5. STEPS TOWARD IMPLEMENTATION

5.1. Evaluation Criteria and Practices

• With few exceptions, engineering education and its associated research in Canada occurs in multi-faculty universities. Engineering professors and students are therefore subject to the general policies of these universities. The ability of engineering faculties to carry out their education and research objectives is constrained by some of these policies and practices.

• Universities have set up policies and processes to measure the quality of professors. Criteria, common to all disciplines, are established for the initial recruitment of faculty, for the review prior to achievement of academic tenure and for promotion to full professorship. These evaluation criteria normally include performance in both teaching and research, and may also include an assessment of creative professional accomplishment.

• Although the policies of many universities may call for equal weight to be given to teaching and research in the evaluation of professors, accomplishment in research has been perceived as the dominant factor in practice in many institutions.

• A major practical reason for dominance of research over teaching in evaluation is that research efforts are normally well documented as an essential and funded part of the research process and can readily be measured by the acceptance of research papers in properly reviewed journals. Education is arguably the university's primary role. However, documentation of educational accomplishment, is much more subjective and therefore more difficult.

• Evaluation criteria tend to be dominated by the values of the majority in the university, i.e. those in the basic sciences, the arts and the humanities. It is frequently difficult in the university community to argue successfully for criteria suited to the character of those disciplines which have professional objectives.

• In the pure sciences and in much of the arts and the humanities, research and scholarship are characterized by an emphasis on contributing to basic specialized knowledge in an academic discipline. In contrast, the emphasis in engineering research should be, and, at its best is, directed at a contribution to the solution of a real or perceived problem or opportunity in society.

• In universities that have included in their policies an evaluation category of creative professional accomplishment, major difficulties arise in providing documentation of such accomplishments acceptable to university committee personnel who are frequently not familiar with the profession.

• Experience in an environment of engineering practice has long been advocated as a desirable, if not essential, attribute of a prospective engineering professor. However, this is not a concern that is shared by most university disciplines and understandably is not reflected in recruitment criteria and starting salaries.

• To understand the effect of these university pressures, it is important to recognize that those being recruited to professorships in engineering are very able people who generally have outstanding academic records. They expect to succeed in their new roles and, accordingly, they act within the existing rules to advance their chances for success. If this process does not produce the desired results, the fault lies not with the junior professors, but rather with the rule makers and the systemic preconceptions in applying the rules.

• In evaluation, significant weight should be given to the contributions that the professor has made to the planning, management and administration of the educational process. The preparation of good curriculum proposals, the preparation of good educational materials, software and laboratory experiences, the writing of good educational papers, the successful training of teaching assistants and junior professors should all be considered to be of significant value.

• Input from recent and mid-career graduates should form a significant part of the documentation assembled for evaluation. This input can be particularly useful in assessing the success in inculcating concepts and habits of approach which have proved to be of lasting value.

• Input from senior professorial colleagues who have professional engineering experience is of particular value. If the integration processes in the curriculum are effective, these colleagues will have useful knowledge of the attitudes, approaches, skills, strengths and weaknesses of their more junior staff members.

• Student evaluations of teaching performance are useful in assessing such factors as effectiveness of preparation, organization, presentation, communication, assistance of individuals and the choice of educational materials.

• The processes of evaluating research accomplishments have been highly developed to serve the needs of the research funding agencies and are therefore readily available to the universities for their own evaluations. The main input comes from other researchers in the same specialty area who advise on the acceptability of research papers submitted for publication. The existence of a published paper is only a measure of having reached a standard for acceptance by the research journal. It is not an effective measure of relevance to persons outside the specialty research group such as potential users of the results.

• Useful input on the relevance and value of the research contributions of an engineering professor can be obtained from qualified persons in industry who have direct knowledge of the results and impact of the research.

RECOMMENDATION 42: Universities should recognize that the objectives and responsibilities of professional faculties such as engineering are somewhat different from those of other disciplines.

RECOMMENDATION 43: Universities should ensure that their recruitment and advancement criteria for professors are sufficiently broad to include the special needs of engineering faculties. These criteria should include appropriate recognition of teaching performance, research development and design contributions, professional experience and accomplishments, service to the community, and contributions to the planning, management and administration of the educational process.

RECOMMENDATION 44: The National Council of Deans of Engineering and Applied Science (NCDEAS) should develop an appropriate set of criteria guidelines for initial recruitment of engineering faculty, for the achievement of academic tenure and for promotion to full professorship.

RECOMMENDATION 45: In the application of advancement criteria for engineering professors, universities should give significant weight to input from persons who have a good understanding of the nature and needs of the graduates and the profession: practising professional engineers, recent and mid-career engineering graduates and senior professorial colleagues with appropriate engineering experience.