Analysis of academic administrators’ attitudes: annual evaluations and factors that improve teaching

Abstract

A survey administered to academic administrators at all 15 of Michigan's public higher education institutions received 224 responses. New academics were hired, the respondents reported, for their potential to produce quality publications and potential to be a quality instructor. Scholarship and teaching were the factors designated as most important for promotion and tenure. The most important methods for evaluating teaching were student evaluations (40 percent), peer evaluation (27 percent), evaluations by the department head or chairperson (23 percent), and self-evaluation (7 percent). When asked if they were satisfied with the evaluation process, 53 percent of the respondents were satisfied, 27 percent were neutral, and 20 percent were dissatisfied. Path analysis revealed that student evaluations, peer evaluations, and evaluation training positively predicted the belief that evaluation facilitated quality instruction, while clarity of the evaluation process and organizational type predicted satisfaction with the evaluation process, which, in turn, influenced the belief that evaluation facilitated quality instruction. The presence of a collective bargaining agreement and a prominent role for the department chairperson in the evaluation process predicted less satisfaction with the evaluation process and less trust that evaluation produced quality instruction.The Students as Colleagues Project trains student volunteers as evaluators of teaching, and their evaluations were compared to those of academics. The student colleagues offered more feedback, as measured by word count, and their feedback was more personal and less couched in professional or impersonal terms than that of the academics. The student colleagues also offered more praise and less criticism. (28 ref)-School of Life, Sport and Social Sciences, Edinburgh Napier University, United Kingdom. Jaquett, C. M., VanMaaren, V. G., & Williams, R. I. Course Factors That Motivate Students to Submit End-of-Course Evaluations. Innovative Higher Education, 2017, 42 (February) pp. 19-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9368-5.In an undergraduate educational psychology course, 152 students completed a questionnaire about the factors that motivated them to complete course evaluations. The students reported a greater willingness to submit course evaluations for courses with positive characteristics, such as easy tests, good grades, extra credit, high standards, and valuable information. Bad grades and hard tests had the opposite effect. (17 ref)-School Psychology Program, University of Tennessee.

Evaluación de la docencia universitaria. Tendencias y tensiones fundamentales

“…Mientras que, Cherry et al (2017) en la Universidad del Norte de Michigan, Marquette en Estados Unidos abordan la evaluación en función de la consecución de las metas universitarias para la inclusión social como una dimensión fundamental. En este sentido, se enfocan en evaluar las formas de enseñanza que utilizan los docentes para atender la diversidad de necesidades de los estudiantes con bajos ingresos, quienes tienen múltiples deficiencias formativas.…”

Métrica objetiva y empírica de evaluación de la enseñanza en una Universidad Pública del Sureste de EE. UU.

“…There has been very little research done on the examination of the perceptions and role of the academic administrator in the evaluation process, especially on which factors of the academic evaluation tend to impact classroom instruction and learning outcomes. Academic administrators play a vital role as "the conduit between university policy-makers (board, president and provost) and the academy" (Cherry et al, 2017). They are also the key to hiring and developing new academics and to help professors and instructors meet university standards for promotion and tenure.…”

“…They are also the key to hiring and developing new academics and to help professors and instructors meet university standards for promotion and tenure. Cherry et al (2017) examined academic administrators' attitudes toward annual faculty evaluation processes and methods. Of the 208 respondents, their findings revealed the following ranking of teaching evaluation methods in their order of importance: Student evaluations had the highest ranking of 39.9% (83) followed by peer evaluations ranking of 27.4% (57).…”

“…Traditionally, academics have been evaluated based on three criteria: teaching, scholarship and service, with different emphasis being placed on one of the individual criteria depending on the type of institution (Fairweather, 2002). Research universities tend to place more emphasis on traditional scholarship while teaching institutions and colleges tend to place more value on teaching and service (Cherry et al, 2017).…”

“…Prior to this recommendation, some states established policies that focused on academic productivity in undergraduate teaching (Colbeck, 2002). As a result, there is now increased attention to academic evaluations of the institutions and faculty with the emphasis on outcomes and accountability (Cherry et al, 2017).…”