UNC Officials Now Subject To Evaluation

But other University officials, including deans and vice chancellors, now are subject to a formal evaluation process that thoroughly examines their professional strengths and weaknesses.

Although the review process emphasizes feedback for administrators, the evaluations have an effect on appointment renewals.

Currently, Sue Kitchen, vice chancellor for student affairs, is being reviewed -- the sixth administrator to undergo the new process.

Provost Robert Shelton, who functions as the appointing officer for these evaluations, said he believes the process is critical for University officials.

"Everyone needs to be reviewed in life," he said. "With these reviews, we wanted to lay everything out and make it all clear."

According to an evaluation procedure memo released by Chancellor James Moeser last June, each UNC vice chancellor and dean will be reviewed by a committee composed of at least seven members. A new committee is created for each administrative review.

Administrators are set to be reviewed four years after their initial appointment and every five years thereafter.

Shelton, who selects committee chairmen and members, said faculty, students, administrators and individuals outside the University can serve on the review committees.

He said the committees solicit interviews and offer open-forum opportunities to garner input from the University community.

"The committee has to be able to get the feedback and analyze it," Shelton said. "They have to be able to coax out information in a responsible manner."

After a committee completes its written evaluative report, the findings are presented to the provost, who then discusses the results with the administrator under review, Shelton said. Ultimately, the provost makes a recommendation to the chancellor if the administrator's appointment is to be renewed.

Thus far, three deans and two vice chancellors have been evaluated according to the new review process. Kitchen, who was unavailable for comment Monday, is in the midst of her review process, which began in January.

Kitchen's review has been more extensive than most others so far, with her committee meeting at least once a week for the past several weeks.

Although each committee tries to complete its review in six weeks, Shelton said this is not always feasible. Kitchen's review is taking longer than most because of the magnitude of her position and newness of the evaluation process, Shelton said.

Although the process is relatively new, Shelton said he believes these evaluations are beneficial to both administrators and to the University in general.

"These reviews provide extraordinarily valuable feedback," he said. "We get involved in such a frenetic pace in these jobs, so it's very important to get a group of individuals to step aside and conduct evaluations. You always like to know what you're doing well, and you always need to know what you're not doing well."

The University Editor can be reached at udesk@unc.edu.