Selection Procedures

Approved September 19, 2018.

Overview: Section 5.4 of our departmental bylaws outlines the voting procedure for the election of our unit head.  This Unit Head Selection Procedures document provides additional detail about the procedures we will use to nominate and select a unit head in the Department of Mathematics.  The timeline provided here is a guideline, and the Advisory Committee is charged to provide additional guidance/details of the process, as needed.

A faculty member must be tenured to run/serve as unit head. While affiliate faculty members cannot vote in the unit head election, they are invited to participate in all other aspects of the election process.  As a reminder, the election results are advisory to the Dean; the Dean ultimately makes the appointment.

1. Forming of a Unit Head Election Committee (UHEC): The Advisory Committee will appoint a 2-member Unit Head Election Committee (UHEC).  Members of the UHEC cannot run for Unit Head (UH).  Members of the Advisory Committee may serve on the UHEC.
2. Nominations: The UHEC will solicit nominations for UH from tenure-track and affiliate members of the department. The nomination period will last at least 2 weeks and self-nominations are accepted.  The UHEC will contact any nominee to ascertain if the nomination is accepted/declined. Within 3 business days after the nomination period closes, the UHEC will announce the UH candidates to the department.
3. Candidate statement(s):  Candidates running for UH must prepare a written statement and submit it to the UHEC; candidates should be given a minimum of 7 business days to prepare their statement after UH candidate nominations are announced.  The written statement should address the faculty member’s interest, qualifications, and goals for serving as unit head. The UHEC will then distribute all of the UH candidate statements to the department.
4. Questions for candidates: In preparation of a unit discussion meeting where candidates share perspectives and answer questions, tenure-track and affiliate faculty members will be given at least 5 business days to submit questions to the UHEC, in writing, prior to the meeting.  Faculty members do not need to provide their names when submitting questions.   If a faculty member chooses to provide their name when submitting questions, it will only be used so that the UHEC may confer with the faculty member to make sure questions have been accurately represented. When questions are distributed to the candidates and department, all questions will be posed anonymously.
5. Questions Document:
   1. Initial draft: The UHEC in consultation with the Advisory Committee (AC) (minus any candidates running for UH), hereafter notated as UHEC/AC, will have at least 2 business days to compile/condense similar questions and, if necessary, edit questions for clarity or to ensure they are relevant, fair, and non-leading.  The UHEC/AC will categorize the questions.  For questions posed to multiple candidates, the UHEC/AC will pose a general question for each category to condense and tie together themes posed in individual questions. The goal for preparing a questions document is to make sure that everyone who has a question for one of the candidates has the opportunity to ask it.
   2.   Finalizing Questions Document: The UHEC will distribute a draft of the submitted questions for the candidates to the department for feedback to make sure everyone’s questions are appropriately addressed before finalizing the list of questions. Department members will have at least 2 business days to provide feedback.  The finalized list of questions will then be distributed to the candidates and department.
6. Sharing of questions with candidates: In order to convey the complexities and nuances of the originally posed questions, the UHEC/AC will also share the compiled (edited, if needed) questions posed by faculty, with names redacted, with the candidates so that each candidate has full information in order to address questions at the unit discussion meeting
7. Unit meeting(s): A unit meeting will be held for candidates to discuss their perspectives and answer questions at least 3 business days after the final Questions Document is shared with the department.  In the case that more than 3 candidates run, the UHEC will schedule multiple unit meetings; no more than 3 candidates will share a unit meeting.  In the case that a large number of questions are submitted, it may not be realistic for the candidates to fully address every question in this meeting.  Grouping questions and identifying categories or themes in the questions will inform the candidates, so they can formulate responses so as to address as many issues as possible.
8. Structure of meeting:
   1. One candidate: In the case of one candidate running, the candidate will have 30 minutes to share a response based on written questions posed prior to the meeting.  Follow up questions may be asked during the meeting.  The final 5 minutes of the meeting will be devoted to the candidate sharing final comments/remarks.
   2. Two candidates:  In the case of two candidates running, each of the candidates will have a total of 25 minutes to respond to their set of questions. The UHEC and the candidates will use a coin toss to determine the order in which the candidates will speak.  Each candidate is free to structure their initial 20 minutes; this time can be devoted completely to responding to the written questions or can also accommodate follow-up questions at the meeting.  Then, at the end of the meeting, each candidate will have 5 minutes to wrap up and make a closing statement.
   3. Three candidates: In the case of three candidates running, each of the candidates will have 16 minutes to respond to their set of questions. The UHEC and the three candidates will do a coin toss to determine the order in which the candidates will speak.  Each candidate is free to structure their 12 minutes; this time can be devoted completely to responding to the written questions or can also accommodate follow-up questions at the meeting.  Then, each candidate will have 4 minutes to wrap up and make a closing statement.
   4. Four or more candidates: The number of unit meetings will be n/3, rounded up, where n is the number of candidates running.  The time allotted to each candidate during the meetings will be the same and based on the descriptions above.  
9. Follow-up written responses: In the case that candidates do not have enough time or want to share additional information after the meeting, they will have the opportunity to respond to questions in writing after the meeting (1 page limit). Candidates should indicate their intention of submitting a follow up written response to the UHEC, and this response must be submitted to the UHEC no later than one business day after the conclusion of the (final) unit meeting.  The UHEC will distribute the follow up written response(s) to departmental faculty.
10. Voting:
    1. Period: The voting period will open at least one day after the final unit meeting to allow time for the UHEC to distribute any follow up written statements prepared by candidates.  Only tenure-track faculty members participate in the vote; they will be given at least 2 business days to vote via secret ballot. The election must be completed by the first Friday in December.
    2. Type: If the number of candidates is greater than two, UHEC/AC (minus any AC members running for UH) will choose whether to use either approval voting with run offs or ranked choice voting (this will be determined after the nomination period ends), as our bylaws, section 5.4, allow for either type of voting system.
    3. Counting: Ballots will be counted by the UHEC; the candidates or their designees are welcome to be present for the counting of ballots.
11. Appointing the Unit Head: The Dean will make the final appointment, after receiving the election results from the department. The Dean has the authority to appoint the Unit Head or to direct the department to follow other processes not covered in the bylaws.

