Reviewing Academic Performance. Approaches to the Evaluation of Departments and Individuals. University of Queensland Press Scholars' Library.
Fuente:
ERIC Institute of Education Sciences
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso educativo Open Access |
| Language: | en |
| Published: |
1987
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1867181789757308928 |
|---|---|
| author | Roe, Ernest And Others |
| author_facet | Roe, Ernest And Others Roe, Ernest And Others |
| collection | Education Resources Information Center |
| contents | Reviewing Academic Performance. Approaches to the Evaluation of Departments and Individuals. University of Queensland Press Scholars' Library. Roe, Ernest And Others Case Studies College Programs Data Collection Departments Evaluation Methods Faculty Evaluation Faculty Promotion Graduate Study Higher Education Information Needs Organizational Effectiveness Probationary Period Program Effectiveness Program Evaluation Rating Scales Self Evaluation (Groups) Self Evaluation (Individuals) Teacher Selection Tenure Evaluation of both the academic department or unit and the individual academic staff member is addressed. Documents relevant to the reviewing process and a variety of instruments for collecting evaluative information are included, along with 10 case studies and exercises that offer advice on effective procedures. Departmental review is defined as a systematic investigation of the structure and functions of an academic department in order to promote better performance. Attention is directed to basic issues relevant to evaluating individual performance such as the purposes, problems of evidence and criteria, institutional and individual responsibility, and principles concerning openness and confidentiality. Of particular concern are four contexts: staff selection, probation and tenure, promotion, and regular appraisal. Information needed on both types of evaluations and ways to obtain them are considered in detail. Appendices provided two in-depth statements concerning review procedures: (1) academic review procedures from the University of California, Santa Barbara; and (2) graduate program review procedures for the University of California, Irvine. (SW) |
| format | Recurso educativo Open Access |
| id | eric_ED278311 |
| institution | ERIC Institute of Education Sciences |
| language | en |
| publishDate | 1987 |
| record_format | eric |
| spellingShingle | Reviewing Academic Performance. Approaches to the Evaluation of Departments and Individuals. University of Queensland Press Scholars' Library. Roe, Ernest And Others Case Studies College Programs Data Collection Departments Evaluation Methods Faculty Evaluation Faculty Promotion Graduate Study Higher Education Information Needs Organizational Effectiveness Probationary Period Program Effectiveness Program Evaluation Rating Scales Self Evaluation (Groups) Self Evaluation (Individuals) Teacher Selection Tenure Reviewing Academic Performance. Approaches to the Evaluation of Departments and Individuals. University of Queensland Press Scholars' Library. Roe, Ernest And Others Case Studies College Programs Data Collection Departments Evaluation Methods Faculty Evaluation Faculty Promotion Graduate Study Higher Education Information Needs Organizational Effectiveness Probationary Period Program Effectiveness Program Evaluation Rating Scales Self Evaluation (Groups) Self Evaluation (Individuals) Teacher Selection Tenure Evaluation of both the academic department or unit and the individual academic staff member is addressed. Documents relevant to the reviewing process and a variety of instruments for collecting evaluative information are included, along with 10 case studies and exercises that offer advice on effective procedures. Departmental review is defined as a systematic investigation of the structure and functions of an academic department in order to promote better performance. Attention is directed to basic issues relevant to evaluating individual performance such as the purposes, problems of evidence and criteria, institutional and individual responsibility, and principles concerning openness and confidentiality. Of particular concern are four contexts: staff selection, probation and tenure, promotion, and regular appraisal. Information needed on both types of evaluations and ways to obtain them are considered in detail. Appendices provided two in-depth statements concerning review procedures: (1) academic review procedures from the University of California, Santa Barbara; and (2) graduate program review procedures for the University of California, Irvine. (SW) |
| title | Reviewing Academic Performance. Approaches to the Evaluation of Departments and Individuals. University of Queensland Press Scholars' Library. |
| topic | Case Studies College Programs Data Collection Departments Evaluation Methods Faculty Evaluation Faculty Promotion Graduate Study Higher Education Information Needs Organizational Effectiveness Probationary Period Program Effectiveness Program Evaluation Rating Scales Self Evaluation (Groups) Self Evaluation (Individuals) Teacher Selection Tenure |
| url | https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED278311 |