Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Filling a gap in the literature, Jeff Buller's new book is designed to help department chairs, deans, and members of evaluation committees by showing them what they need to know and do when participating in faculty reviews and evaluations. The book shows how to apply the information about performance and convey clear messages about priorities. The book also reveals what professionals can do to protect themselves in cases when an appeal or grievance is likely\"--

Although fraught with politics and other perils, teacher evaluation can contribute in important, positive ways to faculty development at both the individual and the departmental levels. Yet the logistics of creating a valid assessment are complicated. Inconsistent methods, rater bias, and overreliance on student evaluation forms have proven problematic. The essays in Assessing the Teaching of Writing demonstrate constructive ways of evaluating teacher performance, taking into consideration the immense number of variables involved. Contributors to the volume examine a range of fundamental issues, including the political context of declining state funds in education; growing public critique of the professoriate and demands for accountability resulting from federal policy initiatives like No Child Left Behind; the increasing sophistication of assessment methods and technologies; and the continuing interest in the scholarship of teaching. The first section addresses concerns and advances in assessment methodologies, and the second takes a closer look at unique individual sites and models of assessment. Chapters collectively argue for viewing teacher assessment as a rhetorical practice. Fostering new ways of thinking about teacher evaluation, Assessing the Teaching of Writing will be of great interest not only to writing program administrators but also to those concerned with faculty development and teacher assessment outside the writing program.

With nearly 48 percent of all U.S. undergraduates attending community and technical colleges, the two-year sector is an integral part of our nation's higher education system and a vital part of our nation's future. The need for effective faculty evaluation and professional development within two-year colleges stems partly from the size of this sector and also from the diversity of its program offerings and its student body. Miller and his co-authors bring timely, authoritative, and practical material to two audiences in this rapidly growing field of education: first, teachers who have permanent appointments but could use professional development and improvement; and, second, the already large and still growing number of part-time instructors who could use more evaluating and improving. This book is intended to be a direct assistance for these groups as well as to administrators who must make personal decisions. This professional book is for human resource managers and staff development officers of two-year colleges. A greater emphasis needs to be placed on human resource management, according to Miller and his co-authors, that will result in better personnel decision making.

The present study identifies characteristics of individuals and work settings that influence Asian international faculty members' intentions to continue their employment in US research universities. Given the demand for researchers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields (STEM), the higher rate of turnover among untenured faculty, and the replacement costs associated with turnover in STEM, the sample is limited to assistant professors employed in these areas. Multinomial regression analyses are conducted to identify variables that \"pull\" and \"push\" uncertain faculty toward intentions stay and leave their current institutions. The results suggest that faculty who are more satisfied with time available for research and those who express stronger organizational commitment are more likely to say they will stay. Those dissatisfied with the fairness of work evaluations and believe tenure decisions are not merit-based, are more likely to say they will leave. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).

In this study, evaluation research in initial teacher education programs were evaluated with a rubric developed in line with Joint Committee Standards (Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson, & Caruthers, 2011) This meta-evaluation study consisted of two phases. In the first phase, a rubric was developed to assess the evaluation reports based on program evaluation standards. In the second phase, theses and articles selected with certain criteria were analyzed based on the meta-evaluation rubric. Adopting the empirical reevaluation of multiple data sets about the same program model, the data were analyzed with the descriptive analysis method. According to the results, the selected research mostly met accuracy standard whilst feasibility and propriety standards were limitedly met. It was concluded that program evaluation research in the Turkish context needed to be improved by further considering program evaluation standards. Bu çalışmada, öğretmen eğitimi programlarına yönelik değerlendirme araştırmaları Ortak Komite Standartları (Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson ve Caruthers, 2011) doğrultusunda geliştirilen bir rubrik ile değerlendirilmiştir. Bu meta-değerlendirme çalışması iki aşamadan oluşmaktadır. İlk aşamada, değerlendirme raporlarını program değerlendirme standartlarına göre değerlendirmek için bir rubrik geliştirilmiştir. İkinci aşamada, belirli ölçütlere göre seçilen tezler ve makaleler geliştirilen meta-değerlendirme rubriğine göre analiz edilmiştir. Aynı program modeline ilişkin birden fazla veri setinin ampirik olarak yeniden değerlendirilmesi benimsenerek, veriler betimsel analiz yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlara göre, seçilen araştırmalar doğruluk standardını çoğunlukla karşılarken, uygulanabilirlik ve uygunluk standartlarını sınırlı düzeyde karşılamıştır. Türkiye bağlamında yürütülen program değerlendirme araştırmalarının, program değerlendirme standartlarını daha etkili şekilde dikkate alarak geliştirilmesi gerektiği sonucuna varılmıştır.

