In this study, animal or dairy sciences faculty from doctoral/research universities were surveyed to clarify teaching performance expectations for the purpose of promotion and tenure of assistant professors. A survey tool including 15 evaluation criteria was available online and at the registration desk of the 2005 Joint Annual Meeting of the American Dairy Science Association and the American Society of Animal Science. The analyzed data set included 47 faculty (41 tenured and 6 tenure-track) with a substantial teaching responsibility from 27 different departments in 25 states. Four criteria were perceived as currently overemphasized: student evaluation of the instructor, student evaluation of the course, authoring peer-reviewed publications, and authoring an undergraduate textbook or book chapter. Nevertheless, more than 50% of respondents reported that these criteria should be used. One criterion emerged as being currently underemphasized: documentation of personal assessment of one's own teaching by preparing a portfolio. The lack of consensus for the remaining 10 items may have reflected substantial differences in institutional practices. The significance of overemphasis or underemphasis of certain criteria varied substantially depending on the respondent's perceived institutional mission. When asked about recognition within their department, 68% of respondents indicated that efforts in teaching improvement were properly rewarded. Respondents doubted the meaningfulness and appropriateness of student ratings tools as currently used. Results also suggested that animal and dairy science faculty placed a higher value on criteria recognizing excellence in teaching based on intradepartmental recognition (e.g., interactions with close-up peers and students) rather than recognition within a broader community of scholars as evidenced by authorship or success in generating funding for teaching. Proposed improvements in the evaluation of teaching for promotion and tenure include 1) providing tenure-track faculty with written guidelines at the time of hiring; 2) ensuring that student ratings tools are reliable and valid; 3) carefully mentoring new faculty within the departmental and institutional culture; and 4) encouraging self-reflection and documentation of attempts to address pedagogical issues in one's own teaching. Educational leaders in doctoral/research universities should promote changes to enhance teaching performance of future faculty graduating from their institutions.
The ultimate goal of widening participation work, which unites policymakers, practitioners and academics, is to enhance the experience of disadvantaged students relating to HE access, success and outcomes. This article presents the Office for Students' (OfS) commissioned project Standards
of Evaluation Practice (Phase 2). This project sought to create a step-change in robustness of evidence used and evaluation practices. Our 2017 – 19 project explored evaluation practices among nine partner organisations drawn from higher education providers (HEPs) and third-sector
partners. The initial aim was to pilot test the Standards of Evidence of Evaluation developed during Phase 1 research; share practices that work and highlight examples of best practice. As the project developed, a further outcome was envisaged through ongoing discussions between the OfS, academics,
HEPs and third-sector parties: a self-assessment tool for evaluation practitioners. This tool provides a framework and guidance which allow practitioners to map their own evaluation approaches. Through using prompts, the five dimensions of the tool highlight strengths and weaknesses of evaluation
within five domains (strategic context, programme design, evaluation design, evaluation implementation and learning). This new tool is, in effect, a five-point framework setting guidance about good evaluation practice. It was rolled out to all HEPs in spring 2019, when providers were invited
to return the completed tool and their reflection as part of their access and participation planning.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.