The following tables present the results of the faculty assessment of administrators conducted at the end of the 2007-2008 academic year by UFF/FAU. This survey is an annual event intended to promote good leadership by providing administrators with regular, systematic feedback and by providing faculty with information about how administrators are doing. Administrators’ absolute scores are probably less useful than their position relative to others. For example, the tables do provide a useful comparison of how deans make personnel and salary decisions as perceived by the faculty.
In order to increase the attention paid to the qualitative results of the evaluation, UFF also analyzed the responses to the open-ended question (“The university would be better served if…”). The analysis of these comments is included in this report. Because of the forthright nature of some comments they will only being made available in a password protected area of the UFF-FAU website.
This report is limited to those administrators who remain in administrative posts at FAU. The former Dean of Education has left the University, and so is unreported here. The former Interim Dean of Arts and Letters has rejoined the faculty, and so is likewise unreported here (a smattering of appraisals for her successor are disregarded as premature). The former VP of the MacArthur campus remains in an administrative capacity at this institution, at the same rank, and is included (with the Treasure Coast VP now VP for all the northern campuses).
The total number of questionnaires returned was 185.
TABLE ONE: DEANS/DIRECTORS
MEAN SCORE ON QUESTION (SCALE: 1-5, WITH 5 HIGHEST)
|
DEAN/DIRECTOR |
#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
#4 |
#5 |
#6 |
#7 |
#8 |
N= |
|
Boykin, Anne |
3.70 |
4.64 |
4.36 |
3.80 |
3.89 |
4.36 |
4.45 |
4.36 |
11 |
|
Buller, Jeffrey |
2.25 |
2.11 |
2.29 |
263 |
2.60 |
2.50 |
2.13 |
2.50 |
9 |
|
Carter, Rosalyn |
3.08 |
3.77 |
3.08 |
3.40 |
2.21 |
3.46 |
3.31 |
3.58 |
14 |
|
Coates, Dennis |
3.00 |
3.52 |
2.86 |
3.56 |
3.52 |
3.73 |
3.69 |
3.54 |
28 |
|
Friedland, Michael |
2.13 |
2.13 |
2.40 |
2.33 |
2.00 |
2.26 |
2.36 |
2.13 |
15 |
|
Miller, William |
2.80 |
3.40 |
2.20 |
2.00 |
2.33 |
2.50 |
2.33 |
2.50 |
5 |
|
Perry, Gary |
4.15 |
4.50 |
4.16 |
4.30 |
3.88 |
4.28 |
4.35 |
4.21 |
30 |
|
Stevens, Karl |
2.33 |
2.44 |
1.89 |
2.44 |
2.00 |
2.00 |
2.22 |
2.13 |
9 |
KEY TO TABLE ONE:
Question #1. Consults faculty/staff before making important decisions.
Question #2. Upholds academic standards and maintains a scholarly atmosphere.
Question #3. Makes personnel decisions in a professional, unbiased manner.
Question #4. Uses faculty governance processes to make decisions.
Question #5. Distributes discretionary money fairly.
Question #6. Is a good administrator.
Question #7. Is an effective leader who promotes the college/unit.
Question #8. OVERALL, the Dean/Director is
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTIONS 1-7 WERE
5=Strongly Agree; 4=Agree; 3=Neutral; 2=Disagree; 1=Strongly Disagree; 0=Don’t Know
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTION 8 WERE
5=Excellent; 4=Above Average; 3=Average; 2=Below Average; 1=Poor; 0=Don’t Know
TABLE TWO: PRESIDENT, PROVOST, AND VICE PRESIDENTS
MEAN SCORE ON QUESTION (SCALE: 1-5, WITH 5 HIGHEST)
|
ADMINISTRATOR |
#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
#4 |
#5 |
#6 |
#7 |
N= |
|
Brogan, Frank (President) |
2.62 |
2.47 |
2.70 |
3.13 |
2.77 |
|
|
181 |
|
Pritchett, John (Provost) |
3.40 |
2.56 |
3.26 |
3.33 |
3.32 |
2.82 |
3.32 |
181 |
|
McPherson, Gerri, (VP, Treasure Coast Campus) |
4.75 |
4.00 |
4.20 |
4.50 |
4.75 |
5.00 |
4.20 |
5 |
|
Murtaugh, Kristen (Vice President, MacArthur Campus) |
3.59 |
3.19 |
3.28 |
3.18 |
3.75 |
3.43 |
3.38 |
22 |
|
Stephens, Joyanne, (VP, Broward Campuses) |
3.84 |
3.60 |
3.23 |
3.76 |
4.04 |
3.79 |
3.46 |
30 |
KEY TO TABLE TWO:
FOR THE PRESIDENT,
QUESTION #1. Makes sure that administrators make decisions fairly and in the best interests of the university.
