Productivity Measurement and Enhancement System (ProMES) Method
Evaluating University Teaching Effectiveness
(Watson, Hedley, Clark, Paquin, Gottesfeld, & Pritchard, 1995)
1. Presented appropriate material in an organized fashion.
- Indicator 1: The instructor was well organized.
- Indicator 2: The amount of material presented or assigned by the instructor was appropriate.
2. Demonstrated subject mastery.
- Indicator 3: The instructor appeared to have a thorough knowledge of the subject.
- Indicator 4: Information and references provided by this instructor were relevant.
3. Communicated effectively.
- Indicator 5: The instructor spoke clearly and was easily understood.
- Indicator 6: The instructor emphasized major points.
- Indicator 7: Concepts were presented in a manner that aided my understanding.
4. Promoted critical thinking and problem solving.
- Indicator 8: The instructor's examination questions required me to do more than recall factual information.
- Indicator 9: The instructor helped me integrate facts, develop conclusions, and arrive at solutions.
- Indicator 10: The instructor raised challenging questions or problems for consideration.
5. Motivated students to learn.
- Indicator 11: The instructor created and maintained an atmosphere that facilitated learning.
- Indicator 12: The instructor stimulated my interest in the subject.
6. Exhibited a positive attitude toward students.
- Indicator 13: The instructor was courteous and easy to approach
- Indicator 14: The instructor was willing to help students outside of class.
7. Evaluated students fairly.
- Indicator 15: This instructor's examination questions covered important concepts presented in the course.
- Indicator 16: The examination questions from this instructor were reasonable in difficulty.
- Indicator 17: The examination questions from this instructor were graded fairly.
[Students respond to each of the above indicators using a five point Likert-type scale (1=Strongly Disagree, 5=Strongly Agree).]
Note:
"Contingencies" are determined according to the "type of class." For instance, large introductory courses may focus on the use of lectures to assist in the acquisition of facts. As such, Indicator 8 might be devalued in summary reports of large lecture courses. The institution developing this instrument developed "contingency evaluations" for laboratory courses and graduate seminars.
