Peer Evaluation Form For Faculty Evaluation Of Semester: Fill & Download for Free

OUT OF THE WORLD..!!!It is hands down, one of the best departments in NIT Trichy. If you’re considering opting for this dept, please read through this answer fully and you’re love for it will increase .I’ll be highlighting some amazing stuff you’ll experience in your four years of B.Tech if you opt for ICE!Student friendly faculties who schedule classes and exams haphazardly. Get used to classes at 6/7pm and exams on random dates non synced to other departments.Professors( male and female) promoting rape culture by victim blaming girls in cases of harassment by security guards. (Yes, it happened )Hypocritical faculties ( 2 to be precise ) who slut shame girls and how culture is ruined in general for roaming/talking/spending time with boys whereas they themselves indulge in workplace fraternization.Course projects on entirely opposite spectrum of difficulties allocated to students , judged and graded together. You have teams with budget <400 ( Automatic hand washer ) and budget > 25k ( Sleeping pod, Solar powered chiller ) graded together. (Subject-PDD , Batch -2018)Amazing right! And you don’t get to choose your projects. The prof is more obsessed with the word ‘solar’ than his life. If the idea you pitch is not involving solar, enjoy implementing his ideas!Waaaiiit..!!! Thats not the best. One team is making a ‘ Mobile Cremator’ as a part of this course now! OK let that sink in for a moment .So dont be surprised if you’re told to implement a ‘ Solar powered cloth dryer’ in this course!Ah I can see you getting more and more excited about ICE..5. Poltitics. Faculties with extremely *cough* sound *cough* technical and core knowledge enjoy professor status whereas faculties with just IEEE publications, technically sound research papers are assistant profs.6. An amazing way of evaluation of your group projects called ‘peer review’..! Duh.. Some faculties thought having the faculty grade everyone based on individual contribution and project understanding is too mainstream. So why not let the team members fight each other awkwardly and rank themselves even if all of them had equal contribution.7. You will have productive faculty student meetings once/ twice a semester. Here all faculties come together, have a mature discussion which involves them shouting at one another/ forming groups usually ending with one group leaving out angrily.8. Some faculties teach you relevant and important technical stuff to the extent that some interviewers see the course plan and question what even did we learn in ICE.9. Subject: You will be exposed to a good set of core subjects and a few additional circuital and non circuital subjects . Might be a pain in the ass initially but trust me it helps a lot during placements.I have more to say but I guess i’ll stop here now. Oh and in case you dint notice , only the 9th point was not sarcastic.TL;DR : Don’t . Please.

I don’t think professors are opposed to the idea of being evaluated. For me, and in my experience, one of the biggest problems is how these evaluations occur. For example, there is a huge literature on the fallacy of using student evaluations of teaching as the benchmark for determining “good” classroom teaching. Among the problems are: first, students who respond to voluntary evaluations tend to fall into two camps - those with an axe to grind because they are angry about something and those who really, really liked the professor. It creates a bimodal distribution that ignores the huge middle ground who never bothered filling out the eval. Second, evidence suggests that teachers who are “entertainers” in the classroom get better evaluations so faculty who are funny or energetic do better on evals than those whose personalities are more introverted or teach highly technical material that doesn’t let them dance, sing, or tell jokes. Third, there are all kinds of biases that affect how students evaluate their instructors - recency bias, leniency bias, similar-to-me bias, and so forth. As a result, those numbers on the evaluation form may tell us more about ourselves than about the teacher. Fourth, the wording of some of the questions is silly; e.g., “What did you like best about this instructor?” Who cares? Isn’t a better question related to evaluations of what you learned, not how cool his hair was or how she never took attendance? Bottom line is that in my experience, the numeric evaluations really only yield examples of dramatic successes or failures. Mid-range faculty (where most of us reside) don’t learn too much about ourselves or our teaching pros and cons.That leads to two alternative forms of evaluation - asking the perspective of students who have been out in the job market for a minimum of three years. Did what they learned positively affect their job performance? Looking back and reflecting, did this teacher make a positive difference in their ability to do well in a professional setting? The problem, again, is that all those stupid biases still keep popping up. Also, the response rate is terrible. We may mail out 150 letters and 12 people will respond. Do we REALLY want to trust the opinions of those 12 people to judge that professor? By definition, anyone in that group is already an outlier, so wouldn’t their opinions also reflect that problem?That leaves the use of other faculty to conduct peer evaluations. To be honest, these actually tend to be pretty good. Critics argue that this is just allowing faculty to police (or not) themselves, so naturally there is nothing useful learned here. I disagree. Peer evals are usually done by senior faculty and as long as the right person is picked to do the review, they tend to be honest and thorough. The bigger issue is that they are a lot of work and so are unpopular with senior professors, especially if they are tapped to do two or three each semester. Of all types of evaluations I have seen, these are probably the most honest and realistic. Of course, the downside is the potential to make enemies of the people that you review. Being a senior professor helps a lot here because I frankly don’t care if someone gets mad at me but for others, they find ways to dodge these assignments because of the social pressure.As you can tell, evaluating professors does matter. Universities try and take it seriously, but there are a number of embedded drawbacks in the process. Making it work as cleanly as possible is always going to be a challenge.