EVALUATION OF NURSING EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS AS DESCRIBED BY INDIVIDUALS IN THAT POSITION.
Contributors: University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Published: 1988
Number of pages: 85
Subjects: Health Sciences, Nursing.; Education, Administration.
Description: The purpose of this research was to describe the evaluation process of nursing education administrators as recounted by individuals in that position. Evaluation was defined as the process of gathering information, examining and judging the information on the basis of value and worth, and possibly using that information for future decision-making. Only evaluation communicated to the administrators was described.

This descriptive research was implemented by mailing an investigator-constructed questionnaire to 151 administrators of baccalaureate and/or higher degree nursing education programs in the southern region as defined by the Southberm Regional Education Board (SREB). Useable responses were obtained from 100 administrators (66.2%).

The majority of the subjects were female, middle-aged, doctorally prepared in a discipline other than nursing, in a permanent position, and had served in the current position an average of 6 years. Most of the respondents had been evaluated (83, 83%). Seventeen (17%) of the administrators had not been evaluated. Most of those 17 respondents (15, 88.2%) would like to be evaluated.

For those evaluated, the purpose was for (a) information (40, 48.2%), (b) assessing progress toward institutional goal attainment (51, 61.4%), (c) merit salary adjustments (34, 41%), and/or (d) determining retention in the position (31, 37.3%). Role performance, professional service, and professional relationships were assessed in the evaluation. Superiors, subordinates, and the nursing education administrator as subject of the evaluation participated in the process at all phases. These individuals initiated and implemented the process, provided evaluative input, and received results of the process. Those administrators who were evaluated attempted to change those behaviors perceived as negative by the individuals evaluating them.

Only 2 of the 17 administrators who were not evaluated preferred not to be evaluated. Recent appointment to the position and absence of an organized evaluation process were frequently cited as reasons for this lack of evaluation. Most administrators did, however, receive feedback regarding their performance in some way.

Future research should (a) compare those administrators who are and who are not evaluated regarding their satisfaction in the position and (b) assess faculty attitudes toward administrator evaluation.
Notes: Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 49-08, Section: B, page: 3113.

Thesis (D.S.N.)--UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM, 1988.

School code: 0005.