学习和教学评估的制度方法:澳大利亚大学的部门扫描

IF 2.7 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management Pub Date : 2023-04-06 DOI:10.1080/1360080X.2023.2196646
Melinda Laundon, Samuel Cunningham, A. Cathcart
{"title":"学习和教学评估的制度方法:澳大利亚大学的部门扫描","authors":"Melinda Laundon, Samuel Cunningham, A. Cathcart","doi":"10.1080/1360080X.2023.2196646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Teaching evaluation is deeply entrenched in institutional quality assurance and is a feature of a range of policies including academic recruitment, promotion, and performance management. Universities must ensure that evaluation practices meet regulatory requirements, while balancing student voice and wellbeing. There is extensive literature examining the validity, reliability, and bias of student surveys, but limited focus on institutional evaluation strategies and what constitutes best practice. This study analyses and reports on the teaching evaluation strategies and practices of Australian and New Zealand universities. All 29 participating institutions use standardised and centrally deployed surveys to evaluate teaching and participated in external student experience surveys to benchmark nationally. Comparisons are provided between the strategic intent of evaluation; survey practices, technology, analysis, and reporting; and the use of other nonsurvey methods. The study informs higher education institutions’ evaluation strategy, policies, and practice and provides an agenda for reframing approaches to evaluation of teaching.","PeriodicalId":51489,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management","volume":"45 1","pages":"511 - 528"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional approaches to evaluation of learning and teaching: A sector scan of Australasian universities\",\"authors\":\"Melinda Laundon, Samuel Cunningham, A. Cathcart\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1360080X.2023.2196646\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Teaching evaluation is deeply entrenched in institutional quality assurance and is a feature of a range of policies including academic recruitment, promotion, and performance management. Universities must ensure that evaluation practices meet regulatory requirements, while balancing student voice and wellbeing. There is extensive literature examining the validity, reliability, and bias of student surveys, but limited focus on institutional evaluation strategies and what constitutes best practice. This study analyses and reports on the teaching evaluation strategies and practices of Australian and New Zealand universities. All 29 participating institutions use standardised and centrally deployed surveys to evaluate teaching and participated in external student experience surveys to benchmark nationally. Comparisons are provided between the strategic intent of evaluation; survey practices, technology, analysis, and reporting; and the use of other nonsurvey methods. The study informs higher education institutions’ evaluation strategy, policies, and practice and provides an agenda for reframing approaches to evaluation of teaching.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51489,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"511 - 528\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2023.2196646\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2023.2196646","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要教学评估深深植根于机构质量保证,是一系列政策的特征,包括学术招聘、晋升和绩效管理。大学必须确保评估实践符合监管要求,同时平衡学生的发言权和幸福感。有大量文献研究了学生调查的有效性、可靠性和偏差,但对机构评估策略和最佳实践的构成关注有限。本研究分析并报告了澳大利亚和新西兰大学的教学评估策略和实践。所有29所参与机构都使用标准化和集中部署的调查来评估教学,并参与外部学生体验调查,以在全国范围内进行基准调查。对评价的战略意图进行了比较;调查实践、技术、分析和报告;以及使用其他非调查方法。该研究为高等教育机构的评估策略、政策和实践提供了信息,并为重新制定教学评估方法提供了议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Institutional approaches to evaluation of learning and teaching: A sector scan of Australasian universities
ABSTRACT Teaching evaluation is deeply entrenched in institutional quality assurance and is a feature of a range of policies including academic recruitment, promotion, and performance management. Universities must ensure that evaluation practices meet regulatory requirements, while balancing student voice and wellbeing. There is extensive literature examining the validity, reliability, and bias of student surveys, but limited focus on institutional evaluation strategies and what constitutes best practice. This study analyses and reports on the teaching evaluation strategies and practices of Australian and New Zealand universities. All 29 participating institutions use standardised and centrally deployed surveys to evaluate teaching and participated in external student experience surveys to benchmark nationally. Comparisons are provided between the strategic intent of evaluation; survey practices, technology, analysis, and reporting; and the use of other nonsurvey methods. The study informs higher education institutions’ evaluation strategy, policies, and practice and provides an agenda for reframing approaches to evaluation of teaching.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: The Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management is an international journal of professional experience and ideas in post-secondary education. It is a must read for those seeking to influence educational policy making. The journal also aims to be of use to managers and senior academic staff who seek to place their work and interests in a broad context and influence educational policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the notion of feminine leadership in Kuwait’s private universities Using self-determination theory as a lens to create sustainable futures for teaching and education focused academics in higher education in Australia What makes a Thesis by Publication? An international study of policy requirements and restrictions Growth mindsets in academics and academia: a review of influence and interventions Academic excellence initiatives: global perspectives
×
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