Open Collections

The evaluation of faculty in British Columbia colleges

University of British Columbia

This study addressed the purpose, frequency, person(s) involved, criteria, methods, and procedures involved in faculty evaluation in all sixteen public British Columbia colleges . Copies of written policy documents for each college were obtained and policies were compared among colleges , between groups of colleges , and between all faculty groups. The results reflected the wide diversity found among policies . The majority of the colleges use the evaluation for both summative and formative purposes. Probationary faculty or newly hired faculty are usually evaluated once per year for two years. Permanent full-time faculty and other faculty groups are commonly evaluated either every three years or annually. Sixty - nine percent of the colleges list specific criteria statements or broad criteria categories and 81% of the colleges have college wide policies on methods used to evaluate faculty. The most common mandatory method of evaluation is student rating forms, followed by evaluation by a superior, and then peer and self evaluation. Colleges are most likely to have two or three mandatory methods of evaluation and an average of two optional evaluation methods. Excluding protocols specifically linked to an evaluation method, most of the procedural policies concern final evaluation results. The majority of colleges do not require mandatory discussion , written goals , or written suggestions for improvements. Seventy - five percent of probationary faculty are evaluated in a manner comparable to that of regular full-time faculty. Fifty-six percent of the colleges evaluate all faculty groups, such as part-time/term contract faculty, with the same frequency, or more frequently than regular full-time faculty. Thirty-one percent of colleges evaluate all faculty groups within a college in an identical manner, whereas in 69 % percent of colleges , evaluation for one or more faculty groups has fewer methods and / or procedures than those used for permanent full-time faculty. Findings in this study are compared to the literature. Acceptable practices are identified and findings which differ significantly from the literature are discussed in detail. Policy recommendations which contribute to a formal, systematic , and effective faculty evaluation system are made.

Thesis/Dissertation

application/pdf

2009-03-10

For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/5818

Education

University of British Columbia

UBCV

DSpace