The changing2 nature of teaching
Sid Nair
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Purpose-Teaching and unit evaluations surveys are used to assess the quality of teaching and the quality of the unit of study. An analysis of teaching and unit evaluation survey practices in Australian universities suggests significant changes. One key change discussed in the paper is the shift from voluntary to mandatory use of surveys with the results used to assess and reward academic staff performance. The change in the direction is largely driven by the introduction of performance-based funding as part of quality assurance arrangements. The paper aims to outline the current trends and changes and the implications in the future such as increased scrutiny of teaching and intrusion to academic autonomy. Design/methodology/approach-The paper is based on the analysis of current teaching and unit evaluation practices across the Australian university sector. The paper presents the case of an Australian university that has introduced performance-based reward using various measures to assess and reward academic staff such as the outcome of student satisfaction surveys. The analysis of external quality audit findings related to teacher and unit evaluations is also presented. Findings-The findings suggest a shift in trend from the use of voluntary to mandatory tools to assess and reward quality teaching. The case of an Australian university outlined in the paper and the approach taken by seven other universities is largely driven by performance-based funding. One of the key concerns for many in higher education is the intrusion of academic autonomy with increased focus on outcomes and less emphasis on resources needed to produce excellence in learning and teaching and research. The increased reliance on student happiness as a measure of educational quality raises the questions on whether high student satisfaction would strengthen academic rigour and student attainment of learning outcomes and generic skills which are seen as key factors in graduate exit standards. Practical implications-The renewal of quality assurance and performance-based funding using student satisfaction as a measure of educational quality will result in increased use of student voice to assess learning and teaching outcomes. Such direction will increase the accountability on academics to improve student experience and the measures will be used to assess academic staff performance. Originality/value-The paper outlines the trends and changes in the teacher and unit evaluations in Australian universities and its implications in the future. The paper also provides a case of an Australian university that has recently made teacher and unit evaluations compulsory with the results used in academic staff annual performance review and linking reward with performance outcomes.
Related papers
Using qualitative data to prove and improve quality in Australian higher education
Evidence based Decision …, 2008
The emergence of contesting motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education
Student feedback-based evaluation performs a significant social role in framing perceptions of the quality of teaching in contemporary Australian higher education. Yet its emergence is a relatively recent phenomenon, having only been in widespread application since the mid-1980s. The early manifestations of student feedback-based evaluation came with newly emerging academic development units with a motive to enhance the quality of local teaching and to afford student retention. However, new motives for assailing student feedback evolved with the rapid growth in student numbers, the introduction of student fees and heightened levels of inter-institutional competition for students. As a result, student feedback-based evaluation progressively became also a powerful proxy measure of teaching and curricula quality assurance at an individual, institutional and sectoral level [Blackmore, J. (2009). Academic pedagogies, quality logics and performative universities: Evaluating teaching and what students want. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 857–872. doi:10.1080/03075070902898664]. This generated critical tensions between the seminal motive of student feedback around quality improvement, and the rising quality assurances discourses, academic performance management demands and institutional marketing. In this paper, the complex social origins of these competing motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education will be explored and analysed. It is argued this provides an important means of understanding the polarising effects of student feedback-based evaluation in Australian universities.
