Keywords school; Performance appraisal; Problems; solution
In order to further improve the enthusiasm of teaching staff, enhance their sense of competition, encourage the advanced and urge the backward, many schools have begun to implement performance appraisal for teaching staff, and take the results of performance appraisal as the basis for adjusting the income of teaching staff. My school began to implement performance appraisal last year. According to the actual situation of our school, we also hired professionals to tailor a set of assessment system for our school, but there are still some difficult problems in the implementation process. I want to talk about my thoughts on some issues and communicate with my friends.
First, how to formulate the assessment criteria for on-the-job staff and full-time teachers?
Because of the different nature of work, the work of teaching staff is trivial and complicated, which is difficult to quantify, and the workload of teachers can be measured by class hours. Therefore, it is obviously inappropriate to use the same ruler to measure the length between them. In view of this problem, the discussion group had a long discussion. Finally, I suggested whether in-service staff and full-time teachers can be assessed separately, which was quickly recognized by everyone. Later, when formulating the assessment rules, there were both * * * assessment requirements (such as morality, ability and diligence) and targeted assessment requirements (different rules were formulated according to their respective characteristics). Practice has proved that this method effectively solves the contradiction between the two.
Second, the evaluation of full-time teachers has the problem of emphasizing "quantity" but neglecting "quality"
For the assessment of full-time teachers, I think the focus should be on teaching quality. "Quality" comes first and "quantity" comes last. For enterprises, quality is life, and for schools, quality is brand and integrity. If the teaching quality is not up to standard, it will be biased to evaluate full-time teachers only by quantity. At present, many schools give performance bonuses to teachers in this way: performance bonus = basic bonus+assessment coefficient * class hours * class fee. As can be seen from this formula, there are two bright spots: one is the assessment coefficient, and the other is the amount of class hours. The evaluation coefficient is calculated according to the designed table, and there are too many contents that can be entered in the table. I divide it into aggressive type and conservative type. Generally speaking, they are conservative, vague and flexible. It is not clear whether it is fair and just to grade conservative forms in a place like China where human feelings are everywhere. Even if we play fairly, the amount of class hours will only cause everyone to compete for a substitute. Whether you can teach that course well or not, as long as you earn class hours. At this rate, it is difficult to guarantee the quality of teaching. In addition, in order to earn more marks, teachers may do some extra work, which distracts the teaching energy, not to mention the courses taken. In order to assess teachers, the school must deploy special assessment personnel and do a lot of statistical work, which is as busy as a bee. In the end, it is nothing more than a discount on class fees, which is time-consuming and laborious and inefficient.
I think the best way to solve this problem is to take as many classes as you want, plus basic bonus, according to the principle of more work and more pay. That is, the performance bonus of full-time teachers = basic bonus+* class hours * class fees. If there must be a coefficient, the most suitable coefficient is the percentage of teaching satisfaction. This figure can be found in the school service monitoring system.
Third, how to assess teachers who have no teaching tasks?
According to the current assessment rules, teachers without lesson plans will only get basic bonuses. When there are temporary jobs in the school, these teachers will be arranged to do some temporary jobs at any time, and they are likely to work overtime like some incumbents. But the difference is that this part of the effort is unpaid. Obviously, according to the formula, it is basic bonus+assessment coefficient *0* class fee = basic bonus. This situation can't reflect the distribution principle of getting more for more work, but it is dubbed as "those who can work more, work for nothing". Therefore, it is often difficult to assign tasks. I think there is a way to solve this problem. That is, when assigning tasks, make a task list, clearly write down the task person, task items and required days, which will be signed by the department head and the competent leader for confirmation; At the end of the month, the relevant personnel of the educational administration department will summarize and report to the labor department according to the actual working days of the task list, and pay bonuses according to the bonus standard of on-the-job personnel. Only in this way can idle teachers be mobilized to participate in non-teaching work in schools.
Fourth, the performance appraisal of the personnel on duty cannot be reasonably quantified.
