Abstract
Teachers' teaching level evaluation is an important component in classroom teaching and professional promotion in the institutions of higher learning in China. Many self-made questionnaires are currently being administered to Chinese college students to evaluate teachers' classroom teaching performance. Quite often, due to the absence of strong educational, and psychological measurements and theoretical foundations for these questionnaires, their dependability remains open to doubt. Evaluation time points, the number of students, major type, and curriculum type were examined in relation to college students' perceptions on their teachers' classroom teaching performance, using Teachers' Teaching Level Evaluation Scale for Colleges (TTLES-C). Data were collected in a sample of 556 students at two time points from three Chinese universities and were analyzed using multivariate generalizability theory. Results showed that evaluations at the beginning of the spring semester produced better outcomes than did evaluations at the end of the fall semester, and 20 student evaluators were sufficient to ensure good dependability. Results also revealed that the evaluation dependability of science curriculum appeared higher than that of liberal arts curriculum. Recommendations were discussed on the evaluation criteria and mode.
Highlights
College teachers’ classroom teaching level is related to students’ future success, their professional development
We developed the Teachers’ Teaching Level Evaluation Scale for Colleges (TTLES-C) to evaluate Chinese college teachers’ teaching level
G Study The estimated G study variance and covariance components for the (s:t) × i◦ design are presented in Table 4 for the two time points data (i.e., T1, the end of the first semester, as can be seen in the upper part of the table; T2, the beginning of the second semester, see the lower part)
Summary
College teachers’ classroom teaching level is related to students’ future success, their professional development. Evaluations of teaching performance often have two primary purposes: administrative decision making and teaching improvement (McKeachie, 1997; Pike, 1998). Most universities exclusively use student evaluation of teaching (SET) instruments to provide information for the instructors to improve the quality of teaching. In the U.S, institutions of higher education use some types of student evaluations of teaching instrument as a means of assessing instructors’ instructional performance in courses (Dommeyer et al, 2002). Within this context, SETs affect both annual teaching performance and salary decisions as well as promotion and tenure decisions. The validity and credibility of SETs data become important
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