Background Coaching is increasingly recognized as a valuable tool to amplify learning in undergraduate medical education (UME), yet national data on its implementation, particularly in the context of clinical skills education, remain limited. Previous survey studies on coaching in medical education have focused on select institutions with established coaching programs, leaving a gap in understanding the broader landscape of coaching in UME. This study aims to address three critical gaps: current descriptions of coaching programs across U.S. medical schools, the nature of support provided to faculty coaches in these programs, and understanding how coaching is integrated into clinical skills development. Methods A national survey was distributed to members of the Directors of Clinical Skills (DOCS) organization, targeting clinical skills educators at U.S. allopathic medical schools. The 29-item survey included multiple-choice, ranked, and open-ended questions. Responses were analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative approaches, combining descriptive statistics with content and thematic analysis to explore coaching program structure, goals, clinical skills impact, evaluation practices, and faculty development. Results Of the 44 respondents, 38 completed the majority of the survey. Nearly half (47%) reported having an active coaching program, with an additional 14% planning to implement a program. Coaching commonly begins in the pre-clerkship phase (93%) and emphasizes longitudinal relationships (87%). Key priorities included professional identity formation and clinical skills development, with history-taking, presentation skills, and clinical reasoning identified as skills most amenable to coaching. Respondents highlighted coaching’s role in fostering constructive learning environments, promoting skill development, and increasing student confidence. However, variations persist in program structure, oversight, and evaluation practices between institutions. Faculty development is widely implemented, with 94% of programs offering ongoing training and 79% compensating their coaches. Communication skills were ranked as the most critical competency for coach development. Evaluation practices were varied, with most programs relying on student satisfaction surveys (69%) and formative feedback (73%). Conclusion This study provides a current national snapshot of coaching in UME through the lens of clinical skills educators. It underscores the growing recognition of coaching’s value in clinical skills development and professional identity formation. While coaching programs are increasingly supported by faculty development and compensation, variability in structure, oversight, and evaluation remains.

Each week, JBHE will provide links to online articles that may be of interest to our readers. Here are this week’s selections.

In the 21st century, sustainability and indicators of world-class universities have come within the scope of an academic cottage industry. The complex problem of university sustainability implies a big challenge for countries and educators to implement important strategies in an integrated and comprehensive way. This paper highlights and analyzes the sustainability indicators of universities included as newly formed world-class universities (NFWCUs) in the top 100 from 2010 and 2018. The integration of three global ranking scales—the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), the Quacquarelli–Symonds World University Ranking (QS) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THEs)—allows us to minimize the impact of the methodology used. This study integrates regression analysis by using statistical grouping, case studies and normative analysis. Our principal findings are as follows: among the commonly ranked top 100 universities in 2018, the ARWU, QS and THE counted 57, compared with 47 in 2010. Thus, comparing 2010 and 2018 shows that 44 of the universities appeared simultaneously in ARWU, QS and THE rankings and maintained a sustainable position in any ranking system in the family of top 100 groups. Three lower-ranked NFWCUs in the hybrid list for 2010 lost their ranking and did not appear in the group of top 100 universities in 2018, which are covered by some catch-up and young universities. The NFWCUs were from US, Australia, China, Singapore, Germany and Belgium. By systematic comparison, the US and UK continued to dominate the stability of NFWCUs in 2010 and 2018. The key sustainability indicators include a high concentration of talent, abundant resources to offer a rich learning environment and conduct advanced research. Generally, the factors were negatively associated with ranking suggesting that a higher score result in top ranking and vice versa. Teaching, research, citation and international outlook were negatively correlated with THE ranking in 2018. Similarly, Alumni and PUB were negatively associated with ARWU ranking in 2018. All factors except international student ratio were significantly correlated in QS ranking either in 2010 or 2018, where negative association was observed. The significant contribution of our study is to highlight that for the sustainability of universities, it is necessary to have an increasing emphasis on the effectiveness and efficiency of government-supported research, stability of investments and more approaches to employ international initiatives. The results also confirm the appropriate governance, developing global students and place emphasis on science and technology as additional factors in the approaches of pathways to NFWCUs, with delivery of outstanding educational programs and comprehensive internationalization as a key indicator for performance improvement and global university ranking systems.

Reading-to-write (RTW) tasks are becoming increasingly popular and have already been used in several high-stakes English proficiency exams, either replacing or complementing a prompt-based essay test. However, it is still not clear that what accounts for successful or unsuccessful performance on an integrated reading–writing task is owing to the hybrid nature of reading and writing skills and to potential rater effects on test score variability. Thus, in this study, data-driven analytic rubrics for the RTW task were developed first. Then, the analytic subscores of 83 college ESL students’ responses to the RTW task were obtained. Correlational analyses were first used for the data to explore the relationship of the writing and reading skills engaged in different aspects of the RTW task. A multivariate G-study was also applied to examine the degree of variability attributable to test takers and raters on analytic subscores. The results indicate that a RTW task may tap into both reading and writing abilities given relatively high correlations observed among composite of and separate analytic subscores, and independent reading and writing scores. The multivariate G-study results also show that each analytic rating domain could capture the difference in variability of test takers’ proficiency utilized in the RTW task, and raters assigned scores neither too harshly nor too leniently across each analytic rating domain. However, the results also reveal that person and rater facets contributed to score variability differently in certain analytic categories. This study provides valuable insights into the nature of RTW tasks and has implications for rating rubric development for integrated tasks.