The work of shift workers is trivial and complicated, which cannot be reasonably quantified. Because things are big and small, we can't talk about "things", let alone measure them with time. Because of different personal abilities, some people finish the same thing in a short time, and some people may not do it well in a few days. Some people are good at communication. After doing some work, they will communicate with their superiors and report. Some people are taciturn and only know how to pull rickshaws. The leaders don't know that the work has been done, but they think it was done by others. Such people are bound to suffer in the assessment. Of course, we can't rule out the existence of such people. For their own political career and interests, they only follow the instructions of the leaders and do their best to please them. They only want to do things according to the instructions of the leaders without being pragmatic, not to mention innovative work. Because raters other than department leaders are not fully aware of the actual workload and hard work of the assessed, it is difficult to proceed from reality, resulting in "blind typing". Therefore, the fairness and impartiality of performance appraisal are reduced, which leads to great flexibility in the operation and results of the appraisal.
My idea is that before the department assessment, the department head should hold a work summary meeting and invite the leaders in charge to attend. Everyone who is assessed will make a brief statement on his work, and if there are points for extra points and deductions, he should also take the initiative to raise them, so as to increase the understanding of the leaders in charge and other faculty members on the work of the assessed and provide a basis for grading. Of course, we should try to avoid the phenomenon of "human feelings are greater than the sky" so as not to violate the principle of fairness.
Fifth, performance appraisal lacks daily supervision.
In the process of performance appraisal, because many completed projects only reflect things on paper, the process has not been supervised. Let some work become a mere formality, such as business study, political study, teaching process and so on.
Unlike other aspects of performance appraisal, daily supervision is independent of time. It is actually a process of information collection, which runs through every link of performance appraisal. Strengthening daily work supervision has the following two advantages: First, it provides materials for year-end assessment. Strengthening daily supervision and collecting information provide realistic basis for year-end performance appraisal. Second, get rid of the monopoly of administrative work. Because the calculation process of performance appraisal is not open, performance appraisal lacks transparency and public supervision. This often leads to the results of performance evaluation being unconvincing and diagnostic.
The evaluation steering group should conscientiously perform their duties, participate in the whole evaluation process, ask questions and collect information to ensure the openness of the evaluation process.
Sixth, the assessment results are not pills.
The purpose of performance appraisal is to encourage the advanced, urge the backward and improve the overall management level of enterprises and institutions. At present, most assessment units are assessed for the purpose of assessment. After the assessment results come out, they will be publicized for a few days, and then bonuses and other welfare benefits will be paid accordingly, and finally it will be over.
In my opinion, performance appraisal is not to kill people with a stick, but to save people. Maybe the metaphor is not appropriate, but that's the truth! The examination results can only be regarded as the doctor's assessment of the patient's health, and the most important prescription has not been finished! The assessment team should promptly convey the assessment results to the departments and individuals with poor assessment results, adopt a two-way interactive way, analyze specific personnel in the form of feedback, and solve problems in a targeted manner, so as to better help the assessed find their own shortcomings, clarify what should be strengthened in the future, and how to improve and improve their work performance in the next step. Only in this way can we achieve the purpose of performance appraisal.
At present, the implementation of performance appraisal in China campus is still in its infancy, which needs to be improved continuously. Is it suitable for China? Advantages or disadvantages? A new weapon or a spell? These need to be constantly verified. At present, it can only be an expedient measure. It is hoped that through the continuous efforts of enterprises and institutions, their performance appraisal methods will have a healthy spiral rise, and the quality of assessment will continue to improve, ensuring the smooth completion of long-term planning strategic objectives of all units.
References:
[1] Ningbo Group. Reflections on the Examination of University Cadres [J]. Higher Education in China, 1999 (3): 60-6 1.
[2] Thanks. On the establishment of performance appraisal system in colleges and universities [J]. Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities, 200 1, 22 (8): 195- 197.
[3] Wang Qiong. Reflections on the performance appraisal of university administrators [J]. Scientific and Technological Progress and Countermeasures, 2003( 1).
[4] Once the seaside. Research on performance evaluation index of administrative departments in universities [J]. Science, Technology and Management, 2003(6).
[5] Guo Biyu. Discussion on the connotation of performance appraisal of college employees [J]. Journal of Nantong Institute of Technology (Social Science Edition), 2004(6):44.
[6] Liu Qiang. Reflections on the establishment of a performance appraisal system for university staff [J]. Modernization of shopping centers, 2005(9).
About the author: Huang Guiyan (1976-), female, accountant of Shaanxi Electric Power Technical School.