Join as an Editor/Reviewer


Volume: 60  ,  Issue: 1 , September    Published Date: 13 September 2020
Publisher Name: IJRP
Views: 77  ,  Download: 21
DOI: 10.47119/IJRP100601920201421


# Author Name
1 Savitha G R


The 360-degree feedback system has emerged as a suitable and valuable tool for solving many snags and biases related to other traditional assessment instruments, where validity and reliability have been traditionally questioned. The 360-degree feedback system is based on the hypothesis that the assessment must be carried out from multiple evaluations of various stakeholders that include several dimensions of employees work from varied perspectives. In this sense, the results of the evaluation would benefit from greater objectivity, reliability and validity. In the management education context, it was always a need for faculty to have a robust system of evaluation to identify their contribution of work. Generally, Management institutes have evaluation surveys filled in by students and these are usually the only tool administered for evaluating faculty performance. The outcome of this type of evaluation could have a significant bias as only one set of stakeholders participates in the assessment. It is important to understand that Faculty of management education not only contributes towards teaching but also towards research publications, consultancy and service to institution.   On understanding the requirements, there is a need to implement a 360-degree feedback system, which addresses the gaps in evaluating faculty contribution. AICTE has made an attempt to introduce 360 degree feedback mechanism for faculty and laid down some parameters. The process comprises of creating a data framework that maps Faculty, Students and Subjects and this data gets captured through an online mechanism. Further, the system has also proposed to disburse rewards on real time basis. Keeping these developments in background, the aim of this paper is to understand the perception of faculty members on the parameters of 360-degree feedback mechanism as recommended by AICTE



  1. Bertram OpitzNicola K. Ferdinand,and Axel Mecklinger -Timing Matters: The Impact of Immediate and Delayed Feedback on Artificial Language Learning, Frontirors in Human Neuroscience, Vol 5, 2011. PMC3034228.
  2. Cashin W., Student Ratings of Teaching- A Summary of the Research. Paper No. 20.  Kansas State University, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  3. Al-Yousuf N. Clinical teacher’s evaluation. J Bahrain (2007) ; 19:154 –  Google Scholar
  4. Dunkin M., Assessing teacher’s effectiveness, (1997), Issue7, PP 37-5, on Google Scholar
  5. Al-Hattami, Abdulghani, (2019), The Perception of Students and Faculty Staff on the Role of Constructive Feedback, International Journal of Instruction, Issue 12, Page 885-894.
  6. Musharraf HusainSabina Khan (2016), Students feedback: An effective tool in teachers evaluation system, International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research, Volume 6 , Issue 3,  Page178-181.
  1. Asitava DebroyAbhishek IngoleAbhay Mudey (2019),  Teachers perceptions on student evaluation of teaching as a tool for faculty development and quality assurance in medical education, Journal of Health and Education, Volume 8, Page 218.
  2. Peterson, K.D. Stevens, D. & Ponzio, R. C. (1998), Variable Data Sources in Teacher Evaluation, Journal of Research and Development in Education, Volume 31, Issue 3, Page 123-132.
  3. Scriven, M. (1981), Summative Teacher Evaluation, The New Handbook of Teacher Evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers, Newbury Park, CA. Sage, (pp.244-271).
  4. Stodolsky, S. S. (1984), Teacher Evaluation: The limits of looking. Educational Researcher, Volume 13, Issue 9, Page 11-18.
  5. Ding Ding Tee & Pervaiz K. Ahmed (2014), 360 degree feedback: an integrative framework for learning and assessment, Teaching in Higher Education, Volume 19, Issue 6, Page 579-591.