Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Faculty evaluation: A prickly pair

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this exploratory study reviewing an institution's faculty evaluation process, we found support for the judgmental aspects of appraisal, but a desire for greater focus upon development. The institutional culture supports a combined approach to the evaluations. Although this diminishes the focus of both forms of evaluation, it serves both the faculty and the institution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrews, H.A. and Licata, C.M. (1991). 'Administrative perceptions of existing evaluation systems', Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 5, 69-76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, P.B. (1993). Human Resource Management: Key Concepts and Skills. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, M. (1985). 'Note on performance appraisal', in Beer, M. and Spector, B. (eds.), Readings in Human Resource Management. New York: The Free Press, pp. 312-331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braskamp, L.A. and Ory, J.C. (1994). Assessing Faculty Work: Enhancing Individual and Institutional Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A., Haslam, C and Webb, A. (1994). 'Performance appraisal in UK universities: A case of procedural compliance?', Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 19(3), 175-187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlton, I. and Sloman, M. (1991). 'Performance appraisal in practice', Human Resource Management Journal 2(3), 80-94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casey, R.J., Gentile, P. and Bigger, S.W. (1997). 'Teaching appraisal in higher education: An Australian perspective', Higher Education 34, 459-482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. (1987). The Academic Life: Small Worlds, Different Worlds. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. (1974). 'Evaluation of faculty', Community College Review 2(2), 12-21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goss, D. (1994). Principles of Human Resource Management. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, B. (1995a). 'Appraising appraisal: some tensions and some possibilities', Higher Education 29, 19-35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, B. (1995b). 'Staff appraisal: Personal, professional and organisational development?', Educational Management and Administration 23(1), 47-57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imrie, B.W. (1996). 'Performance planning, appraisal and development', Higher Education Management 8(2), 87-104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, D.K. (1991). Junior Faculty Development: A Handbook. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Licata, C.M. and Andrews, H.A. (1992). 'Faculty leaders' responses to post-tenure evaluation practices', Community/Junior College Quarterly 16, 47-56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longenecker, C. and Ludwig, D. (1990). 'Ethical dilemmas in performance appraisal revisited', Journal of Business Ethics 9, 961-969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, S.F. (1982). 'Faculty evaluation in community colleges', Community/Junior College Quarterly 6, 167-178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohrman, A.M., Jr.; Resnick-West, S.M. and Lawler, III, E.E. (1990). Designing Performance Appraisal Systems: Aligning Appraisals and Organizational Realities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moses, I. (1989). 'Role and problems of heads of departments in performance appraisal', Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 14(2), 95-105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moses, I. (1996). 'Assessment and appraisal of academic staff', Higher Education Management 8(2), 79-86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, D. (1992). 'Appraisal in action: a case study of innovation and leadership', Studies in Higher Education 17(2), 201-210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. (1996). 'Staff appraisal at Nene College of higher education', Higher Education Management 8(2), 69-77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townley, B. (1993). 'Performance appraisal and the emergence of management', Journal of Management Studies 30(2), 221-238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, A. (1993). Chairing the Academic Department: Leadership Among Peers (3rd Ed.). Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truss, C., Gratton, L., Hope-Hailey, V., McGovern, P. and Stiles, P. (1997). 'Soft and hard models of human resource management: A reappraisal', Journal of Management Studies 34(1), 53-73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, G. (1994). 'From appraisal interview to staff development discussion: practice, training and theory', Journal of Tertiary Education Administration 16(2), 215-224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, N. and Weis, E. (1982). Faculty Evaluation: The Use of Explicit Criteria for Promotion, Retention and Tenure. AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education Research Report No. 2, 1982. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, F. and Beaton, D. (1993). 'The theory and practice of appraisal: Progress review in a Scottish university', Higher Education Quarterly 47(2), 163-189.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Adrienne E. Hyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hyle, A.E. Faculty evaluation: A prickly pair. Higher Education 38, 351–371 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003735227936

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003735227936

Keywords

Search

Navigation