The propriety standards require that evaluations be conducted legally, ethically, and with due regard for the welfare of evaluatees and clients of the evaluations.
P1 Service Orientation–Evaluations of educators should promote sound education principles, fulfillment of institutional missions, and effective performance of job responsibilities, so that the educational needs of students, community, and society are met.
P2 Formal Evaluation Guidelines–Guidelines for personnel evaluations should be recorded in statements of policy, negotiated agreements, and/or personnel evaluation manuals, so that evaluations are consistent, equitable, and in accordance with pertinent laws and ethical codes.
P3 Conflict of Interest–Conflicts of interest should be identified and dealt with openly and honestly, so that they do not compromise the evaluation process and results.
P4 Access to Personnel Evaluation Reports–Access to reports of personnel evaluation should be limited to those individuals with a legitimate need to review and use the reports, so that appropriate use of the information is assured.
P5 Interactions with Evaluatees–The evaluation should address evaluatees in a professional, considerate, and courteous manner, so that their self-esteem, motivation, professional reputations, performance, and attitude toward personnel evaluation are enhanced or, at least, not needlessly damaged.
The utility standards are intended to guide evaluations so that they will be informative, timely, and influential. Check for Educational Evaluations in US at UT Evaluators
U1 Constructive Orientation–Evaluations should be constructive, so that they help institutions to develop human resources and encourage and assist those evaluated to provide excellent service.
U2 Defined Uses–The users and the intended uses of a personnel evaluation should be identified, so that the evaluation can address appropriate questions.
U3 Evaluator Credibility–The evaluation system should be managed and executed by persons with the necessary qualifications, skills, and authority, and evaluators should conduct themselves professionally, so that evaluation reports are respected and used.
U4 Functional Reporting–Reports should be clear, timely, accurate, and germane, so that they are of practical value to the evaluatee and other appropriate audiences.
U5 Follow-Up and Impact–Evaluations should be followed up, so that users and evaluatees are aided to understand the results and take appropriate actions.
The feasibility standards call for evaluation systems that are as easy to implement as possible, efficient in their use of time and resources, adequately funded, and viable from a number of other standpoints.
F1 Practical Procedures–Personnel evaluation procedures should be planned and conducted so that they produce needed information while minimizing disruption and cost.
F2 Political Viability–The personnel evaluation system should be developed and monitored collaboratively, so that all concerned parties are constructively involved in making the system work.
F3 Fiscal Viability–Adequate time and resources should be provided for personnel evaluation activities, so that evaluation plans can be effectively and efficiently implemented.
The accuracy standards require that the obtained information be technically accurate and that conclusions be linked logically to the data. Educational Evaluations in US visit UT Evaluators
A1 Defined Role–The role, responsibilities, performance objectives, and needed qualifications of the evaluatee should be clearly defined, so that the evaluator can determine valid assessment data.
A2 Work Environment–The context in which the evaluatee works should be identified, described, and recorded, so that environmental influences and constraints on performance can be considered in the evaluation.
A3 Documentation of Procedures–The evaluations procedures actually followed should be documented, so that the evaluatees and other users can assess the actual, in relation to intended, procedures.
A4 Valid Measurement–The measurement procedures should be chosen or developed and implemented on the basis of the described role and the intended use, so that the inferences concerning the evaluatee are valid and accurate.
A5 Reliable Measurement–Measurement procedures should be chosen or developed to assure reliability, so that the information obtained will provide consistent indications of the performance of the evaluatee.
A6 Systematic Data Control–The information used in the evaluation should be kept secure, and should be carefully processed and maintained, so as to ensure that the data maintained and analyzed are the same as the data collected.
A7 Bias Control–The evaluation process should provide safeguards against bias, so that the evaluatee’s qualifications or performance are assessed fairly.
A8 Monitoring Evaluation Systems–The personnel evaluation system should be reviewed periodically and systematically, so that appropriate revisions can be made.