If it were up to me I would evaluate performance of teachers on
the basis of how well their students know what is expected. To
make this possible two prerequisites must be met.
1) We must agree (or be forced to agree) on what the expected
knowledge in each department and at each level is. It should be
defined by taking under consideration how much average
students can possibly learn in each semester. Textbooks should
clearly define the common obligatory core, even when optional
chapters are included (for the above average and curious students).
2) Evaluation of students (final exams and final grades) must be
separated from teaching. By this I mean that those who teach
should not be involved in examinations. In this way it would no
longer be possible to have situations in which we say that "this
or that will not be on the exam because we skipped it".
Sooner or later society will realize that teachers, like other
professionals, should be evaluated on the basis of results, not on
the basis of how students feel about teachers. I was often less than
perfect, in terms of passing those who should have failed, but
nobody ever criticized me for this kind of malpractice. I agree
with most of what Mark wrote in the
IrascibleProfessor.com/comments-12-26-99.htm
But an individual teacher, or even a group of teachers (such as
Phys-Lers), can do very little to change the existing situation.
The reform should come from above and be highly coordinated
on the national level. American Physical Society, and similar
organizations in other areas, should get together and design a
realistic plan for imposing desirable changes. Several brader
issues, such as what to do with those who fail, should also
be addressed.