Explaining the pros and cons of different sources of Faculty Evaluation from the viewpoints of Medical University Academics

Nowadays, improvement of teaching quality is one of the basics for a credible higher education system and without doubt evaluation and monitoring of teaching quality are important for reaching this goal. However, different studies have shown that academic evaluation is one of the most controversial topics in Medical Education and deserves more research and attention. Meanwhile, the experience of academics, as the subjects of these assessments, can be very helpful.

The current study is a qualitative (phenomenology) study. Interested academics were invited to participate in 4 focus groups, each including 6 to 8 participants. Open, unstructured questions were asked. Participants suggested different methods of academic assessment and commented on the pros and cons of each. The focus group discussions ended when the conductors felt data saturation has been met.

Data were analyzed through theme analysis method. A total of nine different data sources including seven subjective sources (asking from students, head of faculty, head of department, and colleagues as well as self-assessment, two-way assessment and assessment by a third party) and two objective ones (students’ scoring and the academics’ output) were mentioned and their pros and cons were explored thoroughly and the methods for increasing data quality from each source were also proposed.

In order to acquire more fair results, academic assessment should rather be done through an appropriate combination of different information sources and by considering the current situation and the shortcomings of each source.