Attitudes of University Lecturers towards Students’ Evaluation of the Teaching Process
Abstract
The objective of the paper was to examine the attitudes of university lecturers towards evaluation of the teaching process by students. In addition, we were interested in whether there is an effect of an academic title (assistant, assistant professor, associate, and full professor) or years of work experience on the nature of that attitude. In order to investigate this, we constructed a scale of attitudes. The scale was separated in three dimensions: Invariability of student’s role, Indication of the limitations of evaluation, and Student incompetence in evaluation. The survey was conducted on a total of 287 university lecturers. The results showed that lecturers have a moderate to slightly positive attitude towards the evaluation on all three dimensions. Additionally, the lecturers with more years of experience exhibited a more negative attitude on the dimension of Invariability of student role in relation to the lecturers with less than 5 years of work experience. There were no differences between teaching assistants and senior lecturers (assistant, associate, and full professors) in the attitude about the evaluation of the teaching process by students.
The results obtained in this way are in unison with the results of previous research and suggest that on the one hand, lecturers see positive aspects of evaluation in the form of active involvement of students in the teaching process, but on the other hand there is no confidence in the evaluation (negative side of evaluation) and the objectivity of the evaluation process itself.References
Beck, C., Hart, D., Kosnik, C. (2002). The teaching standards movement and current teaching practices. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 27 (2/3), 175–194. DOI: 10.2307/1602219
Blair, E., & Noel K. V. (2014). Improving higher education practice through student evaluation systems: is the student voice being heard? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39 (7), 879–894.
Bloxham, S. & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: A Practical Guide. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Бранковић, Д. и Партало, Д. (2015). Евалуација квалитета процеса и исхода универзитетске наставе. Научни скуп „Настава и учење – евалуација васпитно-образовног рада“ стр. 85–98.
Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Constructs in Student Ratings of Instructors. In: H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson, D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The Role of Constructs in Psychological and Educational Measurement (277–297). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Давидовић-Ракић, Ј. (2010). Ставови универзитетских предавача према студентској евалуацији наставе (необјављена докторска дисертација). Универзитет Источно Сарајево, Филозофски факултет.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1986). A proposal for evaluation in the teaching profession. The Elementary School Journal, 86 (4), 531–551.
Дунђеровић, Р., Радовановић, И., Леви, С. (2009). Управљање у разреду-психолошки и педагошки аспекти управљачке функције наставника. Београд: Учитељски факултет.
Zhao, J. & Gallant., D. J. (2012). Student Evaluation of Instruction in Higher Education: Exploring Issues of Validity and Reliability. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37 (2), 227–235.
Јанковић, А. & Јарић, И. (2009). Услови рада наставног особља на Универзитету у Београду: евалуација рада наставника. Филозофија и друштво, 20 (3), 3–22.
Jerković, I., Gavrilov-Jerković, V., Mihić, I., Mihić, V., Petrović, J., Zotović, M. (2011). Dometi reforme obrazovanja u Srbiji. U: V. Katić (Ur.), Trendovi razvoja: Evropa 2020: Društvo zasnovano na razvoju (1–4). Novi Sad: Fakultet tehničkih nauka.
Jorgic, D. (2008). Pedagogical evaluation and self-correction. Filozofski fakultet: Banja Luka.
Kundačina, M. (2003). Funkcija evaluativnih istraživanja u reformi obrazovanja. Godišnjak za psihologiju, 2, 45–56.
Levin, B. (2000). Putting Students at the Centre in Education Reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1, 155–172.
Marsh, H. W. (1984). Students' evaluations of university teaching: Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential baises, and utility. Journal of educational psychology, 76 (5), 707.
Milanowski, A. T. & Heneman, H. G. (2001). Assessment of teacher reactions to a standards-based teacher evaluation system: A pilot study. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15 (3), 193–212.
Pavlović, N. (2016). Evaluation of teachers’ work in high education institutions of Serbia. Ekonomika, 62 (2), 85–96.
Peterson, P. L. & Comeaux, M. A. (1990). Evaluating the systems: Teachers’ perspectives on teacher evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12 (1), 3–24.
Pešikan, A. (2012). Standardi u obrazovanju kao način podizanja kvaliteta obrazovanja. Inovacije u nastavi, 25 (1), 5–22.
Reynolds, M. (1999). Standards and professional practice: The TTA and initial teacher training. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47 (3), 247–260.
Sarah, J. S., Spiller, D., Terry, S., Harris, T., Deaker, L., Kennedy, J. (2013). Tertiary teachers and student evaluations: never the twain shall meet? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38, DOI:10.1080/02602938.2013.767876,
Smith, C. (2008). Building effectiveness in teaching through targeted evaluation and response: connecting evaluation to teaching improvement in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33 (5), 517–533.
Shechtman, Z. (1989). The contribution of interpersonal behavior evaluation to the prediction of initial teaching success: A research note. Teaching and Teacher Evaluation, 5, 243–248.
Franceško, M., Đurđić, S., Kosanović, B. (2011). Evaluacija rada nastavnika: izazovi sprovođenja i merni instrumenti. U: V. Katić (ur.), Trendovi razvoja: Evropa 2020: društvo zasnovano na znanju (1–5). Novi Sad: Fakultet tehničkih nauka.
Хавелка, Н. (2005). Увод у психологију међуљудских односа у образовању. Београд: Центар за примењену психологију.
Clark, R. J. & Fischetti, J. C. (1987). Candidate selection in a fifth-year teacher education recruitment model: A multi-stage partnership approach. Journal of Teacher Education, 38, 26–30.
The details about the publication policy, including copyright and licensing, are available at: