next »

[brainofgoo]

I've actually not found any information on this. Can anyone point me to online guidelines for how often you're supposed to be evaluated as non-TT? Have any of you been evaluated more than once a year...or even ever? Don't they care?

[systeme_d_]

This will depend on departmental norms.

At the university I just left, non-TT folks, who were few in number, weren't formally evaluated unless they asked for a peer evaluation or a SGID (small group instructional diagnosis - yeah, I know).

At my new place, non-TT folks, who are relatively plentiful, are evaluated annually.  Peer evaluations are mandatory.

[voxprincipalis]

I've actually not found any information on this. Can anyone point me to online guidelines for how often you're supposed to be evaluated as non-TT? Have any of you been evaluated more than once a year...or even ever? Don't they care?

Rather than a universal online guide, check the faculty handbook for your particular school and department. At my SLAC, full-time VAPs are evaluated on the same schedule as TT folks. Observation of adjuncts ranges from once a semester (seriously) to twice in three years.

VP

[oldfullprof]

As a post-MA, pre-PhD adjunct I was never evaluated between 1981 and 1997 (my first tenure-track, post-PhD job.)  I think once a year is about right.

[spinnaker]

Never evaluated in many years adjuncting. Did they not care, or did they trust me, or were they too busy? I suspect a little of each.

[lizzy]

As others have noted, different places have different practices for evaluation.

At my place, all TT and non-TT faculty are evaluated every year. This includes student evals, peer observations, and a chair observation. We're a union shop, so this is all mandated by the contract. Tenured faculty are reviewed every five years.

[larryc]

How often should I be evaluated?  Never, obviously. I should instead be the standard by which others are evaluated.

[oldadjunct]

How often should I be evaluated?  Never, obviously. I should instead be the standard by which others are evaluated.

Agreed.  There should at least be some standard and I would be willing to accept the "Larry Constant" as the standard unit of measurement.

More seriously, I think all teaching performance should be under some degree of mutal observation and discussion, just as it is in business.  NB: I did not say evaluation, per se.  Flying alone, year after year, is not healthy in my opinion.  It just doesn't happen in business, and I don't think it should happen in teaching.

My personal experience since my return to teaching a few years ago:  college one, a single class room visit with follow-up discussion in the first of six semesters; college two, a class room visit with no follow-up discussion in the first and only semester; college three, no class room visit in four semesters; college four, a class room visit and follow up discussion in each of the last four semesters.

College four, in additional to the visits and discussion, is the most functional and healthiest academic environment of the lot, by far.

College two is the most dysfunctional. College one is a struggling SLAC; College three has a philosophy of, "No waves, no problems. God only knows what is happening in the class rooms.  I don't want to."

[educator1]

In over twenty years of teaching as a non-TT instructor, I have never been formally evaluated nor even had my dept chair, Dean, tenured faculty member, etc. sit in on a class, much less conduct a formal observation.
However, I know that they, as well as the rest of my department, know exactly what I do with my classes and why. It is it obvious on my syllabi, my bragging about what my students produce (I can be obnoxious that way), student comments, the distribution of my evaluations (I say that because the mean is regularly thrown off by a few students who do not belong here and resent my making them do so much work), our discussions in faculty meetings, my sharing of ideas and materials with new faculty, and so forth and so on.
I doubt that a formal observation in any one single class session would capture half of what is a part of my classes over the course of the semester.
Of course, my real evaluation comes in the form of a contract for the following year (us non-TT folks work on a yearly contract with no guarantee of renewal). 

[hipgeek]

I am entering into my 4th year as an adjunct at a CC, teaching one or two classes per semester.  I have never been evaluated.

A few semesters went by without even being asked to hand out student evaluation forms.  When those forms were given out, the protocol was that I remain in the room and that they are handed back to me in an envelope that is supposed to be sealed (but which the students always forget to seal).

What is more annoying is that I know my student evals at the CC are good but repeated requests to get a copy of these evals from the secretaries have gone ignored. (Oh we'll find them and let you know...oh we're still working on it...etc.  months later and still nothing!!)

I have been a GA (teaching a class entirely on my own) at an R1 for 5 years and have only been evaluated once, something I opted for in order to be a candidate for a teaching award for which someone nominated me.  I have no clue how I was nominated by one of my peers when I was never observed before, but apparently the BS I spew about how awesome my classes are must've convinced someone.

[spinnaker]

This will depend on departmental norms.

At the university I just left, non-TT folks, who were few in number, weren't formally evaluated unless they asked for a peer evaluation or a SGID (small group instructional diagnosis - yeah, I know).

At my new place, non-TT folks, who are relatively plentiful, are evaluated annually.  Peer evaluations are mandatory.

The world of adjuncting is often "the less said, the better."

[systeme_d_]

This will depend on departmental norms.

At the university I just left, non-TT folks, who were few in number, weren't formally evaluated unless they asked for a peer evaluation or a SGID (small group instructional diagnosis - yeah, I know).

At my new place, non-TT folks, who are relatively plentiful, are evaluated annually.  Peer evaluations are mandatory.

The world of adjuncting is often "the less said, the better."

Better for whom?  I don't think I understand your point.

There were few adjuncts at my old university because it was in a rural area, and non-TT folks were almost always VAPs or full-time lecturers.   They were the non-TT folks to whom I referred in my post.

At my new place, which is urban, there are lots of non-TT folks.  In my department, they're all either VAPs or full-time PhD students who are adjuncting to get teaching experience while ABD. 

[spinnaker]

This will depend on departmental norms.

At the university I just left, non-TT folks, who were few in number, weren't formally evaluated unless they asked for a peer evaluation or a SGID (small group instructional diagnosis - yeah, I know).

At my new place, non-TT folks, who are relatively plentiful, are evaluated annually.  Peer evaluations are mandatory.

The world of adjuncting is often "the less said, the better."

Better for whom?  I don't think I understand your point.

Adjuncts who work without sufficient office space, the deal is, if you don't have to evaluate, it's easier for everyone. It wouldn't amaze me if accreditation teams follow along.

[spinnaker]

Well I mean, without elaborating, that certain situations exist that are just not valid. If someone goes on record saying you're doing a good job, then what?

[womanofproperty]

If someone goes on record saying you're doing a good job, then what?

Then when you're applying for full-time teaching positions (tt or non-tt) elsewhere, you have something to include in your application packet along with your preprints and reprints.