best evidence when making financial investments in both high-performing and promising academic and research programs.
    Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3
    
    • The dean consistently shows interest in developing all academic and research programs, and
      provides input when appropriate.
      
    • The dean understands professional development of faculty is essential for program develop- ment, sustainability, and growth.
      
    • The dean may assign program responsibilities to direct reports (e.g., chairs), but keeps on top of program management goals.
      Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 4
      
      • The dean shows some interest and ability in the development and sustainability of a selec- tive group of academic and research programs, and demonstrates only limited interest in professional development of faculty.
        
      • The dean needs coaching to improve related management skills or understanding of current academic and research programs.
        Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 2
        
    • The dean gives only passing attention to discussions of academic and research programs, and devotes little or no effort to either program development or the professional development of faculty.
      
    • The dean does not effectively advocate for college programs within the university.
      
    • The dean often does not insure viability of programs due to poor resource allocation deci-
      sions.
      Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 8 ...................................... 0
      • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area. 13
      

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 8: Program Development

Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 8 (verbatim)

1. 8.1  The Dean provides faculty with opportunities and encourages faculty to make the effort to raise the college’s relevance, image, and viability. The extent to which individual faculty follow through varies.
   
2. 8.2  Meets expectations.
   
3. 8.3  There is a request for faculty development funds each semester. However, there is no orga- nized effort for faculty development that improves the teaching and learning process within the college. Faculty development is focused on faculty presentations at conferences, exhibits, or faculty travel. She has admitted in conversations to not be aware of academic degree program requirements. She seems to have some awareness that our department has gone backward in meeting accreditation standards but appears to do nothing about it.
   
4. 8.4  The Dean has been open to my ideas about creating a new center in our college and has been both encouraging of my enthusiasm, and wise in her council about how to actually make progress with it. She supported my participation in an international symposium and is always open to having conversations with me about how things are going in the college. Additionally she has supported the creating of a new Jazz organ program by funding a new electric Jazz organ for the Jazz department. She is clearly a leader in supporting the development of meaningful new programs!
   
5. 8.5  the Dean “talks” a rating of Meets Expectations, but falls short with her follow through, and therefore must receive a rating of Needs Improvement.
   
6. 8.6  She is not helpful nor involved in brainstorming with faculty about new programing or goals. She only relies on chairs input which may not be in line with the actual faculty.
   
7. 8.7  When faced with budget challenges, the Dean proposed eliminating the College’s one successful graduate program.
   

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 14 of 19

Area 9 Dean Davis Problem Solving and Decision-Making
When assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area, please consider the extent of the deans effectiveness in problem solving and decision-making, and her/his ability to anticipate problems.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 9................................................... 3.08
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 3

• The dean anticipates problems and consults others so that problems are turned into oppor- tunities.
  
• Faculty and staff recognize that the dean’s decisions are prudent, judicious, and in the best interest of students and faculty. The dean can be depended on to make decisions for self and others that create opportunities throughout the college.
  Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 2
  
  • When appropriate, the dean consistently consults others with relevant expertise to solve
    problems expediently.
    
  • The dean can be relied upon to use all available resources during the problem solving and decision-making process. Faculty and chairs look to the dean for guidance on resolving problems, conflicts, etc.
    Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 2
    
    • The dean effectively solves most problems within an expected time frame.
      
    • The dean usually makes decisions carefully and using an appropriate and ethical problem solving process. Consults others prior to making a decision and demonstrates good judge- ment when a decision is made.
      Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 5
      
      • The dean settles often for the first suggested solution, rather than exploring all possibilities.
        
      • The dean may demonstrate some understanding of the problem solving process, but does not consistently employ it. May seek advice from others prior to making a decision, but does so inconsistently. The dean needs coaching on making judicious decisions.
        Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 1
        
    • The dean is unable to find solutions to basic problems. Does not seek advice from others to
      find solutions to such problems.
      
    • The dean does not demonstrate an understanding of the decision-making and problem solving process at the college, department, or program level. Decisions appear to be imprudent and without proper assessment of the situation, circumstance, or opportunity.
      Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 9 ...................................... 0 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
      Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 9 (verbatim)
      

1. 9.1  Aside from decisions sometimes being made too quickly and without sufficient notice, meets expectations.
   
2. 9.2  Again, she seems to settle on the solution that most aligns with her position rather than selecting other possibilities that might be better. Often her opinion is formed before meeting with others and remains entrenched in that opinion during the meeting rather than considering other possibilities. She does not ask good, insightful questions to understand the problem.
   

15

Evaluation of Dean Davis Area 9: Problem Solving and Decision-Making

Faculty cannot expect her to resolve a problem as she will frequently defer the problem to someone else - frequently the chair - and then not follow-up to see if the problem has been taken care of with all parties involved - thus relying too much on the chair’s opinion. There have been frequent situations were she needed to bring in all parties to discuss the issue but has not done so.

3. 9.3  The Dean is bias and lacks objectivity in her problem solving.
   
4. 9.4  Some faculty meetings consisted of the Dean presenting problems to the faculty and then asking “what are we going to do?” They seem like crisis situations, with some panic from the college and Dean’s office.
   

