This Teaching Evaluation Form is a subjective performance measure that was used at a university for many years. Ratings were made by students to assess the teaching performance of individual instructors. With this assignment, you will consider issues of criterion relevance, criterion deficiency, and criterion contamination as they relate to this rating system. You will then develop a higher-quality alternative rating scale for one aspect of teaching performance.
Respond to each question below, using the headings provided.
CRITIQUE (1-2 paragraphs): Using the information provided in Chapter 5 and the lecture material for Week 4, provide an evidence-based critique of the Teaching Evaluation Form as a tool for evaluating teaching performance.
Specifically, what do you see as strengths and weaknesses of using a graphic rating scale to assess instructor performance? Why?
CRITERION DEFICIENCY (What is missing?): Identify 2 specific behaviours or elements of an instructor’s teaching performance that are NOT captured by this measure. In the style of the existing measure, write TWO new items to address these deficiencies in the rating scale. For each new item, explain what you think it adds to the existing measure of teaching performance, and why it is important to capture this aspect of teaching performance.
CRITERION CONTAMINATION (What is unrelated?): Identify 2 specific items on the Teaching Evaluation Form that you believe are most vulnerable to criterion contamination (i.e., items that might include information that is unrelated to teaching performance, and/or are most open to biased responding). Explain your answers, including how, specifically, you think each item might contribute to criterion contamination (give examples).
CRITERION RELEVANCE (What is relevant to performance?): Identify 2 specific items on the Teaching Evaluation Form that you believe are relevant to teaching performance (i.e., items that clearly capture behaviours that constitute teaching performance). Explain your answer, including why, specifically, you think these items best capture teaching performance.
PERFORMANCE DIMENSION & BARS (Construct a simple, 3-point BARS): Select one of your CRITERION RELEVANT items from #4. Assign it to a broader category, or performance dimension (e.g., Communication Skills; Feedback & Assessment; Interaction with Students; Specialized Knowledge, or another dimension you come up with). Construct a behaviourally-anchored rating scale for your chosen performance dimension (see Figure 5.2 in your text for an example).
Define your performance dimension in a few brief sentences.
Construct a simple, 3-point Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS) with 3=Excellent performance, 2= Average performance, 1=Poor performance for your chosen performance dimension. For each point along the scale (excellent, average and poor), include 3 specific job performance behaviours that define and/or illustrate what performance in this job, at each level might look like. Use a variety of different behaviours to illustrate excellent/average/poor performance. You are acting as your own SME to generate sample behaviours.
SAMPLE BARS LAYOUT
Communication: Expresses ideas clearly and effectively both verbally and in writing. Organizes and delivers information appropriately. Listens actively and responds appropriately.
3 “Excellent”
List 3 concrete behaviours to show how an instructor might demonstrate excellent communication as defined above.
2 “Average”
List 3 concrete behaviours to show how an instructor might demonstrate average communication as defined above.
1 “Poor”
List 3 concrete behaviours to show how an instructor might demonstrate poor communication as defined above.
