To Appraise Or Not To Appraise


RAJIB KUMAR

Exploring the sensitive gamut of faculty evaluation by students

The other day there was a brawl at the quarterly faculty meeting of a leading management institute on the sensitive issue of introduction of faculty evaluation by students.

Two senior academicians got into a heated debate; “Some 20,000 students are getting into WBUT affiliated institutions every year now…do you know what kind of students are getting in…you want them to evaluate me? Excuse me…” one thundered at another.

I listened with interest the passionately expressed views of the 60 something professor whose lectures I had attended some 15-20 years back. Surely he had a point. After all, our educational systems are a different ball game and it would be suicidal to implement predominantly western models like these before careful introspection.

Faculty evaluation forms at the end of every course every quarter end has been a regular feature in the United States for more than two decades now. In small and mid sized American private universities and colleges one particular faculty member designs his or her own programs; he then delivers the same and finally assesses student knowledge intake –before that he or she also has to choose an appropriate mode of doing so…. with such an expanse…all the more reason why an appraisal is required perhaps!

On completion of the course, students assess the program as well as the delivery skills of the faculty. Students may decide to remain confidential. The forms are filled up on the last class day and then one particular student collects all the forms; puts them into an envelope, duly seals it and ferries it over to the Dean’s (Academic Affairs) office or uses the campus mail room service to do the needful.

The importance of student feedback should never be undermined; after all they are the customers of our product. The success and failure levels of a faculty, unless under certain extraordinary circumstances (eg. unpopular decisions like frequent class tests or disciplinary action for sidetalking etc) should in all probability be quantified in terms of the success and failure of the students. After all don’t we contemplate on changing the home tutor of our ward if he or she gets a lesser grade in the exam than what is expected of him or her?

Students may often tend to judge a teacher based on so called “extraneous” criteria like her attire, his or her presentability, accent, the extent of his or her IT savvy ness etc. I have the views of a Chennai based lady faculty expressed in a recent edition of the National HRD Network Journal at hand. But the question is can we call these “extraneous” anymore?

Personality Development & Grooming have become a mandatory requisite for even Chartered Accountants, leave alone management students who are anyways expected to be suave. Just like a doctor must take care of his own health first, we, faculty members, need to equip ourselves with all these new age skills known by a variety of names-soft, finishing school, multi tasking and what not.

In my opinion, at the end of the day a performance appraisal of a faculty person must incorporate methods normally associated with appraising a corporate executive as well; namely, self-appraisal, peer evaluation and immediate superior evaluation addressing the needs of 360°

In addition, the faculty’s involvement in research and publication must also be an important component in the entire process. Faculty members must be constantly encouraged to write whether for the in house newsletter or relevant fraternity journals.
Whether we like it or not student feedback systems should be a part of the system but it should definitely have its “checks and balances” so that a bad fish or two do not misuse the system to settle personal scores with a faculty member. The final appraiser must carefully review the grades or comments made and try to first interpret any grossly adverse feedback in terms of real “extraneous” factors- disciplinary standards set by the faculty, the student evaluator’s personal records on absenteeism, performance in other classes, general attitude etc.

(Offline, Volume-5, No- 4, April 2007)

MATERIAL WORLD ANNIVERSARY DEBATE 2007- A Report


In his welcome address Rajib Kumar, CEO, Material World shared some lighter moments of his stay in the United States. He listed the advantages and disadvantages associated with getting educated overseas. In an era where international degrees are available right here in India where exactly does overseas education stand? Kumar invited the distinguished panel to deliberate on this.

Inaugurating the anniversary celebrations Rathin Datta, Sheriff of Kolkata said he had an “institutional interest” in the topic in light of his association with the Indian Institute of Management.

Guest of Honor Khokan Mookerji, Secretary General, Bengal Chambers of Commerce and Industry said that we (in India) do not have enough good learning institutions and that we desperately needed to upgrade the quality of our higher education.

Dr. Anuradha Das, Principal, Calcutta International School said a large percentage of students from her school go abroad for higher studies. She was therefore speaking from that perspective (and experience). Overseas education gives a lot of flexibility and a greater level of confidence to students with which they can come out as winners in professional and personal life. She mentioned the very admission process in overseas institutions is a lesson in time and stress management.

Prof Ananya Chakraborty, Professor In Charge, Departments of Journalism and Film Studies, St. Xavier’s College countered Das’s assertion. "What is the percentage of population going abroad for education? How many can afford overseas education in India?" she asked. This was essentially a luxury of the elite she asserted. Chakraborty mentioned that he knew people who went abroad for education and experienced immense trauma in their 1st year- “uprooted from their own culture”. They experienced not only geographical alienation but also alienation within the student community she asserted.

Dr. Sushanto Banerjee, Director of the American Center Library at Kolkata countered Chakraborty’s assertion that students get traumatized in foreign nations. Students are given full orientation before they begin their stay he reassured the house. Banerjee mentioned that the demand of getting educated in the US is so high that it is difficult to find a space to sit in the United States Educational Foundation in India. He said, currently, there are about 76,000 students from India in institutions in the US. He cited examples of Prof Amartya Sen, Prannoy Roy and Azim Premji all of who excelled, he said, with the help of the education they attained in overseas nations. Through overseas education one becomes a “complete man” Banerjee opined. Political interference in educational institutions in India was rampant Banerjee said. There are good institutions in India like the IITs, IIMs or ISIs but very few can get in these the ex-ISI noted.

Sushmita Chakraborty, English teacher of La Martinere for Boys analyzing the motion said with the medium of Internet at everybody’s access level- why would one have to venture outside to gain information or know about other cultures? She said though she too spent an extended period of time in the UK for her education she feels it is not a “necessity”. “Its not air, water or shelter” she quipped. Sushmita paralleled overseas education with a mobile phone with “added features”. A mobile phone is a necessity today but a mobile phone set with added features like camera, megapixel, MP3 Player etc and so on is a luxury.

Dr. Das said overseas education empowers the student to choose what he or she wants to learn. She cited the example of the year’s ISC topper who gave the IITs a miss and went to Singapore for higher education. “We must value the decision of a topper,” Dr. Das told the house building a strong case in favor of the motion.

Ananya Chakraborty wondered if overseas education was that great why are medical and business establishments in countries like United States still dominated by Indians and Pakistanis? Where are the “complete” men? Countering Sushanto Banerjee’s example of Amartya Sen, Chakraborty said Sen’s roots are firmly here. “Amartya Sen has not given up his Indian citizenship,” she reminded her worthy opponents. Chakraborty was critical about the American system for international students. The visa fees, fees of TOEFL are exorbitant she opined. The system, she felt was not transparent and all this was a “huge source of income”. She also questioned the justifiability of taking the TOEFL for a Masters in English. “I do not see those long cues in front of the American consulate any more” Chakraborty commented.

Dr. Sushanto Banerjee said gone is the age of Nalanda University. Most campuses in India lack basic technologies like Wi Fi. Contrary to the conventional wisdom and views of his opponents, Banerjee mentioned that many students are going overseas from middle class families with the help of financial aid from US universities and funding agencies. He cited the example of the son of driver at the American center who made it to the US with the help of scholarship assistance.

Veteran PR and Media personality Biswajit Matilal was the moderator.

The House remained divided on the issue. The Motion, therefore, remain open ended.

(Editorial Team, Offline)