PURPOSE: To provide baseline data on evaluation of faculty performance in U.S. schools and programs of public health. METHOD: The authors administered an anonymous Internet-based questionnaire using PHP Surveyor. The invited sample consisted of individuals listed in the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) Directory of Accredited Schools and Programs of Public Health. The authors explored performance measures in teaching, research, and service, and assessed how faculty performance measures are used. RESULTS: A total of 64 individuals (60.4%) responded to the survey, with 26 (40.6%) reporting accreditation/reaccreditation by CEPH within the preceding 24 months. Although all schools and programs employ faculty performance evaluations, a significant difference exists between schools and programs in the use of results for merit pay increases and mentoring purposes. Thirty-one (48.4%) of the organizations published minimum performance expectations. Fifty-nine (92.2%) of the respondents counted number of publications, but only 22 (34.4%) formally evaluated their quality. Sixty-two (96.9%) evaluated teaching through student course evaluations, and only 29 (45.3%) engaged in peer assessment. Although aggregate results of teaching evaluation are available to faculty and administrators, this information is often unavailable to students and the public. Most schools and programs documented faculty service activities qualitatively but neither assessed it quantitatively nor evaluated its impact. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into how schools and programs of public health evaluate faculty performance. Results suggest that although schools and programs do evaluate faculty performance on a basic level, many do not devote substantial attention to this process.
PURPOSE: To provide baseline data on evaluation of faculty performance in U.S. schools and programs of public health. METHOD: The authors administered an anonymous Internet-based questionnaire using PHP Surveyor. The invited sample consisted of individuals listed in the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) Directory of Accredited Schools and Programs of Public Health. The authors explored performance measures in teaching, research, and service, and assessed how faculty performance measures are used. RESULTS: A total of 64 individuals (60.4%) responded to the survey, with 26 (40.6%) reporting accreditation/reaccreditation by CEPH within the preceding 24 months. Although all schools and programs employ faculty performance evaluations, a significant difference exists between schools and programs in the use of results for merit pay increases and mentoring purposes. Thirty-one (48.4%) of the organizations published minimum performance expectations. Fifty-nine (92.2%) of the respondents counted number of publications, but only 22 (34.4%) formally evaluated their quality. Sixty-two (96.9%) evaluated teaching through student course evaluations, and only 29 (45.3%) engaged in peer assessment. Although aggregate results of teaching evaluation are available to faculty and administrators, this information is often unavailable to students and the public. Most schools and programs documented faculty service activities qualitatively but neither assessed it quantitatively nor evaluated its impact. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into how schools and programs of public health evaluate faculty performance. Results suggest that although schools and programs do evaluate faculty performance on a basic level, many do not devote substantial attention to this process.
Authors: Melissa S Medina; W Thomas Smith; Srikanth Kolluru; Elizabeth A Sheaffer; Margarita DiVall Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 2.047