Nursing Education & Evaluation of Administrative Effectiveness, Structure, and Governance
Evaluation of Administrative Effectiveness, Structure, and Governance in Nursing Education
Evaluation of Administrative Effectiveness, Structure, and Governance in Nursing Education
The qualifications and leadership skills of program administrators are important to program effectiveness. Formal evaluation of administrators should occur annually or at regularly specified intervals.
The specific evaluation of the administrator may include the extent to which the administrator guides the establishment of a clear mission and goals for the unit and the effectiveness with which the administrator represents the department or school, both internally and externally, and contributes to the reputation of the unit within and beyond the institution. Attention should be focused on the administrator’s ability to raise funds and to allocate the budget in a fair and effective manner.
Evidence of integrity and collegiality is an issue of concern, as are the leadership qualities of conflict resolution, decision making, motivation, and interpersonal skills. Regardless of the university size and focus, evaluation of administrative effectiveness should be a collaborative process in which faculty members participate.
Faculty members should have the opportunity to provide evaluative feedback on the performance of administrative faculty. This collaborative process can be replicated at various levels within the nursing school and the institution. For example, the responsibility for the evaluation of the nursing department chair may rest with the dean of the school; however, information from faculty members should be considered in that evaluation.
This process may be repeated to the level of the vice president for academic affairs who evaluates the dean and in turn receives evaluation feedback from the faculty. At all levels, input from supervisors and subordinates is taken into consideration as the faculty or administrator writes his or her own self-evaluation, identifying strengths, plans for improvement, and goals for the upcoming year.
In addition to defining the appropriate process for performance review, faculty and administrators should reflect on the effectiveness of the process, including the utility of evaluation forms and the usefulness of evaluation in improving performance.
The use of standard assessment tools, such as those provided by the IDEA Center for the evaluation of department chairs and deans, is another means of obtaining feedback on administrative effectiveness. The advantage of these standardized tools is that they provide the opportunity to compare administrative performance with national benchmarks. The disadvantage of this approach is the cost.
In addition to effective leadership, the structure and governance of the department must provide effective means for communication and problem solving. Bylaws and written policies are two mechanisms for promoting effective department governance.
The nursing school’s bylaws should be examined for congruence with the constitution and bylaws of the larger institution and the structures included to facilitate faculty governance in relation to academic authority.
For example, it is useful to do a comparative analysis of standing committees and the mission and goals of the school. Are the standing committees configured to address major issues related to faculty affairs, student affairs, curriculum, budget, and major thrusts of the mission? In universities with a school of law, consultation is often readily available to review the fit of the bylaws with parliamentary rules and congruence checks.
The extent to which stakeholders are included in the committee structures delineated in the bylaws is important as well. For example, are students represented on appropriate committees and how are voting privileges defined? Whether the established mechanisms function in the manner described is another issue for evaluation. Minutes of all standing committees should be filed in a central location.
These minutes should reflect membership, agenda items, salient discussions, and a precise statement of decisions made, and actions taken. It is useful for evaluating follow up to designate membership annually in the minutes of the first meeting of each committee.
After each name, there should be an indicator of representation (e.g., faculty, student, alumni, consumer). In this way, one can track whether stakeholders indicated in the bylaws are in fact represented on designated committees. Representation is an intended means of integration of stakeholders, but attendance and participation are indicators of actual participation.
Therefore, attendance should be recorded for each meeting. Accreditation teams may review minutes for these elements and often track membership participation and decisions. Including tracking data is important. For example, the reviewer should state how decisions and documents are channeled for final decision making. If a curriculum committee recommendation was forwarded to the faculty council for deliberation and action, the date it was forwarded should be included.
The minutes of the faculty council can then be tracked to ensure that the decision item is moved forward in a timely fashion and what decision was made. Accurate record keeping facilitates evaluation tracking.
Policies should be evaluated for their effectiveness in supporting and guiding communication and decision making relevant to program implementation. Policies should be organized in a manual or file and should be available to all to whom they apply.
Many schools provide all new faculty with an electronic or written policy manual and send updates to the manual on a regular basis. Students usually receive information related to relevant policies at an appropriate time. For example, some policies are included in the school catalog.
Policies related to specific courses are usually included in course materials. An investigation of how policies are disseminated to those affected by the policies should be a part of the evaluation of policies. A mechanism should be in place to let the appropriate constituents know about changes in policies.
Policies should be reviewed annually and updated regularly. The approval documentation that should be present on every policy will demonstrate that all stakeholders had input into their development and approval. Minutes of meetings of appropriate bodies will provide evidence of discussion and action by the stakeholders. Policies need to be clearly stated and widely communicated. Evidence that policies are not followed is cause for analyzing reasons and intervening accordingly.