Methods of Assessing Teaching: Investigating the how and why

Teaching Performance, Service, and Scholarship: The Rewarding of U.S. Media and Communication Faculty Members’ Teaching in Tenure and Promotion Documents

“…Media and communication institutions valued the practice of formally observing the performance of tenure candidates through peer evaluations: "Each candidate must offer recent peer review evaluations from at least two faculty members who have observed two different courses (where applicable, these should be one undergraduate and one graduate course) (#72)." Panici (1999) found in a survey of 70 journalism and mass communication department heads that 40% required them, and this study found that they were mentioned in 63% of documents. Some documents, however, stated that peer observations were supplemental to teaching scores and faculty members could request an evaluation only if they wanted to add one to their portfolio.…”

“…Scores also make it easier for administration to compare faculty performance across a department or school. Signaling theory is one useful explanation in understanding why summative teaching scores have gained traction in academia (Panici, 1999). Quantitative summaries enable parties unfamiliar with their area of teaching to competently evaluate them.…”

“…Faculty members perceive department chairs as the most influential person in assessing their teaching effectiveness, partially, because they are the ones most likely to conduct annual reviews of faculty and advise faculty members throughout the tenure process (Cohen, 1997;Lueck et al, 1993). In a survey of 70 Association of Journalism and Mass Communication department heads, respondents felt that administration relied too heavily on them, yet the findings showed that 63% reported that student evaluations were the top required form of evaluation with 32% stating that the purpose of the evaluations were solely for tenure, promotion, and contract renewal purposes (Panici, 1999). The impact of teaching evaluations on tenure and promotion decisions is unclear.…”

“…It should be noted, however, assessment of teaching effectiveness is a contested and cloudy space (Cohen, 1997;Kreber & Cranton, 2000). Panici (1999) stated that "it appears that the assessment of journalism and mass communication teaching is an ambiguous and non-systematic process" based on an evaluation of survey data collected from department heads (p. 70). This study on tenure and promotion documents may shed some light on what components and criteria represent teaching evaluation standards.…”