2006 evaluation results
2006 evaluation results
| SA | A | N | D | SD | NBJ | 2006 median | 2005* median | 2004* median | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | actively promotes an environment for scholarly excellence. | 14 | 10 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4.54 | 4.55 | |
| Q2 | actively promotes an environment for teaching excellence. | 9 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 4.18 | 4.22 | |
| Q3 | effectively represents the interests of the department to senior administrators. | 4 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 7 | 3.75 | 3.70 | |
| Q4 | consults the faculty adequately before making important decisions. | 4 | 12 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 3.88 | 3.88 | |
| Q5 | makes excellent administrative appointments. | 8 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4.17 | 4.00 | |
| Q6 | fosters a fair and rigorous promotion and tenure process. | 9 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4.22 | 4.20 | |
| Q7 | manages departmental administrative staff well, including maintaining appropriate staffing levels. | 7 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3.89 | 4.00 | |
| Q8 | manages the department's resources well. | 4 | 13 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 3.96 | 4.21 | |
| Q9 | is attentive to long-term, strategic issues that affect the department. | 5 | 13 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3.92 | 4.33 | |
| Q10 | inspires confidence in leadership overall. | 7 | 13 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4.04 | 4.60 |