skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 34403 Find in a Library
Title: HOW BAR ASSOCIATIONS EVALUATE SITTING JUDGES
Author(s): C O PHILIP
Corporate Author: New York University
Institute of Judicial Admin
United States of America
Date Published: 1976
Page Count: 60
Sponsoring Agency: New York University
New York, NY 10011
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF AN AUGUST 1975 QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY OF 25 STATE AND 28 LOCAL BAR ASSOCIATIONS CONDUCTED BY THE INSTITUTE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION.
Abstract: THIS SURVEY WAS DESIGNED TO FIND OUT WHAT ASSOCIATIONS HAD PROGRAMS FOR EVALUATING TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURT JUDGES' PERFORMANCES. BACKUP MATERIALS SUCH AS REPORTS AND POLLING FORMS WERE ALSO REQUESTED. ASSOCIATIONS THAT DID EVALUATE INCUMBENT JUDGES WERE INTERVIEWED BY TELEPHONE IN DECEMBER TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL MATERIAL ABOUT THEIR PROGRAMS. OF THE 53 BAR ASSOCIATIONS TO WHICH THE QUESTIONNAIRE WAS SENT, FIFTEEN STATE AND SIXTEEN LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS - A 58.5 PERCENT RESPONSE RATE REPLIED. OF THE THIRTY-ONE RESPONDENTS, TWELVE INDICATED THAT THEY WERE ENGAGED IN SOME FORM OF JUDICIAL EVALUATION. NENETEEN ASSOCIATIONS STATED THAT THEY DID NOT CONDUCT EVALUATION PROGRAMS, ALTHOUGH FOUR SAID THAT THEY WERE CONSIDERING DOING SO. NINE HAD NOT CONSIDERED IT; AND SIX HAD CONSIDERED AND REJECTED IT. THIS SURVEY REPORT DISCUSSES THE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EVALUATION PROGRAMS (PURPOSES, METHODS, DISSEMENATION OF RESULTS) AND SUGGESTS GUIDELINES FOR THE EVALUATION OF AN APPOINTED JUDICIARY. ALSO INCLUDED ARE DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF THE THIRTEEN PROGRAMS FOR EVALUATING SITTING JUDGES CONDUCTED BY THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS IN THE SURVEY. BECAUSE POLLING APPEARED TO BE THE MOST SIGNIFICANT COMMON DENOMINATOR AMONG THE PROGRAMS, THEY HAVE BEEN CLASSIFIED IN THREE GROUPS: BAR ASSOCIATIONS WHICH CONDUCT POLLS OF THEIR ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP (PHILADELPHIA, CHICAGO, CINCINNATI, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, DADE COUNTY, CONNECTICUT, ILLINOIS); THOSE WHICH CONDUCT POLLS OF A PART OF THEIR MEMBERSHIP (MARYLAND, CHICAGO, ARIZONA); AND THOSE WHICH DO NOT CONDUCT ANY POLL (NEW YORK CITY, CHICAGO, NEW JERSEY). APPENDED ARE DATA ON THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS RESPONDING TO THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE, SAMPLE JUDICIAL EVALUATION FORMS, AND THE ADDRESSES OF BAR ASSOCIATIONS CONDUCTING EVALUATIONS. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED) (SNI ABSTRACT)
Index Term(s): Institute for Judicial Administration; Judges; Performance requirements; Personnel evaluation; Surveys; Techniques
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=34403

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.