Conducting a worthwhile assessment of the performance of university presidents poses unique challenges for higher education institutions. One of the most difficult issues is determining the content and format of the assessment instrument. Due to the breadth and complexity of the job, the list of potential criteria that could serve as content for the assessment instrument is almost limitless. There are also many format options with respect to the arrangement of the assessment instrument and plan for administering it. In order to fill an apparent gap in research on university president assessment, this study proposes a model for determining the content and format of an assessment instrument — the Assessment Instrument Development Approach (AIDA). The AIDA model incorporates a mixed-methods research design aimed at identifying the content and format of an assessment instrument that will produce reliable and valid results. Addressing the question, What approach can UNM and other public universities use to develop an effective performance assessment instrument for their president?' this study critiqued the initial AIDA model and suggests a revised model based on study findings. Addressing the question, 'What is the preferred content and format for a president performance assessment instrument?' this study proposed an initial framework for the relationships among variables derived from pertinent theory and concepts pertaining to university president assessment. Considering the study results, a revised framework was developed along with example hypotheses that should be tested in future research to gain additional insights into performance assessment for university presidents. The results of this study reveal there are many candidate criteria and formats for assessing performance. What appears to be lacking in literature and in practice is a means to identify the best criteria and formats that will produce reliable, valid, and useful results for assessment of university presidents. The methods and findings described in this study provide additional insight into the 'means' for developing an assessment instrument and the 'ends' which are fair, equitable, and productive assessments of university president performance.
Organizational Learning and Instructional Technology
Level of Degree
Organization, Information & Learning Sciences
Boverie, Patricia E.
First Committee Member (Chair)
Bramble, William J.
Second Committee Member
Salisbury, Mark W.
Third Committee Member
Noll, Bruce A.
Fourth Committee Member
Marley, Scott C.
College presidents--Rating of, Performance--Evaluation, Evaluation--Methodology
Lester, Dennis L.. "Developing an Effective Instrument for Assessing the Performance of Public University Presidents." (2010). http://digitalrepository.unm.edu/oils_etds/18