Good afternoon, colleagues. Welcome to your update for the March 27, 2012 Board of Trustees meeting. I’ll mention the highlights. You can access the agenda and all supporting documentation at http://www.uky.edu/Trustees/agenda/full/2012/mar/welcome.html.
Chair’s Report 1 (CR 1)
Board Chair Britt Brockman presented a new process of evaluating the president. Here are all the details: http://www.uky.edu/Trustees/agenda/full/2012/mar/cr1.pdf. Essentially, the new evaluation process (the Board approved its adoption) will be a 360° evaluation of the President, with 20-30 interviews with representatives of key constituent groups who are in a position to comment on the President’s performance. Every three to four years the number of interviewees will increase to 40-50. Constituency groups will include the University Senate, Staff Senate, Student Government Association, Alumni Association, senior administrators, elected officials, donors, and state and local community leaders. The full Board will identify the individuals to be interviewed.
Interview questions will be agreed upon by the President and the Board Chair, in consultation with the Board’s Executive Committee. The President will prepare an annual self-evaluation to help aid the evaluation process. The Executive Committee will be responsible for conducting the evaluation (as is the current practice, per Governing Regulations II.E.2.a) and will share the results with the Board.
Evaluation questions will be both quantitative (on a five-point scale) and qualitative. The last page of the supporting documentation also includes sample questions used by other universities. Since they weren’t designed for UK, they don’t quite fit at UK, but they are good, basic examples of the types of questions we will use. In my opinion, this is a dramatic change for UK, and for the good of the University. This gives us as trustees a better picture of the President’s performance.
I think that the revised presidential evaluation process is a huge improvement. It will allow many more individuals to participate in the evaluation, particularly those who work closely with the President in various, specific areas. Board members will also offer individual opinions on the President’s performance.
President’s Report 4 (PR 4)
President Capilouto explained that the Board was being asked to award an Honorary Doctor of Engineering to Vijay K. Dhir and an Honorary Doctor of Science to Sally Mason. The Board approved them both unanimously – their bios are at http://www.uky.edu/Trustees/agenda/full/2012/mar/cr1.pdf.
This was the second reading for a series of Governing Regulations changes that were revised primarily to ensure compliance with SACS accreditation standards. Some concerns were raised during the February Board meeting about how the proposed changes came to be and the Board Chair charged the Board’s Academic Affairs Committee with reviewing the changes. I attended one of the educational sessions provided to all Board members to help explain the changes. When the 2009 – 2014 Strategic Plan was approved in June 2009, it included a “Values” statement that was an update from what was listed in Governing Regulations II.C.3. There was a concern that the changes to UK’s “Values” statement may not have been appropriately vetted during the Strategic Plan development process. So, between the February and March meetings, there was a robust process at the Board level in which the changes to the Values (which stem from GR II.C.3) were vetted among Board members, as well with student, faculty and staff representative bodies.
There were other items, of course, but the issues above caught my eye, so to speak.
I enjoyed watching the positive outcome of the Governing Regulations review process, which was organized by the Academic Affairs Committee Chair, Keith Gannon. It is a good example of how well things turn out when different groups of University constituencies work together. Shared governance is a powerful thing.
As always, I am honored to represent staff at the level of the Board. If there is something you need from me, please don’t hesitate to ask. (firstname.lastname@example.org / email@example.com / 257-5872)
All the best,