Beyond Student Evaluation of Teaching: Identifying and addressing academic staff development needs

2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy Ballantyne ◽  
Jill Borthwick ◽  
Jan Packer
Keyword(s):  
Staff Development ◽  
Student Evaluation ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Student Evaluation Of Teaching ◽  
Academic Staff Development ◽  
Evaluation Of Teaching

scholarly journals Internationalizing teacher education curricula: opportunities for academic staff development

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-169
Author(s):  
Mónica Lourenço
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Staff Development ◽  
Global Education ◽  
Teacher Educators ◽  
Teaching Practice ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Development Program ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Academic Staff Development ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this study is to understand the impact of a collaborative workshop, aimed to support teacher educators in embedding a “global outlook” in the curriculum on their perceived professional development. Design/methodology/approach The workshop included working sessions, during a period of 13 months, and was structured as participatory action research, according to which volunteer academics designed, developed and evaluated global education projects in their course units. Data were gathered through a focus group session, conducted with the teacher educators at a final stage of the workshop, and analyzed according to the principles of thematic analysis. Findings Results of the analysis suggest that the workshop presented a meaningful opportunity for teacher educators to reconstruct their knowledge and teaching practice to (re)discover the importance of collaborative work and to assume new commitments to themselves and to others. Originality/value The study addresses a gap in the existing literature on academic staff development in internationalization of the curriculum, focusing on the perceptions of teacher educators’, whose voices have been largely silent in research in the field. The study concludes with a set of recommendations for a professional development program in internationalization of the curriculum.

scholarly journals Lessons Learned from Research on Student Evaluation of Teaching in Higher Education

2021 ◽  
pp. 237-256
Author(s):  
Bob Uttl
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Effective Teaching ◽  
Teaching Effectiveness ◽  
Student Evaluation ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Student Evaluation Of Teaching ◽  
Knowledge Class ◽  
Teaching Awards ◽  
Student Preference ◽  
Evaluation Of Teaching

AbstractIn higher education, anonymous student evaluation of teaching (SET) ratings are used to measure faculty’s teaching effectiveness and to make high-stakes decisions about hiring, firing, promotion, merit pay, and teaching awards. SET have many desirable properties: SET are quick and cheap to collect, SET means and standard deviations give aura of precision and scientific validity, and SET provide tangible seemingly objective numbers for both high-stake decisions and public accountability purposes. Unfortunately, SET as a measure of teaching effectiveness are fatally flawed. First, experts cannot agree what effective teaching is. They only agree that effective teaching ought to result in learning. Second, SET do not measure faculty’s teaching effectiveness as students do not learn more from more highly rated professors. Third, SET depend on many teaching effectiveness irrelevant factors (TEIFs) not attributable to the professor (e.g., students’ intelligence, students’ prior knowledge, class size, subject). Fourth, SET are influenced by student preference factors (SPFs) whose consideration violates human rights legislation (e.g., ethnicity, accent). Fifth, SET are easily manipulated by chocolates, course easiness, and other incentives. However, student ratings of professors can be used for very limited purposes such as formative feedback and raising alarm about ineffective teaching practices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document