There has been considerable debate on the evaluation of faculty performance by administrators. Much of the research has focused on the "publish or perish" issue on a university-wide basis rather than considering differences between disciplines which might invalidate the effectiveness of a global evaluation policy. This paper is a case study of three areas (Business, Psychology, and Sociology/Anthropology) at Kansas State University. Significant differences were found in the orientations of the different areas and in the criteria that are being used and that should be used (according to the respondents) for performance evaluation. Despite the significant differences in the departments' orientations, all of the faculty tended to agree strongly that teaching should be an important evaluative criterion.
ASJC Scopus subject areas