QUESTION #2. Makes decisions that are in the best interests of the faculty and professional staff.
QUESTION #3. Upholds academic standards and encourages a scholarly atmosphere.
QUESTION #4. Is an effective leader who promotes the development of the university.
QUESTION #5. OVERALL, President Brogan is
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTIONS 1-4 WERE
5=Strongly Agree; 4=Agree; 3=Neutral; 2=Disagree; 1=Strongly Disagree; 0=Don’t Know
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTION 5 WERE
5=Excellent; 4=Above Average; 3=Average; 2=Below Average; 1=Poor; 0=Don’t Know
FOR THE PROVOST AND VICE PRESIDENTS,
QUESTION #1. Is a good administrator.
QUESTION #2. Uses faculty governance processes to make decisions.
QUESTION #3. Keeps faculty informed about decisions.
QUESTION #4. PROVOST: Makes sure that Vice Presidents and Deans make fair decisions.
VICE PRESIDENTS: Ensures that campus fiscal resources are appropriately allotted and expended.
QUESTION #5. PROVOST: Upholds academic standards and maintains a scholarly atmosphere.
VICE PRESIDENTS: Is competent in overseeing daily campus operations.
QUESTION #6. PROVOST: Is an effective leader who promotes the development of the university.
VICE PRESIDENTS: Is an effective leader who promotes the development of the campus.
QUESTION #7. OVERALL, the Provost/Vice President is
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTIONS 1-6 WERE
5=Strongly Agree; 4=Agree; 3=Neutral; 2=Disagree; 1=Strongly Disagree; 0=Don’t Know
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTION 7 WERE
5=Excellent; 4=Above Average; 3=Average; 2=Below Average; 1=Poor; 0=Don’t Know
Henderson School returns (N = 8):
TABLE: PRINCIPAL AND DIRECTOR
MEAN SCORE ON QUESTION (SCALE: 1-5, WITH 5 HIGHEST)
|
|
#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
#4 |
#5 |
#6 |
#7 |
#8 |
|
Brady, Marla (Principal) |
3.00 |
3.88 |
2.75 |
3.14 |
3.50 |
3.25 |
3.38 |
3.50 |
|
Thomas Glenn (Director) |
3.00 |
3.88 |
3.38 |
3.38 |
3.29 |
3.38 |
3.63 |
3.38 |
KEY TO TABLE ONE:
Question #1. Consults faculty/staff before making important decisions.
Question #2. Upholds academic standards and maintains a scholarly atmosphere.
Question #3. Makes personnel decisions in a professional, unbiased manner.
Question #4. Uses faculty governance processes to make decisions.
Question #5. Principal: Makes sensible curriculum decisions.
Director: Distributes discretionary money fairly.
Question #6. Is a good administrator.
Question #7. Is an effective leader who promotes the school.
Question #8. OVERALL, the Principal/Director is
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTIONS 1-7 WERE
5=Strongly Agree; 4=Agree; 3=Neutral; 2=Disagree; 1=Strongly Disagree; 0=Don’t Know
THE RESPONSES FOR QUESTION 8 WERE
5=Excellent; 4=Above Average; 3=Average; 2=Below Average; 1=Poor; 0=Don’t Know
ANALYSIS OF THE WRITTEN COMMENTS
The UFF/FAU administrator assessment form for 2007-2008 included an open-ended question, “The university would be better served if…,” which provided an opportunity for faculty to comment on an administrator’s performance. There was space as well for additional comments. A summary of all the written comments is given below:
President Brogan:
Among the faculty who returned questionnaires, 72 wrote comments on the University President. Three of these respondents praise him more or less highly; five others compliment him mildly – a number of these, however, noting that with him as president the University has not prospered. A few comments touch upon the need for him to improve funding for the university through lobbying and fund-raising so as to enhance both research and instructional resources. Others call upon him to exercise academic leadership and appoint better administrators – a couple urging him to replace the Provost with someone more collegial than authoritarian. Other comments call upon him to be more open and engaged with the faculty, improve academics and the academic environment, support and show more respect for the faculty, listen to the faculty, and raise faculty salaries. Multiple comments criticize him variously for his lack of a doctorate, his handling of the Davenport matter (“The lies over Davenport alone would have gotten anyone else fired.”), his focus on sports – especially football – over academics, and a number of other perceived shortcomings. A total of 21 comments call for him to resign or be fired.
