Abstract
The effectiveness of good teaching and learning in higher education depends on many critical factors. Governments, institutions and individuals continue to adapt and utilize a scheme of strategies in higher education for both sound pedagogical and "real-world" application. Debate and dialogue around what constitutes good teaching and good learning has led most Universities to conduct evaluations of teaching, often from multiple perspectives. Course and subject evaluations, student evaluation of teaching (SET), student feedback surveys, teaching and peer evaluations, and even informal feedback mechanisms are incorporated into many of the evaluation and measurement instruments recognized by institutions for determining the value of their teaching. Various forms of teaching evaluations may be taken out of context, or when different evaluation mechanisms are not triangulated together, we may see the distinct possibility that results may be inaccurate, distorted, misleading or even abused. Moreover, we realize that teacher effectiveness and consequently student learning may also be compromised. This paper suggests that there needs to be an alignment of the institutions goals with evaluation objectives (and consequently student learning), otherwise observations and evaluations will continue to create misunderstandings and confusion as to their suitability and value. Reflecting on teaching and learning evaluation practices observed across three international universities; this paper proposes that universities adopt a broader teaching evaluation framework that harmonizes and manages evaluations of teaching through a more coordinated, contextual and transparent approach that embraces social, individual and cultural perspectives.