Rating faculty becomes easier in the online mode?

The reports at Maryland remind us that as professors put material online, they are leaving far more of a trace than traditional lecturers ever did. In the old days, once a class ended, the chalkboard was quickly erased by the next group, and the scrawlings were gone forever. Now professors are converting their yellowing lecture notes to text on course-management systems, or posting videos of their lecture performances for students to watch later for review.

All of those materials are preserved on college servers. And such data could easily be used to evaluate the quality of the teaching going on behind closed classroom doors, though the University of Maryland-Baltimore County has no plans to do that.

Though the idea of using technology to rank activity is new to teaching, it has long been a staple of academic research.

For decades, scientists have tracked the number of times their articles are cited by others, and such citation indexes have been important for career advancement.

Teaching has had no similar metric—except, of course, for student evaluations. But many people consider those evaluations imperfect measures because students may rate most favorably those professors who are more generous with their grading rather than those who challenge them.

So in an era when colleges are under more pressure than ever to be accountable for their costs and quality, the question arises: Will colleges begin to use technology to help them measure teaching? And should they?

This excerpt from a report in the Chronicle will not help sell online teaching and learning to the unocnverted.

But, at some time, we will have to recognize the fact that there is no "metric" for teaching.  It is an article of faith that those who teach are good at it.  The reality is though we faculty are far from being good teachers.  

I joke around with my students that they should thank their stars that they were not in my classes even five years ago--I know I sucked then compared to now.  Even two years ago!  In California, the first time I taught a televised class, I got a copy of the first telecast, which I asked my wife and daughter also to watch.  I came home and asked them for their feedback.  As they started listing the different things I was horrible at, I remember how awful I felt.  I stopped them after a while.  

Later, when they were asleep, I played the VCR (yes, that antique item!) and watched my lecture in solitude.  I was awful.  Simply awful.  My hands were flailing all over the place.  Every sentence had ums and ers.  I was asking students for their views, but not putting them together to tell a story.  My PowerPoint slides were awful.  There was nothing that seemed ok.  Bloody depressing it was.

Yet, there was nothing in the system to pull me up for the awful teacher that I was (And, after having observed quite a few, I am sure there are even worse than me!)  Do we run any other service with such profound implications where we care not about the quality of the service?  A simple error at the DMV and we are ready to pounce over the separator and assault the person!

Thinking and reflecting about teaching and learning has made me better, no doubt.  I am not sure if I am anywhere near being a "great teacher"; I am just happy I am not as bad as I used to be :-)

I am sure though that it is only a matter of time that society--maybe the goverment--demands that there is a measure of teaching.  It will be neat if we can preempt that.  But, I doubt it.  After all, I am at a university where even the student evaluation of faculty and courses happens only once a year and not every time!!!!!