UT Faculty Senate Executive Committee Page 16 of 19

Area 10 Dean Davis Planning & Organizing
When assigning degree ratings for your dean in this area, please consider the extent to which tasks, activities, outcomes and time must be prioritized, sequenced and scheduled.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 10.................................................. 3.18
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 1 • The dean balances multiple projects effectively.
• The dean is recognized as an expert planner.
Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 4

• The dean develops reasonable plans for multiple projects and effectively organizes time to
  complete them.
  
• The dean works effectively with faculty, chairs, and staff to identify goals and to establish activity assignments, timeline, and intermediary assessment points for each task.
  Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 2
  
  • The dean effectively manages time and all elements of one project by providing project plans
    and status.
    
  • The dean effectively communicates the issues to be addressed, and sets reasonable goals, activities, and timeline for each task.
    Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 4
    
    • The dean attempts to plan and execute daily tasks, but struggles with setting and commu-
      nicating priorities. Requires intervention from others to redirect work to higher priorities.
      
    • The dean shows little or no ability to bring together a team to address a pressing issue.
      Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 0
      
  • The dean shows no ability to plan and execute daily tasks. Takes no initiative but waits to
    be assigned tasks from higher administrators (e.g., Provost).
    
  • The dean does not attempt to bring together a team to address a pressing issue.
    Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 10..................................... 2 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
    Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 10 (verbatim)
    

1. 10.1  Meets expectations.
   
2. 10.2  While I am sure she plans and does daily tasks, there is no communication of priorities of the college. She does not appear to set goals for the college. The bringing together of a team is limited to a few favorite faculty to help plan a certain project but she does not instill a sense of teamwork throughout the college. These favorite faculty tend to be “yes” individuals – who easily conform to the Dean’s wishes.
   
3. 10.3  Mission or tasks are not clearly communicated. Faculty are often not clear as to the college’s initiatives or goals.
   

17

Area 11 Dean Davis Financial Management
When assigning degree ratings in this area, please consider the extent to which the dean is able to prepare and manage budgets, and be financially accountable to students, faculty, chairs, and the central administration.
Dean Davis’s score in Area 11.................................................. 3.09
The title page of this report provides context for this score.
Role Model .................................................... Number of responses: 2
• The dean clearly stands out as a leader in financial management and financial accountabil- ity. The dean supports and advises chairs on development of departmental budgets and consistently secures resources necessary to meet those budgets.
Exceeds Expectations .......................................... Number of responses: 2
• The dean demonstrates financial accountability. Effectively communicates how fiscal realities will impact department and program needs. Makes financial decisions in consultation with chairs, program directors, and faculty.
Meets Expectations ............................................ Number of responses: 3 • The dean is adept at budget preparation and makes financial decisions in consultation with
chairs and program directors.
Needs Improvement ............................................ Number of responses: 3
• The dean needs coaching to improve financial skills, but shows some ability in relating current fiscal conditions to department needs.
Unsuccessful .................................................... Number of responses: 1
• The dean is able to prepare a budget but does not understand much information on the financial statements. Shows little or no ability in relating current fiscal conditions to depart- ment or program needs. The dean does not effectively consult with or inform chairs about budgetary issues. The dean will continue to be unsuccessful in this area unless coaching is provided.
Number of non-responses to options provided in Area 11..................................... 2 • Unable to assess because of insufficient observation of dean’s performance in this area.
Written Comments on Dean Davis’s Performance in Area 11 (verbatim)

1. 11.1  No department has been asked to submit a budget proposal so budget rollover inertia occurs. To properly form a college budget, there needs to be budget proposals coming from the department and discussions need to occur regarding budget priorities.
   
2. 11.2  I am unaware of the Dean’s ability to do the actual budget proposals sent to admin., but she does NOT properly consult program directors, and she does not understand the workings and needs of many of the disciples in the College.
   

18

Area 12 Dean Davis Comments on overall administrative performance
Faculty members were invited to provide comments on the overall administrative perforance of their dean. The following are the verbatim responses received from that invitation.

1. 12.1  Overall, I believe the Dean is managing her position and meeting responsibilities effectively. Faculty within the college are generally slow to realize that significant changes must be made to keep the programs viable. Tensions between pre-retirement senior faculty and progressive junior faculty is a constant that the Dean must continuously address. Given the obstacles of a changing faculty dynamic, stewarding an Arts program, and ever-shrinking budgets, I believe the Dean is performing admirably.
   
2. 12.2  Deb has both great heart and solid judgement. I feel her passion for the arts every time I interact with her, and I very much appreciate her efforts to move the college forward. She invited me to be a part of the steering committee even though I am a lecturer, and I have always felt that she both listens to me and has outstanding guidance about how to move my projects and initiatives forward in real and meaningful ways. Her door is always open, and I find my connection with her a joyful one filled with both enthusiastic vision for the future and practical wisdom about how to get there.
   
3. 12.3  The dean has high standards and works very hard to make our college the best it can be. She seems to genuinely care about the success of the college and the arts in general. I greatly appreciate all she does for us.
   
4. 12.4  I believe a change needs to be considered.
   

19