Evaluation

FAQs

Members

Request Assistance

Request Review

Resources

Readings

Benchmarking Engaged Institutions

   

Evaluation Criteria for the Scholarship of Engagement

 These criteria are used by the National Review Board to assess and evaluate the Scholarship of Engagement. Drawing from the criteria presented in Scholarship Assessed: A Special Report on Faculty Evaluation, (Glassick, Huber & Maeroff, 1997), they have been adapted to more closely reflect the unique fit with the Scholarship of Engagement.

The Scholarship of Engagement is a term that captures scholarship in the areas of teaching, research, and/or service. It engages faculty in academically relevant work that simultaneously meets campus mission and goals as well as community needs. Engagement is a scholarly agenda that incorporates communities issues and which can be within or integrative across teaching research and service. In this definition, community is broadly defined to include audiences external to the campus that are part of a collaborative process to contribute to the public good.

In applying these criteria, the National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement is mindful of the variation in institutional contexts, the breadth of faculty work, and individual promotion and tenure guidelines.

Goals/Questions
  • Does the scholar state the basic purpose of the work and its value for public good?
  • Is there an "academic fit" with the scholar's role, departmental and university mission?
  • Does the scholar define objectives that are realistic and achievable?
  • Does the scholar identify intellectual and significant questions in the discipline and in the community?


Context of theory, literature, "best practices"
  • Does the scholar show an understanding of relevant existing scholarship?
  • Does the scholar bring the necessary skills to the collaboration?
  • Does the scholar make significant contributions to the work?
  • Is the work intellectually compelling?


Methods
  • Does the scholar use methods appropriate to the goals, questions and context of the work?
  • Does the scholar describe rationale for election of methods in relation to context and issue?
  • Does the scholar apply effectively the methods selected?
  • Does the scholar modify procedures in response to changing circumstances?


Results
  • Does the scholar achieve the goals?
  • Does the scholar's work add consequentially to the discipline and to the community?
  • Does the scholar's work open additional areas for further exploration and collaboration?
  • Does the scholar's work achieve impact or change? Are those outcomes evaluated and by whom?
  • Does the scholar's work make a contribution consistent with the purpose and target of the work over a period of time?


Communication/Dissemination
  • Does the scholar use a suitable styles and effective organization to present the work?
  • Does the scholar communicate/disseminate to appropriate academic and public audiences consistent with the mission of the institution?
  • Does the scholar use appropriate forums for communicating work to the intended audience?
  • Does the scholar present information with clarity and integrity?


Reflective Critique
  • Does the scholar critically evaluate the work?
  • What are the sources of evidence informing the critique?
  • Does the scholar bring an appropriate breadth of evidence to the critique?
  • In what way has the community perspective informed the critique?
  • Does the scholar use evaluation to learn from the work and to direct future work?
  • Is the scholar involved in a local, state and national dialogue related to the work?


Modified March 2002

All contents copyright ©
Clearinghouse & National Review Board
for The Scholarship of Engagement.
All rights reserved.