| Abstract: | The academic award restructuring of 1991 established a trial period for academic staff appraisal for the purposes of staff development. The trend in Australia towards more formal performance management for academics has occurred during a period of substantial change to the structure of higher education and institutional management, and brought debate on whether appraisal, for either summative purposes (where performance assessment is for remuneration or promotion purposes) or formative purposes (where the emphasis is on planning personal development), is appropriate for academic staff. Arguments have been put forward for the benefits of appraisal processes with primarily developmental intent. Thus far there have been reports of the characteristics and processes of appraisal schemes, but less data on outcomes; in particular, little evidence to indicate the extent to which schemes lead to worthwhile staff development. This paper reports selected findings of a study of the evolving appraisal scheme of The University of Melbourne. The study was conducted after the scheme's second year of operation by the Centre for the Study of Higher Education which played an advisory role in an internal review of the scheme. The findings reveal some uncertainty among staff about the intentions of the scheme, and tensions between summative and formative purposes, perhaps not surprising given the contentious issue which staff appraisal has been in higher education. Nevertheless, positive outcomes were identified, but possibly too few to claim that the scheme was fully achieving a developmental objective. These findings raise questions about the effectiveness of academic staff appraisal nationally and suggest that it is time to reconsider the policy linkage between appraisal and staff development. |
