Email list hosting service & mailing list manager


Assessment of Research Offices 00pslowry@xxxxxx 13 Feb 1996 12:43 EST

 Some questions have been raised recently concerning
 assessment of research offices. Sharon Davis from the
 University of Nebraska and I have been interested in
 this topic for some years and we both have published
 separately and jointly on evaluation of the research
 office. Our most recent article published in the NCURA
 Journal presented some results of data collected from
 100 institutions in an attempt to assess the status of
 evaluation activities with research offices (I would
 refer you to the Spring 1995 issue of Research
 Management Review). Our second article providing some
 additional data on this topic is underway.

 We found that 58 percent of the institutions in the
 sample have experienced some sort of evaluation.  There
 were many combinations of types of evaluators, with
 faculty being a part of the evaluation team in the
 largest number. A surprisingly large number of offices
 used outside evaluators. The most common form of
 assessment was some sort of feedback from faculty and
 included written surveys, telephone surveys, and
 interviews.  Administrators and office staff were
 groups also included in some type of survey.

 In the course of our work, we have found very little
 else by way of published data on the status of
 evaluation activities. We have, however, noticed from
 our NCURA workshop on this topic that in the last five
 years the participants are increasingly referring to an
 evaluation that has recently occurred or will occur in
 the next 1-2 years.

 A related comment made in the discussion concerned a
 suggestion by a faculty member to form a committee of
 faculty members to advise and make suggestions on how
 to better meet their needs. A faculty advisory
 committee, while requiring effort, is an excellent way
 to not only receive comments, advise, and support from
 one of the primary clients of our offices, but serves a
 dual purpose of providing an avenue for educating
 (albeit a small number of) faculty on the often
 competing priorities of the research office.

     Peggy S. Lowry
     Ball State University
     317/285-1600