All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

An Academic Accomplishment Index For Assessing Faculty Performance
Unformatted Document Text:  4 centers only 13% have a formal institutional program to recognize and reward the use of information technology as part of the faculty review process (Green, 1999). In the past several years, the number of online journals appears to be growing, perhaps to more efficiently process the growing number of conference and journal submissions. In spite of the acceptance of these technologies as teaching and research tools, it has been noted that review committees may not take this work seriously (Seminoff and Wepner, 1995; Young, 2002). Given the increasing role technology plays in both teaching courses and publishing research a baseline of how these technologies are viewed is critical to our understanding their importance in faculty evaluation. OBJECTIVES The basic objective of this study was to determine if there is a level of standardization or uniformity in the ways in which administrators tend to regard various criteria of accomplishment in their assessments of faculty for academic rewards. Posing the issue in a different way, a major objective was to try and identify “what counts”---the features of the academic culture that constitute the norms of advancement. What is it that a faculty member must do in order to be judged worthy of such rewards as salary increases, promotion in rank, and gaining tenure? There are, of course other types of rewards that are familiar to academics---teaching what one prefers, reductions in the number of hours taught, scheduling of classes on preferred days and hours and so on. A decision was made not to explore the ways in which these are allocated. Thus, the focus is on the more formal question as to what constitutes meritorious performance within the three general areas of teaching, research and service. In attempting to find answers to this question, three issues appear to be important: First, what are the major and specific forms of accomplishment within those broad categories that are widely considered as evidence of a faculty member’s high or low level of performance. Second,

Authors: Adams, Jonathan.
first   previous   Page 4 of 14   next   last



background image
4
centers only 13% have a formal institutional program to recognize and reward the use of
information technology as part of the faculty review process (Green, 1999).
In the past several years, the number of online journals appears to be growing, perhaps to
more efficiently process the growing number of conference and journal submissions. In spite of
the acceptance of these technologies as teaching and research tools, it has been noted that review
committees may not take this work seriously (Seminoff and Wepner, 1995; Young, 2002). Given
the increasing role technology plays in both teaching courses and publishing research a baseline
of how these technologies are viewed is critical to our understanding their importance in faculty
evaluation.
OBJECTIVES
The basic objective of this study was to determine if there is a level of standardization or
uniformity in the ways in which administrators tend to regard various criteria of accomplishment
in their assessments of faculty for academic rewards. Posing the issue in a different way, a major
objective was to try and identify “what counts”---the features of the academic culture that
constitute the norms of advancement. What is it that a faculty member must do in order to be
judged worthy of such rewards as salary increases, promotion in rank, and gaining tenure? There
are, of course other types of rewards that are familiar to academics---teaching what one prefers,
reductions in the number of hours taught, scheduling of classes on preferred days and hours and
so on. A decision was made not to explore the ways in which these are allocated. Thus, the focus
is on the more formal question as to what constitutes meritorious performance within the three
general areas of teaching, research and service.
In attempting to find answers to this question, three issues appear to be important: First,
what are the major and specific forms of accomplishment within those broad categories that are
widely considered as evidence of a faculty member’s high or low level of performance. Second,


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 4 of 14   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.