Evaluating Kinesiology Faculty: Best Practices, Challenges, and Innovative Approaches
Click name to view affiliation
Search for other papers by Philip E. Martin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mary E. Rudisill in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Bradley D. Hatfield in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jared Russell in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by T. Gilmour Reeve in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
One of the most important and yet more challenging and stressful tasks completed by a department chair is evaluating faculty. Regardless of its importance, though, department chairs often receive little or no training for this critical task. This paper contains three sections, all of which focus on faculty annual evaluations. The first section discusses a number of recommendations for conducting thorough and meaningful annual evaluations. The second section highlights a real case scenario at Auburn University in which all university departments were tasked with changing their evaluation procedures, criteria, and expectations for faculty performance to better align with the revised strategic goals and mission of the university. The third section highlights an innovative peer-based faculty performance-evaluation system employed in the department of kinesiology at the University of Maryland that is designed to engage all tenure-track faculty in the evaluation process.
Martin is with the Dept. of Kinesiology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. Rudisill and Russell are with the the School of Kinesiology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL. Hatfield is with the Dept. of Kinesiology, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. Reeve is with the American Kinesiology Association, P.O. Box 721, Mahomet, IL.
© 2024 Human Kinetics