Please provide at least 150-word response to each student response below. Be sure to research/cite/reference sources in each discussion.
1st Post: The discussion across organizations, the community, and concerned higher educational leadership desires to address administrative effectiveness. The concept is not light in nature. When assessing effectiveness related to instruction and learning, we look to the faculty and students. The administrative roles encompass the totality of higher education institutions outcomes. The use of strategic plans, quality measures, and community input to implement measures capability of driving needed and sustainable changes for continued organizational growth. There are different measures and metrics capable of enforcing administrative effectiveness for better outcomes. The administrative obligation concerning fiscal accountability drives assessments exploring the organization’s budget. With the current crisis concerning college tuition containment, the administrative leaders are tasked with maintaining sustainable and quality programs. This may include measures on soliciting monies. The use of research to drive marketing measures capable of funding. Oversight of money utilization is critical.
The structure of spending plays a vital role in student outcomes and effective financial sustainability. Previous module, we discussed faculty and instruction load. How the difference of low to high loads played a role financially due to financial constraints in higher education institutions. Beyond the immediate instructor, the administrative staff has grown with student enrollment. This is a part of the cost structure/allotment of monies. The measure concerns look at the functions of the administrative staff. The impact each role has on student outcomes. The organizational mission should be the driver for the administrative role outcomes. As schools compete more for private dollars, the use of monies is becoming increasingly critical in structing.
2nd Post: The cyclical process of institutional effectiveness continues with measures. Aligned with understanding the variables contributing to institutional effectiveness is the notion that administrators must set and evaluate measures. It goes back to that saying I have always been told, “You are only as good as those at the forefront.” Middaugh (2010) states that assessing effectiveness means asking customers how satisfied they are with the specific administrative units (Middaugh, 2010, p. 170). There are direct and indirect measures.
One of the more known indirect measures is student satisfaction surveys, as they address the specific needs of students (Middaugh, 2010). At the University of Delaware, they developed campus pulse surveys that focus on areas of discontent that students may have (Middaugh, 2010). External reviewers can also Another indirect measure is conducting a systematic review of administrative units or department heads (“What are some appropriate”, 2020) … At my institution, we receive 360 feedback reviews, to which our colleagues that we work with can give us feedback (both positive and negative) about our work for either the semester or the entire academic year. Direct measures require the evaluation of actual performance-based indicators such as wait time, number of students seen or acceptances (if admissions), and cost performances (“What are some appropriate”, 2020).
If institutions want to understand the impacts, they “must engage in self-study and then examine the findings (Middaugh, 2010, p. 172).” Some of the ways measures can have an impact on the overall effectiveness of the institution is accreditation (whether it's kept or taken away), funding for services and support, retention, enrollment numbers, etc. The impacts can be internal or external but are all very imperative when wanting to navigate institutional effectiveness; however, institutions must be willing to repeat this process for continuous change and growth to occur.
3rd Post: Measures and evaluations are designed to determine if the institution or stakeholders meet their goals and objectives. Unfortunately, some administrators want the title but do not want to complete the tasks the title holds, including navigating measurement and evaluation.
Working in administration, I can always see the impacts because people can react differently regarding measurements and evaluation. The uncertainty or unknown of what may happen can lead to reactions. Certain administrators take the information received very hard; others can take what is said and move on. Because institutional effectiveness is a cyclical process, I believe that Jenkins (2013) described it best when talking about the responsibility and control of leaders because there is a hierarchy. There is always something we can work on and be better at. When there is an intentionality in understanding the measures that are valuable for an institution, it can lead to a robust system for evaluation.
The specific type of measure used for the evaluation is dependent upon the institution and what the evaluation is for. Is it for accreditation, or is it for department review? Administrators can improve if they think of their evaluation as constructive criticism. Sometimes, it is easy to think everything is going well, but perspectives are everything. Administrators do not always have the outside scope of those completing the evaluations. When they feel supported by the institution throughout the entire measurement and evaluation process (including before and after), it can change their mindset and allow improvements to occur.
As it has been said before, the administrator is only as good as those leading before them, and the institution holds power to choose measures, variables of those measures, and the type of evaluation they feel would contribute to the overall impact of institutional effectiveness.
