Bypassing opportunities for quality improvement: insights from Vietnamese administrators’ approaches to student evaluation of teaching

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1108/qae-04-2023-0067
Lan Anh Nguyen
{"title":"Bypassing opportunities for quality improvement: insights from Vietnamese administrators’ approaches to student evaluation of teaching","authors":"Lan Anh Nguyen","doi":"10.1108/qae-04-2023-0067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nAlthough student evaluation of teaching (SET) is widely used, there has been a significant disparity between its potential benefits with the actual impact on improving educational quality. This study aims to inquire into the factors contributing to this discrepancy and the underlying mechanisms hindering the effective utilisation of SET.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis qualitative case study used problem-based methodology to investigate the theories of action of administrators involved in SET. The study uses SET documents and individual interviews with 18 administrators from six Vietnamese higher education institutions.\n\n\nFindings\nWhile the administrators monitored SET data and addressed SET problems, few used it for quality improvement. The participants’ SET approaches were influenced by various constraints, especially the intricate interaction between neoliberal agendas with professional and cultural values.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nDespite a lack of statistical generalisability, this study contributes to analytical generalisation by vividly portraying the complexity of the SET practice in a higher education context.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThis study suggests a more inclusive approach to quality improvement that prioritises multi-stakeholder engagement.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThe constraint analysis offers invaluable insights into the challenges and dynamics of SET practice, which can be used to enhance SET effectiveness and overall educational quality.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis paper addresses the need to examine the theories of action of administrators involved in SET, emphasising the significance of a comprehensive understanding of the stakeholders’ underlying reasoning process for successful evaluation implementation.\n","PeriodicalId":46734,"journal":{"name":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-04-2023-0067","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Although student evaluation of teaching (SET) is widely used, there has been a significant disparity between its potential benefits with the actual impact on improving educational quality. This study aims to inquire into the factors contributing to this discrepancy and the underlying mechanisms hindering the effective utilisation of SET. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative case study used problem-based methodology to investigate the theories of action of administrators involved in SET. The study uses SET documents and individual interviews with 18 administrators from six Vietnamese higher education institutions. Findings While the administrators monitored SET data and addressed SET problems, few used it for quality improvement. The participants’ SET approaches were influenced by various constraints, especially the intricate interaction between neoliberal agendas with professional and cultural values. Research limitations/implications Despite a lack of statistical generalisability, this study contributes to analytical generalisation by vividly portraying the complexity of the SET practice in a higher education context. Practical implications This study suggests a more inclusive approach to quality improvement that prioritises multi-stakeholder engagement. Social implications The constraint analysis offers invaluable insights into the challenges and dynamics of SET practice, which can be used to enhance SET effectiveness and overall educational quality. Originality/value This paper addresses the need to examine the theories of action of administrators involved in SET, emphasising the significance of a comprehensive understanding of the stakeholders’ underlying reasoning process for successful evaluation implementation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
错失改善质素的机会:来自越南行政人员对学生评教方法的见解
目的学生教学评价(student evaluation of teaching, SET)被广泛应用,但其潜在效益与对提高教育质量的实际影响之间存在显著差异。本研究旨在探讨造成这一差异的因素,以及阻碍SET有效利用的潜在机制。设计/方法/方法这个定性案例研究使用基于问题的方法来调查管理人员参与SET的行为理论。该研究使用了SET文件和对越南六所高等教育机构的18名管理人员的个人访谈。当管理员监控SET数据并解决SET问题时,很少有人将其用于质量改进。参与者的SET方法受到各种制约因素的影响,特别是新自由主义议程与专业和文化价值观之间错综复杂的相互作用。尽管缺乏统计上的普遍性,但本研究通过生动地描绘高等教育背景下SET实践的复杂性,有助于分析性概括。实际意义本研究提出了一种更包容的质量改进方法,优先考虑多方利益相关者的参与。社会意义约束分析为SET实践的挑战和动态提供了宝贵的见解,可用于提高SET的有效性和整体教育质量。原创性/价值本文探讨了研究SET管理人员的行动理论的必要性,强调了全面理解利益相关者的潜在推理过程对成功评估实施的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: QAE publishes original empirical or theoretical articles on Quality Assurance issues, including dimensions and indicators of Quality and Quality Improvement, as applicable to education at all levels, including pre-primary, primary, secondary, higher and professional education. Periodically, QAE also publishes systematic reviews, research syntheses and assessment policy articles on topics of current significance. As an international journal, QAE seeks submissions on topics that have global relevance. Article submissions could pertain to the following areas integral to QAE''s mission: -organizational or program development, change and improvement -educational testing or assessment programs -evaluation of educational innovations, programs and projects -school efficiency assessments -standards, reforms, accountability, accreditation, and audits in education -tools, criteria and methods for examining or assuring quality
期刊最新文献
The impact of gamification on meaningful learning and student performance in an undergraduate online engineering course Generative AI: hopes, controversies and the future of faculty roles in education AI-enhanced education: exploring the impact of AI literacy on generation Z’s academic performance in Northern India Stakeholders’ involvement in economics and management programs quality assurance Experimental evidence for the efficacy of generative AI in improving students’ writing skills
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1