Questions? Call 800-624-6242 About | Ordering | New Menu | Items in cart [0] SEARCH

PAPERBACK price:$21.00 add to cart Rights & Permissions Free PDF Access Sign in to download PDF book and chapters Free Resources PDF SUMMARY Display this book on your site! Related Titles Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century Educating Engineers: Preparing 21st Century Leaders in the Context of New Modes of Learning: Summary of a Forum Other Related Titles Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved (2009) Citation Manager Export the bibliographic data for this book in your chosen format Web Search Builder Use this book's key terms to search within this book, across our collection, or across the Web. Skim This Chapter Skim this chapter and use this chapter's key terms to search within this book. Reference Finder Paste in your own text to find books that relate to your topic. Citation Manager . "References." Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009. Please select a format: Page 35   E-mail Share on facebook Facebook Share on delicious Delicious Share on stumbleupon Stumble Share on twitter Twitter More Sharing ServicesMore The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. References ABET. (2008). 2008-09 Criteria for evaluating engineering programs. Available online at http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2008-09%20EAC%20Criteria%2011-30-07.pdf. Aleamoni, L. M. (1981). Student ratings of instruction. In J. Millman (Ed.) Handbook of teacher evaluation (pp. 110-145). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Arreola, R. A. (1997). On the tightrope. The Department Chair, 7 (4). Boston, MA: Anker Publishing Co. Arreola, R. A. (2007). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Arreola, R. A., Theall, M., & Aleamoni, L. M. (2003). Beyond scholarship: Recognizing the multiple roles of the professoriate. Paper presented at the 2003 American Educational Research Association Convention, Chicago, IL. Available online at http://www.cedanet.com/meta/Beyond%20Scholarship.pdf. Atman, C. J. (2007, June 8). Engineering education research: Some history and examples from the U.S. Opening address to the Danish Centre for Engineering Education Research and Development, Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at http://www.engr.washington.edu/caee/Atman%202007.06.08%20Denmark-final.pdf. Braskamp, L. A. & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Brint, S. (2008). The Spellings Commission and the case for professionalizing college teaching. ACADEME Online. Available at http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2008/MJ/Feat/brin.htm. England, J. (1996). How evaluations of teaching are used in personnel decisions. American Council of Learned Societies, Occasional Paper N. 33. Available at http://archives.acls.org/op/33_Professonal_Evaluation_of_Teaching.htm. Felder, R. (1993). Reaching the second tier: Learning and teaching styles in college science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 23(5), 286-290. Lencioni, P. M. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Michell, J. (1997). Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. British Journal of Psychology, 88 (3), 355-383. National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Page 35 Front Matter (R1-R10) Executive Summary (1-3) 1 Background, Framing, and Concepts (4-8) 2 Governing Principles of Good Metrics (9-11) 3 ASSUMPTIONS (12-14) 4 What To Measure (15-22) 5 Measuring Teaching Performance (23-32) 6 Conclusions and Recommendations (33-34) References (35-38) Appendix A Workshop Agenda and Attendees (39-40) Appendix B Biographical Sketches of Committee Members (41-42)

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 35
Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved References ABET. (2008). 2008-09 Criteria for evaluating engineering programs. Available online at http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2008-09%20EAC%20Criteria%2011-30-07.pdf. Aleamoni, L. M. (1981). Student ratings of instruction. In J. Millman (Ed.) Handbook of teacher evaluation (pp. 110-145). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Arreola, R. A. (1997). On the tightrope. The Department Chair, 7 (4). Boston, MA: Anker Publishing Co. Arreola, R. A. (2007). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Arreola, R. A., Theall, M., & Aleamoni, L. M. (2003). Beyond scholarship: Recognizing the multiple roles of the professoriate. Paper presented at the 2003 American Educational Research Association Convention, Chicago, IL. Available online at http://www.cedanet.com/meta/Beyond%20Scholarship.pdf. Atman, C. J. (2007, June 8). Engineering education research: Some history and examples from the U.S. Opening address to the Danish Centre for Engineering Education Research and Development, Copenhagen, Denmark. Available online at http://www.engr.washington.edu/caee/Atman%202007.06.08%20Denmark-final.pdf. Braskamp, L. A. & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Brint, S. (2008). The Spellings Commission and the case for professionalizing college teaching. ACADEME Online. Available at http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2008/MJ/Feat/brin.htm. England, J. (1996). How evaluations of teaching are used in personnel decisions. American Council of Learned Societies, Occasional Paper N. 33. Available at http://archives.acls.org/op/33_Professonal_Evaluation_of_Teaching.htm. Felder, R. (1993). Reaching the second tier: Learning and teaching styles in college science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 23(5), 286-290. Lencioni, P. M. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Michell, J. (1997). Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. British Journal of Psychology, 88 (3), 355-383. National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

OCR for page 36
Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved National Research Council. (2003). Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Science Foundation. (2002). Science and engineering indicators 2002. Available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c3/c3s2.htm. Paese, P. W., Lind, E. A., & Kanfer. (1988). Procedural fairness and work group responses to performance evaluation systems. Social Justice Research 2(3), 193-205. Theall, M. (2007, June 11). Basic issues in good evaluation practice. Invited presentation at the Academic Impressions Institute’s Using Faculty Evaluation Data for Decision Making, Boston, MA. United States Department of Education. (2006). A test of leadership: Charting the future of U.S. higher education. Washington, DC: USDEd. University of Texas. Preparing for peer observation: A handbook. Retrieved December 1, 2008, from http://www.utexas.edu/academic/cte/PeerObserve.html#AppendixList. Van Note, C. H., & Szabo, B. (1996). Who uses faculty development services? In To Improve the Academy, vol. 16. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press, Inc. Van Prooijen, J-W. (2007). Fairness judgments: Genuine morality or disguised egocentrism? In Mind Articles, Special Issue 5. Available online at http://www.in-mind.org/special-issue/fairness-judgments-genuine-morality-or-disguised-egocent.html.

OCR for page 37
Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved Appendixes

OCR for page 38
Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved This page intentionally left blank.