Subscribers to Chemed-L, Phys-L, and STLHE-L have been mercifully
spared from my 680-line post "Re: Measuring Teaching Performance" by
the sage posting-line limitations of their lists.
Subscribers to AERA-C have been mercifully spared by an oversight in
my original transmission.
If your interest in "Measuring Teaching Performance" is:
(a) zero or less, please hit DELETE;
(b) slightly greater than zero, please scan the:
ABSTACT: Assuming that "teaching performance" is gauged by *student
learning* and not *teacher behavior*, I discuss: five INDIRECT and
therefore problematic measures of teaching performance: (1) Reformed
Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP), (2) Student Evaluations Of
Teaching (SET's), (3) Course Exams or Final Grades, (4) National
Survey Of Student Engagement (NSSE), and (5) Student Assessment Of
Learning Gains" (SALG). These are contrasted with a DIRECT measure of
teaching performance (i.e., student learning) pioneered by physics
education researchers: pre/post testing with valid and consistently
reliable diagnostic tests based on thorough qualitative and
quantitative research by disciplinary experts.