Exploring the implications of student feedback-based evaluation for the development of university educators
Student feedback-based evaluation is a familiar feature of the contemporary global higher education landscape (Chalmers, 2007; Harvey, 2003; Johnson, 2000; Kulik, 2001). Student evaluation now acts as a powerful proxy for assuring the quality of teaching, courses and programs across diverse discipline and qualification frameworks. The data it generates increasingly guides significant judgments about the quality of teaching practices, as well as academic appointment, performance and promotion (Harvey, 2003). It is therefore more critical in shaping understandings of what constitutes effective pedagogical practices in university teaching environments. However, at the same time, student feedback-based evaluation also remains largely a frequently unwelcome fringe dweller in current academic teaching life, often responded to with scepticism and unease (Edstrom, 2008). For many academics, such scepticism arises around the real capacity of student feedback to effectively mediate the increasingly complex environments of higher education learning. Indeed, it has been argued that despite its considerable and influential institutional power, student feedback is widely perceived by academics to be inherently narrow and superficial (Edstrom, 2008; Kulik, 2001; Schuck, Gordon, & Buchanan, 2008). This paper reports on the empirical outcomes of case study-based action research conducted in a major Australian university, which was developed around identifying the tensions emerging around conventional quantitative forms of student evaluation in two major university teaching programs. These case studies suggested that the contradictions around the role of the student voice—contested between quality improvement of pedagogies and quality assurance of educational 'products' is having an increasing destabilising impact of how the nature of pedagogical work is understood. It is asserted that this outcome has potentially significant implications for those involved in both initial and ongoing professional development of academic teachers in universities. Introduction Quantitative student feedback-based evaluation is being increasingly used in universities to assess teacher and program quality, and as a means of framing local and institutional – level academic development work. The influence of the student voice as a proxy for teaching quality has grown exponentially with the explosion of university rankings and league tables. As a consequence, it is also increasingly powerful as a form of objectified evidence for appointment, tenure and promotion (Darwin, 2015; Wellsman, 2006). This has meant student evaluation has transformed from its originating role as an educative tool for the development of academic teaching and teachers, to something framed within an explicit quality assurance and accountability ambition. This has inevitably had significant implications for the role and influence the student voice has had on initial teacher education and continuing academic development practices within universities. In order to understand the implications of student evaluation on the nature of understandings of contemporary academic work, two case studies conducted over three semesters were undertaken in a major Australian university. The case studies were framed
Understanding, recognising and rewarding teaching quality in higher education: an exploration of the impact and implications of the Teaching Excellence Framework
Understanding, recognising and rewarding teaching quality in higher education: an exploration of the impact and implications of the Teaching Excellence Framework, 2019
This report presents the findings and recommendations of an independent research study on the impact and implications of the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) on staff working in higher education (HE) provision in the UK. The study captures the views and experiences of over 6,000 UCU members working in universities and college-based HE providers in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, along with the perspectives of the Chair of the TEF assessment panel and representation from the National Union of Students (NUS). The introduction of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) in 2016 marked a key turning point for HE in the UK. Never before has the ‘quality’ of HE teaching been subjected to such external scrutiny, culminating in high stakes assessment outcomes for institutions through the TEF’s medal categories of gold, silver and bronze. HE providers are still very much coming to terms with what the TEF means for them and how best to organise their institutional responses. Thus the TEF and the whole debate around the quality of teaching in HE is not only live and topical but equally one that continues to raise more questions than answers across the sector. Between February and November 2018, a team of academic researchers from Birmingham City University (BCU), commissioned by the University and College Union (UCU), carried out an independent study aimed at plugging the gap in knowledge and research relating to the impact and implications of the TEF on those working in HE. The study aimed to investigate UCU members’ awareness, involvement and perception of the TEF and its impact on them. The project was commissioned in anticipation of UCU’s contribution to the Independent Review of the TEF in 2019. UCU also recognised the need for staff perspectives to be made more visible in the Review, which has not been the case in the development and implementation of the TEF to date, as they have largely been excluded from the process. Thus one of the unique contributions of this report to debates around teaching excellence and the TEF in particular is the inclusion of the voices and experiences of the HE workforce who are most directly affected by this policy reform. A distinctive strength of this report and the research project it encapsulates is the scale and breadth of the sample it captures. To date, no other study has harnessed the views of such a large representation of staff working in HE provision about the TEF. The TEF and how it has impacted on the professional lives of the HE workforce was a subject about which the participants in this project had a lot to say. This report brings together a wealth of perspectives, opinions and situated experiences generated in the project data through the voices of those directly involved in and affected by the TEF. This report has drawn on a range of evidence collected during the research project to inform its findings and recommendations. These include: 1) a literature review on teaching excellence and cognate publications; 2) an online survey of university and college-based HE staff across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; 3) a series of national strategic seminars hosted in England and Scotland and 4) interviews with representatives from the TEF assessment panel and the NUS.
