Teacher evaluation is conducted to improve the teaching effectiveness of the faculty. However, the evaluation itself has to be effective, which is possible when two issues are first addressed quite skillfully. First is the factors (or criteria) of successful teacher and teaching. And second is ‘who will evaluate?’ Unless these challenges are addressed, it is difficult to practice a result-oriented evaluation of teachers, particularly at the higher education level. Existing research tells that there is a universal set of factors (variables) with commonly used operationalizations (measurements) to evaluate teachers. Adjustments are possible to add more factors and/or attributes (Questions) according to the situation. For example, besides common evaluations, public and private teachers will also be evaluated on different grounds. It is global practice that teachers are evaluated according to their ‘Teaching Methods (TM)’, ‘Utilization of the Qualification & Experience (UQE)’, ‘Teachers Attitude & Behavior (TAB)’, ‘Classroom Management (CM)’, ‘Care of Individual Differences (CID)’, Co-Curricular Activities (CCA)’, ‘Sense of Responsibility (SR)’, and ‘Evaluation Technique (ET)’ using a set of questions (about the attributes) with either dichotomous (i.e., yes/no) or continuous (i.e., 5-Point or 7-Point) scales. Mostly students, heads and colleagues are the evaluators. It is ARGUED in this research that the above practices are based on several ‘assumptions or preconceived expectations.’ One of the assumptions is that all the respondents give similar importance (value) to every variable and attribute. However, it is obviously possible that ‘CID’ can be more important for a student while heads may be attaching higher value with ‘SR’. This diversity can also be found within one group of students or heads or colleagues. For instance male students may give priority to the CCA while female students can put TAB as higher level factor. In this study, three samples of heads, colleagues and students were selected (using statistical procedures) who all filled the same questionnaire with 49 questions on 9 variables. Using SPSS (V. 12.0) data was analyzed both in a combined manner as well as separately for heads, colleagues and students. To find the ‘Best-Fit’ of factors predicting the behavior of a particular group, ‘Stepwise-Regression’ was applied. For computing the demographic impacts the researcher used ‘Tests of Significance’ including, ‘t-Test’ and ‘ANOVA’ to compute the mean differences. The results support our hypothesis about the differences of groups from each other as well as variations in the selection of factors due to the demographic diversities within each group of evaluators. Eight predictors (TM, UQE, TAB, CM, CID, CCA, SR, & ET) were used to explain the dependent variable (Overall Score - OS). The findings of this study report that heads’ attitude is determined by SR (p=.028) & ET (p=.015), Colleagues prefer CID (p=.008), CCA (p=.035) & SR (p=.000) while, students used TM (p=.039) & ET (p=.000) for evaluating the teachers in Gomal University. It is obvious that out of eight independent variables, very few are playing any role in the evaluation process. Most of the factors have been excluded in stepwise regression. Furthermore, the predictors (factors) selected by heads, colleagues and students are also more different than similar. Likewise, heads have no difference of opinion across all the demographic groupings. But colleagues and students are significantly different on ‘Faculty’ but similar on other demographics. Furthermore, teachers have some difference of opinion due to their grouping on ‘Domicile’. To cut short, it has been hypothesized, tested and proved that all the evaluators do not give similar importance to the factors of evaluation. So their evaluation does not include only the placing of a teacher on the scale, it is also affected by whether or not the evaluator considers the predictor important.
Both Zainuddin Ibn Nujaim (d. 970HJ) and Herbert Broom (d. 1882CE) are famous for the arrangement, interpretations and for sound applications of juristico-legal maxims and rules respectively in Muslim and western world of law and jurisprudence. The al-Ashbah wa-Al-Nazair of Ibn Nujaim and Broom’s Legal Maxims of Herbert Broom speak of their deep approach to the concerned discipline. This article provides a general analysis of the juristico-legal interpretations regarding the elementary maxim of hardship and injuria remedium (hardship and harm remission) as made by Ibn Nujaim (d.970HJ) and Herbert Broom(d.1882CE) in their aforesaid books.
Teacher professional development (TPD) is a process to enhance knowledge and skills of the teachers to improve quality of teaching and learning in schools. It further strengthens teachers’ prospect about their profession by fostering positive change in their attitude, beliefs, perceptions and ideology. Moreover, TPD enables teachers to enhance their personal and professional effectiveness and competence. While meeting their PD targets, the teachers experience number of successes and challenges due to local cultural context in which they are situated. The aim of the current study was to explore the experiences of male and female mentors and mentees in an ongoing field-based in-service mentor-mentee model of PD in the Baltistan region of Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan. In particular, the study examined how the local cultural context of the Baltistan region shaped or guided the experiences of the male and female mentors and mentees while participating in the PD process. It further explored the role of local cultural context in the successes and challenges to meet the PD targets of the male and female mentors and mentees. The case study method of qualitative research design was employed and semi structured interviews and mentees’ classroom observations were used to generate and collect the data. The research was conducted in two clusters; one is mentored by a male teacher and another with a female mentor.A male and a female mentee from each cluster were inducted in the study. Thus, the primary participants were six in total including a male mentor, a female mentor, two male mentees and two female mentees who were selected through purposive sampling technique. The key findings of study have revealed that mentors’ and mentees’ experiences of PD were shaped by the cultural context. The interactions of male and female mentors and mentees in PD process were directed by the local cultural norms. Furthermore, the religious activities of the local context had an influence on participations’ experiences of PD in terms of curtailing the frequency of prescheduled PD activities. The PD process also helped them to develop their knowledge and skills of teaching language in early grades. The findings also indicated that participation in PD immensely contributed to the development of both the mentors’ and mentees’ sense of professional identities.