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. But few will admit enjoying it, for fear of being perceived as unserious about research. It’s odd, since the three standard categories of academic life (teaching, research, and service/administration) are so varied and have so much in common.It’s normal to divide academic work into three categories. They differ in their visibility, reward structure, and prestige. Research sits at the top of the pile. In the most highly valued, and it plays the greatest role in hiring, promotions, funding, and other forms of recognition. Teaching comes next. It’s something that everybody understands that professors do. Everybody understands that it’s necessary and useful, but it’s less highly valued, and being a star in the classroom gets little recognition, and even arouses some suspicion. ‘Service’ or ‘administration’ is a catch-all for pretty much everything else. It covers a lot of different things. It is widely looked down upon as something between a necessary evil and a nuisance, which stands in the way of “real work” (= research). When done well, it is often warmly appreciated, but generally on a local level and without much visibility or lasting recognition.There’s really a lot of overlap between the three areas. All require creative problem solving and thinking on your feet. All require people skills, sometimes dealing with difficult or obstructive people. Even the most solitary forms of research require you to work with other humans sooner or later. And collaboration is the default in most areas of research nowadays, whether explicitly or implicitly. All require effective communication. All require learning new things. And all sometimes force you to deal with bizarre rules.There are frustrations in all areas. Nobody likes doing things that seem like pointless busy-work. Nobody likes doing things that are unlikely to be valued or appreciated. Few people enjoy delivering or receiving bad news. There’s busy work involved in doing those extra analyses that the reviewer demanded in order to get your paper accepted. I’ve never heard anybody say that they enjoyed dealing with cases of academic dishonesty in their classes. And nobody gets a thrill out of filling out forms and reports that are unlikely to ever be read. (My university used to have a faculty evaluation form that we would fill out every year that included checkboxes for any major prizes that we might have won. Every year I had to apologetically check the box that said that, unfortunately, I had yet again failed to win a Nobel Prize.)There are also moments of great satisfaction in all areas. In research it can come in making a discovery, or explaining it well, or in receiving recognition for it (via a publication, or an appreciative audience, or many other ways). Or it can come through identifying a problem that isn’t yet solved but with your reach. In teaching it comes from seeing students make progress. Often the greatest satisfaction comes not from the most talented students, but from the ones who are benefiting the most. In administration it also comes from doing things that make a difference: finding a creative solution to an organizational or funding challenge; finding an agreeable resolution to a disagreement; creating new opportunities that benefit students, colleagues, or the public. And in each case there are many other examples.A big difference between research, teaching, and service/admin is that they involve working with different sets of people, and you have different levels of control over who you work with. In research you get to choose the community of peers that you associate with, and you can choose to be more or less closely connected with them. They might include colleagues or students from your institutions, or they might all be far away. This community tends to be stable across many years, and often builds on connections that you made as a graduate student. In teaching you generally don’t get to choose who enrolls in your classes, and there’s variation in how much choice you have in who you serve in an advising role. This community changes faster: there are some students who you barely get to know before the semester is over; there are others who you get to know over the course of a few years. All at least have a passing interest in your expertise (well, sometimes a grudging disinterest is as good as it gets). In service/admin it is a huge mix. You could be working with people who you’ve worked with productively over many years. Or you could be thrown together with people who you’ve never met, who resent being with you as much as your worst students, and who have an even bigger sense of entitlement than those students.There’s also a big difference in the preparation that you get for different types of work. A PhD is supposed to prepare you to be an expert researcher, and most people spend decades building on that training. Professors sometimes receive training in teaching, but it’s always far less than the training they receive in research. And training in the skills needed for other activities is almost non-existent. You’re unlikely to be hired as a professor if you don’t have demonstrated talent as a researchers. You’re supposed to show skills in teaching, but accommodations will be made if you’re a great researcher. But skills in other areas are rarely considered in hiring, so there are many people who are really not very good beyond research and teaching, or who actively cultivate being bad at administration, as a way of avoiding it. Needing to work with people like that contributes to the distaste that many feel for admin.Research is often regarded as the most noble calling of a professor. It involves the pursuit of truth, the life of the mind, unconnected from trivial worldly concerns. That’s a little ironic, given that it’s the most rewarded academic pursuit, the one that leads to the greatest personal acclaim, remuneration, and overall clout. In some respects, other aspects of academic life that are necessary but unheralded are noble.Personally, I enjoy all three areas. I find certain aspects of all of them annoying, and I find other aspects of each of them very satisfying. There are some aspects of research that I enjoy a lot less enjoyable than some aspects of administration. They are all very varied. I’m perhaps fortunate that I mostly really like the people who I work with in teaching, research, and administration, and I’m sure that contributes to overall satisfaction. Professors who don’t get along with their institutional colleagues are less likely to enjoy admin. And professors who feel out of place in their research community but get along with their institutional colleagues might find more satisfaction in administration. But they might be reluctant to admit that, as there is a certain stigma associated with spending more time on administration, as it is often regarded as conceding failure in research.The values surrounding research, teaching, and administration/service are heavily influenced by academic acculturation. Professors start their academic life as research students, in an environment where little other than research matters. Some of the strongest peer connections are established at the same time, and they are to people who you remain connected to largely via research, and who are mostly aware only of what you do in research. Your graduate school buddies generally have no idea how you are as a teacher, and don’t even know whether you spend much of your time in administration. The labels don’t help either. The terms “administration” and “service” have neutral to negative connotations, and don’t convey any need for creativity or talent. Ironically, most academics also strongly support the notion of academic self-governance, but they often resent the responsibilities that come with that.