Evaluating Teaching Performance
Michael B. Paulsen
There are many comprehensive systems for the evaluation of faculty per-
formance and guidelines for the development of such systems; each includes
a substantial component devoted to evaluating faculty teaching performance
(Arreola, 2000; Braskamp and Ory, 1994; Cashin, 1996; Centra, 1993;
Johnson and Ryan, 2000; Richlin and Manning, 1995; Seldin, 1980, 1999a;
Theall and Franklin, 1990). Contributors to this literature agree about key
principles that promote effective faculty evaluation (Cashin, 1996). This
chapter focuses on three principles: clarifying expectations of and by fac-
ulty, identifying the nature and sources of data to be used for evaluation,
and clarifying the purposes and uses of evaluation data.
Clarifying Expectations
Clarifying the expectations that institutions and departments have for their
faculty and that faculty have for their own performance are central to a suc-
cessful faculty evaluation system (Arreola, 2000; Braskamp and Ory, 1994;
Cashin, 1996; Seldin, 1980, 1999a). Expectations for faculty work respon-
sibilities and outcomes are affected by institutional, departmental, discipli-
nary, and individual faculty priorities. These expectations also affect the
methods, criteria, and the nature and sources of data used to evaluate fac-
ulty work. In recent years, both institutional and faculty expectations have
begun to change because the nature of faculty work has changed.
Redeļ¬nitions of faculty roles affect how the teacher role of faculty relates to
the other dimensions of faculty work. Understanding long- and short-term
changes in the teacher role will help clarify expectations for faculty work as
a whole.
Michael B. Paulsen
There are many comprehensive systems for the evaluation of faculty per-
formance and guidelines for the development of such systems; each includes
a substantial component devoted to evaluating faculty teaching performance
(Arreola, 2000; Braskamp and Ory, 1994; Cashin, 1996; Centra, 1993;
Johnson and Ryan, 2000; Richlin and Manning, 1995; Seldin, 1980, 1999a;
Theall and Franklin, 1990). Contributors to this literature agree about key
principles that promote effective faculty evaluation (Cashin, 1996). This
chapter focuses on three principles: clarifying expectations of and by fac-
ulty, identifying the nature and sources of data to be used for evaluation,
and clarifying the purposes and uses of evaluation data.
Clarifying Expectations
Clarifying the expectations that institutions and departments have for their
faculty and that faculty have for their own performance are central to a suc-
cessful faculty evaluation system (Arreola, 2000; Braskamp and Ory, 1994;
Cashin, 1996; Seldin, 1980, 1999a). Expectations for faculty work respon-
sibilities and outcomes are affected by institutional, departmental, discipli-
nary, and individual faculty priorities. These expectations also affect the
methods, criteria, and the nature and sources of data used to evaluate fac-
ulty work. In recent years, both institutional and faculty expectations have
begun to change because the nature of faculty work has changed.
Redeļ¬nitions of faculty roles affect how the teacher role of faculty relates to
the other dimensions of faculty work. Understanding long- and short-term
changes in the teacher role will help clarify expectations for faculty work as
a whole.
Evaluating Teaching Performance