 

Evaluation Procedures

Approved September 19, 2018

Overview: Section 5.7 of our departmental bylaws state: “In the winter semester of the second year of a Department Chair’s term, the Department shall conduct an evaluation of the Department Chair. As part of this process, a faculty member or administrator outside the department will facilitate a department meeting and prepare a final report for the department and Dean by the end of the semester.”  By conducting the evaluation in the second year, the Unit Head has the opportunity to receive feedback and make adjustments, if desired, before the next election. This Unit Head Evaluation Procedures document provides additional detail about the procedures we will use to carry out this evaluation

1. Role and choice of an evaluator: The Advisory Committee will choose an evaluator from outside the department to facilitate the UH evaluation process.  The external evaluator’s role includes: compile and interpret evaluation data gathered via the UH evaluation survey, create a unit meeting agenda based on evaluation survey results, facilitate a unit meeting by late March, solicit input from the UH, write a subsequent evaluation report for the Dean and department, meet with the Dean and to discuss findings, and disseminate the final report to the department.
2. Construct an evaluation survey: The Advisory Committee will solicit feedback from the UH about questions the UH would like asked of faculty/staff about the UH’s performance.  Using this feedback along with other resources (e.g., an adapted version of the CLAS Faculty Council Unit Head Survey), the Advisory Committee will create a written evaluation survey.
3. Solicit written feedback from departmental members: The Advisory Committee will solicit written feedback from math faculty and staff regarding the UH’s effectiveness in leading the department.  In particular, the Advisory Committee will send out a UH evaluation survey to all tenure track and affiliate faculty and staff. All information collected, except for the UH’s, will remain anonymous to the department through the process.  However, the Dean and external evaluator will have access to non-anonymous survey data. 
4. Compile and analyze survey data: The external evaluator will compile the written data from the UH evaluation survey, identify themes, including strengths, concerns, and areas for growth, and draft an agenda for the unit meeting.
5. Construct agenda for departmental meeting: After compiling the written data, the external evaluator will meet with the Advisory Committee (AC).  The AC will collectively discuss and provide input/context to the external evaluator for the formation of the agenda that will be used to focus the unit meeting discussion and to ensure that agenda items are inclusive and representative of the written responses from the UH evaluation survey. Pre-meeting survey results (names redacted except the unit head) will be shared with the AC as part of the process for establishing agenda discussion items. 
6. Departmental meeting: The external evaluator will send out the UH evaluation agenda to the department and will facilitate a departmental meeting to discuss themes and solicit additional information.  The UH will not be present at this departmental meeting.
7. Post-meeting survey: There will be a post-meeting survey for tenure-track faculty; the sole purpose of this survey is to allow people to share additional comments directly related to the meeting agenda and discussion.
8. Meeting with UH: The external evaluator will schedule a 1 hour meeting with the UH after the departmental meeting and before the writing of the final report to share themes that emerged from the written data and departmental discussion and to elicit the UH’s perspective related to these themes. 
9. Communication with the external evaluator:  Except for #8, the external evaluator will not meet or communicate individually with any department faculty or staff member as part of this process; the external evaluator will use only the pre-meeting survey responses, the department meeting discussion, information gathered from meetings with the Advisory Committee and UH, and the post-meeting survey responses to generate the report.
10. Preparing the written report: The external evaluator will draft a final report summarizing the UH’s performance and potential areas of growth and then meet with the Advisory Committee for feedback.  In addition to the draft of the report, the external evaluator will share an anonymous version of the post-meeting survey results.  After meeting in person with the AC, the external evaluator will finalize and share the report with the Dean, along with the full (non-redacted) pre- and post-meeting survey results. 
11. Sharing final report: The external evaluator will share the final report with the department and the Dean.
12. Debriefing: At the Dean's discretion, the UH, Dean and/or external evaluator will meet to discuss the findings of the evaluation/final report and, as needed, identify ways to address issues and provide need support for the UH.