The assesment and evaluation of academic members in faculties in a systematic way is a crucial issue because higher education institutions put a large emphasis on a transparent, efficient and successful management. This study aims to conduct a mixed (quantitative and qualitative) research about the expectations of Education Faculties’ academic members about a performance evaluation approach and the obstacles to such an evaluation system. Convergent parallel mixed method design has been preferred as research model. “Expectations from performance assessment” subscale and “barriers to performance assessment” subscale have been used as data collection tools which are developed by Tonbul (2008). Independent Samples t-test and ANOVA are used for analysis of quantitave data; and content analysis is used for analysis of qualitative data. As a result of this study, it is found out that academic members have a moderate level of expectations from a performance evaluation approach. The highest expectations belong to assistant professors while the lowest belong to professors. The mostly agreed expectations of academic members from a performance evaluation approach are found to be “developing a consensus about the criteria of an effective academician, affecting professional development of academic members positively and increasing workload of academic members”. The most frequent obstacles to a performance evaluation approach emerged as “current organizational mechanism of higher education institutions” and “workload of faculty academic members”. The scores of both expectations and obstacles significantly differ depending on “taking academic incentive, work experience in higher education, academic title and satisfaction level of academicians from their institutions”. As a result of qualitative analysis, there emerge many themes and codes related to a performance evaluation system. In “Attitude Towards Performance Approach” theme, the most frequent codes appeared to be “adopters, doubters”. In Academicians’ Priorities theme, the codes emerged as “research and publications, evaluation of quality of instruction, advisory for undergraduates and postgraduates”; In Positive Effects theme, the codes emerged as “motivation, financial support, search of quality”; In Negative Effects theme, the codes emerged as “intra-institutional rivalry, academic dishonesty”; In Obstacles theme, the codes emerged as “intense workload, lack of instrintic motivation”; and finally In Suggestions theme, the codes emerged as “more officer employment, institutional support for academic efforts and research publishings”.
The assessment and evaluation of academic members in faculties in a systematic way is a crucial issue because higher education institutions put a large emphasis on a transparent, efficient and successful management. This study aims to conduct a mixed (quantitative and qualitative) research about the expectations of Education Faculties' academic members about a performance evaluation approach and the obstacles to such an evaluation system. Convergent parallel mixed method design has been preferred as research model. "Expectations from performance assessment" subscale and "barriers to performance assessment" subscale have been used as data collection tools that are developed by Tonbul (2008). Independent samples t-test and ANOVA are used for analysis of quantitave data; and content analysis is used for analysis of qualitative data. As a result of this study, it is found that academic members have a moderate level of expectations from a performance evaluation approach. The highest expectations belong to assistant professors while the lowest belong to professors. The mostly agreed expectations of academic members from a performance evaluation approach are found to be "developing a consensus about the criteria of an effective academic, affecting professional development of academic members positively and increasing the workload of academic members". The most frequent obstacles to a performance evaluation approach emerged as "current organizational mechanism of higher education institutions" and "workload of faculty academic members". The scores of both expectations and obstacles significantly differ depending on "taking academic incentive, work experience in higher education, academic title and satisfaction level of academics from their institutions". As a result of qualitative analysis, there emerge many themes and codes related to a performance evaluation system. In "Attitude Towards Performance Approach" theme, the most frequent codes appeared to be "adopters, doubters". In Academicians' Priorities theme, the codes emerged as "research and publications, evaluation of quality of instruction, advisory for undergraduates and postgraduates"; In Positive Effects theme, the codes emerged as "motivation, financial support, search of quality"; In Negative Effects theme, the codes emerged as "intra-institutional rivalry, academic dishonesty"; In Obstacles theme, the codes emerged as "intense workload, lack of instructive motivation"; and finally In Suggestions theme, the codes emerged as "more officer employment, institutional support for academic efforts and research publishings".
Alan : Eğitim Bilimleri
Dergi Türü : Ulusal
Benzer Makaleler | Yazar | # |
---|
Makale | Yazar | # |
---|