Evaluation of Teaching Performance in Higher Education: Students Perspectives and Teaching Management Indicators
INTED2017 Proceedings, 2017
This study is part of a research project whose main objective is to identify, select, evaluate and synthesize the available evidence on Quality Indicators in Higher Education. There is, an advance in the establishment of Quality evaluation standards in Higher Education. Higher education institutions have undergone profound changes in the last 40 years, in particular in the Teacher Performance Evaluation. In the recent past, such as massification and democratization, were necessary and useful, although it is still necessary to anticipate structural and functional changes that increase the quality and social equity of Higher Education. In this work, the parameters resulting from pedagogical surveys in a Portuguese higher education institution in the north of the country will be presented, surveys for the 2015/2016 school year, presented to 1751 students, in a total of 11 degrees and 18 master's degrees. It is analyzed the performance of a group of 68 teachers, working full time, teachers evaluated by students. This paper presents the instruments made profitable by the students in the last three academic years, allowing the identification of the indicators regarding the qualifications and competences of the faculty in the following areas: research, teaching, university management and transfer and knowledge valorization. This paper describes the procedures resulting from the descriptive analysis (frequency analysis, descriptive measures and association measures) and inferential analysis (ANOVA one-way, MANOVA one-way, MANOVA two-way and correlation analysis) discussing the results regarding the impact of teacher performance on student satisfaction.
Monitoring and Measuring Teaching Excellence in Higher Education: From Contrived Competition to Collective Collaboration
Teaching Excellence in Higher Education, 2017
Achieving Excellence in Academic Quality Management with Educational Audit in University Learning
2014
Educational auditing seeks to improve, the performance of academic staff, technical staff, students and other non teaching staff by engaging them in active learning through the processes of identifying key questions and responding to critical appraisal, leading to personal and institutional improvement. The climate in which this organizational development can blossom has to be positive and supportive and therefore non-threatening. The intention should be to move to a philosophy where the educational audit becomes an internally led continuing activity which seeks to make more explicit and supportive the concept of professional accountability and leads to a continual improvement in the quality of service provided. Economy, Efficiency and Effectiveness are the key indicators of Quality. Performance evaluation in Educational System has to be balance of measures of and judgment about both efficiency (the relationships of inputs to outcomes) and effectiveness (the relationships of objectives to outcomes). This paper illustrates the possible approaches to the concept of educational effectiveness and its measurement
Towards a Framework for Evaluating Quality Teaching in Higher Education
2015
The three main functions in Higher Education (HE) are teaching, research and community engagement (Vardi and Quin 2011). These three are equally important. However, recognition of teaching and community engagement currently seem to enjoy less prominence than research. This may be due to a lack of a proper framework in evaluating the other two.The aim of this article is to initiate a discourse on the development of a framework teaching evaluation in HE. We present: 1) a rationale for the development of a framework for the evaluation of teaching in higher education; 2) a design for a framework for evaluating teaching and 3) an exemplar for such a framework. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4s1p223
Academic standards and the assessment of student learning: Some current issues in Australian higher education
Tertiary Education and Management, 2003
This paper reports a recent national study by the Centre for the Study of Higher Education into contemporary practices in student assessment in Australian higher education and the issues of quality assurance facing the sector in the light of public speculation and concern about academic standards. A major issue emerging from the project is the importance of defining the relationships between approaches to student assessment and grading, quality assurance and academic standards. The paper discusses the issues surrounding academic standards in Australia in the context of the new national framework for higher education quality assurance and the role of the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA). RENEWED DISCUSSION ABOUT ACADEMIC STANDARDS IN AUSTRALIAN HIGHER EDUCATION In April 2002, the Australian government launched a major review of Australian higher education with a Ministerial discussion paper, Higher Education at the Crossroads (Nelson 2002). The Minister's framework for consultation was sweeping, canvassing the quality of learning experiences and outcomes, equity of access, institutional specialisation, governance and management, and possible new funding arrangements. One issue given particular prominence in Crossroads was the question of academic standards and the processes for assuring the standards of Australian awards: Over the years there have been allegations that university standards are falling. Some critics contend that some universities now offer courses lacking intellectual rigour and that there has been a 'dumbing down' of universities. There are also concerns about a deterioration in the calibre of students entering university but the available evidence does not support this. There have been claims that 'softmarking' has become common practice, and the quality of education has generally been compromised.
