Abstract
Evaluation of clinical tutors by students is potentially useful for tutor feedback and to assist administrators in decisions about tenure and promotion. At most universities, there has been inadequate attention paid to clinical tutor evaluation. McGill University in Canada designed an evaluation system adhering rigidly to accepted psychometric standards of reliability and validity and has used it successfully for the past 5 years. When researchers investigated its credibility with McGill tutors, they found significant ambivalence and some hostility toward the process. Apparently, these tutors are suspicious of the credibility of student ratings of their teaching skills. Part of the explanation for this lies in their own selfdoubts as reflected in lower self-ratings. Much of the ambivalence relates to lack of recognition of clinical teaching by administrators and lack of impact of teaching evaluations on promotion and tenure decisions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.