02052nam a22003372u 45000010008000000030008000080050017000160070014000330080041000470370019000880400036001070820015001431000023001582450097001812600068002783000010003465000154003565200787005105330081012976500027013786500035014056500028014406500032014686500031015006500031015316500029015626500035015916500021016266500031016476550036016785345246BD-DhUL20161214135902.0he u||024||||080220s1977    xxu ||| b     ||| s eng d  aED149374bERIC  aericdbengcericddMvIdBD-DhUL  a651.7bRIB1 aHildebrandt, H. W.10aAccountability of the Business Communication Instructor /h[microform] /cH. W. Hildebrandt.  a[Washington, D.C.] :bDistributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,c1977.  a11 p.  aERIC Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Business Communication Association (Chicago, Illinois, December 28-30, 1977).5ericd  aTeachers of business communication, along with teachers in other disciplines, must develop ways of responding to demands for faculty evaluation. The first section of this paper considers three questions relevant to any kind of faculty evaluation: To whom should a teacher be accountable? What criteria should be the touchstones for evaluation? and, How should the results of faculty evaluation be used? The second section discusses relevant research studies, describes faculty evaluation procedures used in several business schools, and suggests three guiding principles for faculty evaluation: to state goals in terms of measurable, overt action; to be precise in language, avoiding variant interpretations; and to qualify the conditions under which a goal is to be completed. (GW)  aMicrofiche.b[Washington D.C.]:cERIC Clearinghouseemicrofiches : positive.17aAccountability.2ericd17aBusiness Communication.2ericd17aCollege Faculty.2ericd07aEvaluation Criteria.2ericd17aEvaluation Methods.2ericd17aFaculty Evaluation.2ericd07aHigher Education.2ericd07aMeasurement Objectives.2ericd07aResearch.2ericd07aTeacher Evaluation.2ericd 7aSpeeches/Meeting Papers.2ericd