Related papers
Indicators of university teaching and learning quality
INDICATORS, 2008
Quality in Higher Education
Higher education institutions throughout the United Kingdom are now scrutinised by assessors from the Quality Assurance Agency. The Agency’s mission is to promote public con® dence that quality of provision and standards of awards in higher education are being safeguarded and enhanced. This paper focuses initially on the subject review results and reports for the mathematics, statistics and operational research aspect of provision. Of the six areas that are graded, the one which consistently produces the poorest results is quality management and enhancement. The most common reasons why institutions lose marks in this category are identi® ed and the second biggest area of weakness, namely, seeking and implementing student views, is examined in the context of a survey carried out by the Educational Development Unit at the University of Ulster. It is evident that student evaluation, whether of courses, teaching quality or the overall student experience, is extremely important and has a signi® cant role to play in the quality assurance process. Finally, recent initiatives are reported that attempt to raise the pro® le of teaching and learning and reward staff committed to excellence in teaching.
Implementing a Teaching Performance Assessment: An Australian Case Study
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 2020
This paper reports on the implementation of a Teaching Performance Assessment (TPA), a component of graduation recently introduced into the teaching workforce in Australia. The TPA typically requires graduates to demonstrate that they can plan, implement, assess and reflect on a series of lessons given to school students. This case study used grounded theory to analyse the initial implementation of a TPA at an Australian university, based on interviews, student focus groups, and a classroom readiness survey. We investigated the TPA's contribution to final-year pre-service teachers' learning and professional readiness. We conclude that the TPA, as a threshold task, is broadly beneficial to the profession and graduating teachers, and may strengthen professional bonds between schools and universities. We also warn of TPA-related fragilities and its potential to reinforce populist notions of 'teaching as telling' and to test surface-level quizknowledge to the exclusion of deeper, attitudinal learning outcomes.
Educational Monitoring, Evaluation and Quality Management Submitted to
Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement, but this impact can be either positive or negative. Feedback has no effect in a vacuum; to be powerful in its effect, there must be a learning context to which feedback is addressed. It is but part of the teaching process and is that which happens after a student has responded to initial instruction when information is provided regarding some aspect(s) of the student's task performance (Hattie.J, Timperely.H; 2007) In most countries with higher education systems the practice of routinely monitoring satisfaction levels of stakeholders is now well established. The most visible feedback tools utilized by universities to measure levels of satisfaction are surveys, both paperbased questionnaires and online versions. (Elassy.N, 2013) Collecting student feedback data on individual classroom practice is a routine part of good practice in most universities across the world. The UK has however, been behind many countries such as Australia and the USA in collecting such annual student survey data. (Reid, K; 2010) One of the forms of collecting student and other stakeholder feedback has been through evaluation surveys. The utility of evaluation surveys as a diagnostic tool for quality assurance and enhancement purposes has been highlighted; further Bennett et al (2006) identified a number of ways in which universities have approached the process of better understanding and meeting the needs of their students through student evaluation. Some of the purposes for employing evaluation surveys include; Providing diagnostic feedback to faculties about their teaching that can aid in the development and improvement of teaching.