Provost Pritchett:
Sixty-four respondents wrote comments on the Provost on the questionnaires they returned. Six comments are complimentary, even highly so. Of the rest, nine call for him to have greater contact with the faculty, four complain that he has little contact and is out of touch with the faculty, and four report that they know nothing about him or what he does. Six comments describe him as dismissive of faculty input and supportive of the deans against faculty interests. A couple of comments urge him to learn more about what is going on in the colleges, and others report bad leadership in some colleges that is going unaddressed. Five comments call for him to improve academic standards; another enjoins him to fulfill his promise to improve the academic atmosphere and raise faculty salaries. A number of other comments call on him variously to be a better leader, put FAU’s interests before his own, be more honest with the faculty, and show greater integrity. Three comments criticize him for hiring a friend from Auburn at a high salary in a time of fiscal crisis – this being described by one commentator as “unprofessional and an abuse of his powers.” A total of nine comments call for him to resign or be removed.
Vice President McPherson (Treasure Coast Campus):
There were two comments for Vice President McPherson. One advises her to be more visible. The other faults her for lacking a doctorate and professorial experience, hence being a poor role model (noting the same for President Brogan).
Vice president Murtaugh (MacArthur Campus):
There were seven comments for Vice President Murtaugh. One commends her for doing a good job, two recommend that she retire. Four comments state that she should be more visible and interactive with the faculty. The need for her to be more scholarly and focused on academics is mentioned.
Vice President Stephens (Broward Campuses):
There were fifteen comments for Vice President Stephens. Three comments are complimentary; several report not knowing who she is or what she does. The most that is said about her presence is that “she is around from time to time.” Recommendations include actually consulting with faculty and being a stronger advocate for additional funding. In one comment she is described as being too submissive to the main campus administrators.
Dean Boykin (College of Nursing):
Three comments were turned in for Dean Boykin. One compliments her for her willingness to provide support and guidance. Another urges her to spend more time with faculty and day-to-day operations – on all campuses. The third faults her for favoritism and showing greater interest in expenditures for the College’s building than in providing support for teaching activities, such as teaching assistants.
Dean Buller (Honors College):
Five comments were turned in for Dean Buller. One calls for increased transparency, another for closer interaction with the faculty and awareness of their needs. Two call for his resignation, one of them faulting him for a limited grasp of honors education, lack of fund-raising ability, and inadequacy as an advocate for the College – ending with a suggestion that the positions of dean and associate dean be merged to save money.
Dean Carter (CAUPA):
There were four comments for Dean Carter. They recommend variously that she listen to faculty, get more resources, and exercise stronger leadership especially given the current fiscal crisis.
Dean Coates (College of Business):
Eight comments were turned in for Dean Coates. One praises him while three call for his resignation. A comment calls for him to be more visible to the faculty, another for him to put in a full day’s work as opposed to what he has been doing. Charges of corruption and of violations of the collective bargaining agreement are leveled.
Dean Friedland (College of Biomedical Science):
Eight comments for Dean Friedman. One praises him as an excellent leader while three call for his removal. One comment describes him as dictatorial, another as promoting a hostile work environment, and another as treating some faculty disrespectfully.
Dean Perry (College of Science):
There were twelve comments for Dean Perry. Three comments call for him to continue in his position, one describing him as a wonderful dean. Three comments urge him to interact more with the faculty, one adding that he needs to follow through with initiatives and develop a multi-year plan. Budget constraints are acknowledged in some comments, one noting that the additional resources needed should include funds for faculty salaries.
Dean Stevens (College of Engineering):
Five comments were turned in for Dean Stevens. One urges him to provide vision and faults him for not consulting with the faculty and for spending too much time promoting his “green building” concept. The other four comments call for his resignation, one noting that the Dean’s Office is oversized, absorbing resources that could better be used for teaching assistants, etc.
Director Miller (Library):
There were five comments for Director Miller. Two comments note that he goes through the motions of consulting with faculty and staff, but appears to have his mind made up in advance. A couple of comments report that one associate director is abusive, damaging morale, but Director Miller takes no action. One comment expresses concern about the Library’s “awkward” web page and its navigability, and calls for improved collaboration between academic departments and the Library.
Director Thomas (Henderson School):
There were two comments for Director Thomas, calling for him to be more of a presence and more involved at Henderson, and not spread so thin.
Principal Brady (Henderson School):
Two comments for Principal Brady. One calls for her to be more communicative with the faculty. The other urges her to exercise less bias and favoritism in her treatment of the faculty.