学生教学评价的文献综述

G. Ching
{"title":"学生教学评价的文献综述","authors":"G. Ching","doi":"10.1108/HEED-04-2018-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nCompetition among higher education institutions has pushed universities to expand their competitive advantages. Based on the assumption that the core functions of universities are academic, understanding the teaching–learning process with the help of student evaluation of teaching (SET) would seem to be a logical solution in increasing competitiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe current paper presents a narrative literature review examining how SETs work within the concept of service marketing, focusing specifically on the search, experience, and credence qualities of the provider. A review of the various factors that affect the collection of SETs is also included.\n\n\nFindings\nRelevant findings show the influence of students’ prior expectations on SET ratings. Therefore, teachers are advised to establish a psychological contract with the students at the start of the semester. Such an agreement should be negotiated, setting out the potential benefits of undertaking the course and a clear definition of acceptable performance within the class. Moreover, connections should be made between courses and subjects in order to provide an overall view of the entire program together with future career pathways.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nGiven the complex factors affecting SETs and the antecedents involved, there appears to be no single perfect tool to adequately reflect what is happening in the classroom. As different SETs may be needed for different courses and subjects, options such as faculty self-evaluation and peer-evaluation might be considered to augment current SETs.\n","PeriodicalId":32842,"journal":{"name":"Higher Education Evaluation and Development","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/HEED-04-2018-0009","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A literature review on the student evaluation of teaching\",\"authors\":\"G. Ching\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/HEED-04-2018-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nCompetition among higher education institutions has pushed universities to expand their competitive advantages. Based on the assumption that the core functions of universities are academic, understanding the teaching–learning process with the help of student evaluation of teaching (SET) would seem to be a logical solution in increasing competitiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe current paper presents a narrative literature review examining how SETs work within the concept of service marketing, focusing specifically on the search, experience, and credence qualities of the provider. A review of the various factors that affect the collection of SETs is also included.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nRelevant findings show the influence of students’ prior expectations on SET ratings. Therefore, teachers are advised to establish a psychological contract with the students at the start of the semester. Such an agreement should be negotiated, setting out the potential benefits of undertaking the course and a clear definition of acceptable performance within the class. Moreover, connections should be made between courses and subjects in order to provide an overall view of the entire program together with future career pathways.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nGiven the complex factors affecting SETs and the antecedents involved, there appears to be no single perfect tool to adequately reflect what is happening in the classroom. As different SETs may be needed for different courses and subjects, options such as faculty self-evaluation and peer-evaluation might be considered to augment current SETs.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":32842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Higher Education Evaluation and Development\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/HEED-04-2018-0009\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Higher Education Evaluation and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/HEED-04-2018-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Higher Education Evaluation and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/HEED-04-2018-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

目的高等教育机构之间的竞争促使大学扩大其竞争优势。基于大学的核心职能是学术的假设,借助学生对教学的评估来理解教学过程似乎是提高竞争力的合理解决方案。本文旨在讨论这些问题。设计/方法论/方法当前的论文提供了一篇叙述性文献综述,考察了SET如何在服务营销概念中发挥作用,特别关注提供商的搜索、体验和信任质量。还包括对影响SETs收集的各种因素的审查。相关研究结果显示了学生先前的期望对SET评分的影响。因此,建议教师在学期开始时与学生建立心理契约。应该协商达成这样的协议,列出参加课程的潜在好处,并明确定义课程内可接受的表现。此外,课程和科目之间应该建立联系,以便提供整个课程的整体视图以及未来的职业道路。原创性/价值考虑到影响SET的复杂因素和所涉及的前因,似乎没有一个完美的工具来充分反映课堂上发生的事情。由于不同的课程和科目可能需要不同的SET,因此可以考虑教师自我评估和同行评估等选项来增强当前的SET。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A literature review on the student evaluation of teaching
Purpose Competition among higher education institutions has pushed universities to expand their competitive advantages. Based on the assumption that the core functions of universities are academic, understanding the teaching–learning process with the help of student evaluation of teaching (SET) would seem to be a logical solution in increasing competitiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The current paper presents a narrative literature review examining how SETs work within the concept of service marketing, focusing specifically on the search, experience, and credence qualities of the provider. A review of the various factors that affect the collection of SETs is also included. Findings Relevant findings show the influence of students’ prior expectations on SET ratings. Therefore, teachers are advised to establish a psychological contract with the students at the start of the semester. Such an agreement should be negotiated, setting out the potential benefits of undertaking the course and a clear definition of acceptable performance within the class. Moreover, connections should be made between courses and subjects in order to provide an overall view of the entire program together with future career pathways. Originality/value Given the complex factors affecting SETs and the antecedents involved, there appears to be no single perfect tool to adequately reflect what is happening in the classroom. As different SETs may be needed for different courses and subjects, options such as faculty self-evaluation and peer-evaluation might be considered to augment current SETs.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信