Student Evaluations and the Performance of University Teaching: Teaching to the Test
LEARNing Landscapes, 2020
What do course evaluation questionnaires (CEQs) do to our teaching and to our perceptions of ourselves as teachers? We are all early- to mid-career academics at a midsized Canadian university who explore how course evaluation questionnaires have affected our academic identities. By using autoethnography and critical reflection, we examine how CEQs shape and restrict our teaching identities as well as the identities of our students. Alternative ways of assessing teaching excellence and promoting communities of inquiry are explored.
A Decade of Student Evaluation of Teaching: Case Study of an Evolving System
Student evaluation of teaching is now an accepted, even expected, activity of Australian universities. This paper discusses the first decade of an institutional student evaluation of teaching system and the issues which accompany its introduction, success and ongoing development. The gradual evolution of student evaluation of teaching in this university highlight the complexity of such systems and the need for long term institutional planning commitment and resourcing. The paper concludes with a discussion of issues which will face institutional policy makers in relation to student evaluation of teaching systems.
Student evaluation of teaching: keeping in touch with reality
Quality in Higher Education, 2012
Student evaluation of teaching is commonplace in many universities and may be the predominant input into the performance evaluation of staff and organisational units. This paper used publicly available student evaluation of teaching data to present examples of where institutional responses to evaluation processes appeared to be educationally ineffective, and where the pursuit of the 'right' student evaluation results appears to have been mistakenly equated with the aim of improved teaching and learning. If the vast resources devoted to student evaluation of teaching are to be effective, then the data produced by student evaluation systems must lead to real and sustainable improvements in teaching quality and student learning, rather than becoming an end in itself.
Student Evaluation as an Impetus for Quality Teaching and Learning in Higher Education Institutions: The Experience of Bishop Stuart University
2020
In the context of sustained growth and diversification of Higher Education Systems, civil society is increasingly concerned about the quality of programmers offered to students. As a result, there is an increase in public assessments and international comparisons of Higher Education Institutions, not only within the higher education sector but in the general media (OECD, 2008). However, evaluation methods tend to overemphasize research and the use of research performance as a yardstick of an institution's value. Although this is very paramount in academia, it has got insignificant contribution to the quality of graduates who precede from such breeding grounds. There is need to appreciate the fact that the quality of graduates is largely determined by the way they are taught thus calling for a rationalized intended approach to the evaluation of the quality of teaching and learning in higher education institutions (Kaneko, 2008). The current study investigated the quality of teaching in Bishop Stuart University in Uganda with the aim of encouraging practices that could enhance the quality of teaching and thereby checking the quality of graduates. The study adopted a cross sectional comparative study design using both quantitative and qualitative research approaches. This study was conducted at Bishop Stuart University (BSU), Mbarara in the Faculty of Education where a comparison of the teaching and learning process of students in two programme sessions of study (recess or distance learning and regular sessions) was carried out. Randomized samples of 362 out of a population of 1501 and 78 out of a population of 201 students were obtained from both the regular and recess sessions respectively for the quantitative data. An evaluation was done of the teaching and learning process in the two programme sessions in the classes taught by the same lecturers using the same instrument which had 9 items related to lecturers' punctuality, attendance, mastery of subject content, teaching methods, enthusiasm and commitment, lecturers' being dependable and approachable, respect and meaningful feedback. The findings thereof were mutually exclusive; it was found that the lecturers from students of the regular programme had very good scores whereas from students of recess or distance learning programme, the same lecturers had low scores. This finding compelled the researchers to find out why this was so. They thus conducted a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and three Key Informants' Interviews (KIIs) which revealed that the programme session conditions and terms of work affected the teaching and learning processes. It was concluded that under a given outlay of conditions, the same lecturers performed differently. It was thus recommended that using both qualitative and quantitative data approaches, there should be continuous student evaluations in ensuring effective teaching and learning, particularly for students in higher institutions of learning.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.