This position statement is an official policy of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) and was adopted by the ASHA Legislative Council (LC 30-92) in November 1992. It was developed by the Ad Hoc Committee on Professional Performance Appraisal: Ron Gillam (chair), Therese Goldsmith, Cassandra Peters-Johnson (ex officio), Judith Rassi, Rebecca Reeves, and Toya Wyatt. Vice President for Governmental and Social Policy Jean H. Lovrinic was the monitoring vice president. See the technical report “Professional Performance Appraisal by Individuals Outside of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology” (1992) developed by the Ad Hoc Committee on Professional Performance Appraisal.
It is the position of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) that professional performance appraisals of speech-language pathologists and audiologists who are engaged in the delivery of clinical services should include an assessment of the clinical skills that are unique to the employee's profession. This component of the performance appraisal should be conducted by people who hold ASHA certification (and licensure where appropriate) in the employee's professional area. In cases in which organizational structure precludes adoption of this position, participatory approaches (peer evaluations and/or self-evaluations) should be instituted as components of the performance appraisal process.
Hunter, M. (1988). Create rather than await your fate in teacher evaluation. In S. J. Stanley & W. J. Popham (Eds.), Teacher evaluation: Six prescriptions for success (pp. 32–55). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jacobs, R. R. (1986). Numerical rating scales. In R. A. Bark (Ed.), Performance assessment: Methods and applications (pp. 82–99). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Landsborough, R. (1985). A technique for encouraging employee involvement in improving productivity. Hospital and Health Services Administration, 30, 124–134.
Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1981). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Marguiles, N., & Duval, J. (1984). Productivity management: A model for participative management in health care organizations. Health Care Management Review, 29, 61–70.
Mawdsley, B. (1987). Kansas inventory of self-supervision. In Farmer, S. (Ed.). , Clinical supervision: A coming of age. Proceedings of the national conference on supervision. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University, 1987.
Natriello, G. (1990). Intended and unintended consequences: Purposes and effects of teacher evaluation. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers (pp. 35–45). New York: Sage Publications.
Smith, P., & Kendall, L. M. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149–155.
Teel, K. S. (1978). Self-appraisal revisited. Personnel Journal, 57, 364–367.
Wise, A. E., & Darling-Hammond, L. (1988). Licensing teachers: Design for the teaching profession. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
Index terms: performance evaluation
Reference this material as: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1993). Professional performance appraisal by individuals outside the professions of speech-language pathology and audiology [Position Statement]. Available from www.asha.org/policy.
© Copyright 1993 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. All rights reserved.
Disclaimer: The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association disclaims any liability to any party for the accuracy, completeness, or availability of these documents, or for any damages arising out of the use of the documents and any information they contain.