Quality Assurance through a Continuous Curriculum Review (CCR) Strategy: Reflections on a pilot project

Smith, Carl; Herbert, Debra M. B.; Robinson, Wayne; Watt, Kerrianne

doi:10.1080/02602930120082050

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, such student self-evaluation is argued by some to have great potential for demonstrating development of generic skills, which are often difficult to assess with other standard, more formal measures and assessment tools (Moore and Hunter 1993;Smith et al 2001). The literature on self-reporting (Converse and Presser 1989;DeNisi and Shaw 1977;Hansford and Hattie 1982;Laing et al 1989;Pike 1995) suggests that validity of students' responses is maximised where five broad conditions are met: (1) when respondents can provide answers based on their current knowledge; (2) when questions are clear and unambiguous; (3) when questions relate to recent activity; (4) when respondents take the questions seriously; (5) when the items do not suffer the effect of social desirability bias.…”

Section: Weaknesses In the Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of the Learning Community in the Development of Discipline Knowledge and Generic Graduate Outcomes

Smith

Bath

2006

High Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we describe a study of learning outcomes at a research-intensive Australian university. Three graduate outcome variables (discipline knowledge and skills, communication and problem solving, and ethical and social sensitivity) are analysed separately using OLS regression and comparisons are made of the patterns of unique contributions from four independent variables (the CEQ Good Teaching and Learning Communities Scales, and two new, independent, scales for measuring Teaching and Program Quality). Further comparisons of these patterns are made across the Schools of the university. Results support the view that teaching and program quality are not the only important determinants of students' learning outcomes. It is concluded that, whilst it continues to be appropriate for universities to be concerned with the quality of their teaching and programs, the interactive, social and collaborative aspects of students' learning experiences, captured in the notion of the Learning Community, are also very important determinants of graduate outcomes, and so should be included in the focus of attempts at enhancing the quality of student learning.

show abstract

Section: Weaknesses In the Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of the Learning Community in the Development of Discipline Knowledge and Generic Graduate Outcomes

Smith

Bath

2006

High Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This began with the implementation of the norm-referenced guidelines system RIGs (Ratings Interpretation Guides) (Neumann 2000). Because of shortcomings in the RIGs approach, a Criterion Referenced Interpretation (CRI) (based on percentage agreement benchmarks) was developed (building on work done in a different context by Smith et al 2001) to supplement the information provided from RIGs. Together these systems of interpretive assistance allowed the commencement of Phase 3 after one year -the annual reporting and Responsive Invitation to a Teaching Enhancement Service (RITES).…”

Section: A Five-phase Programme Linking Evaluation and Staff Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building effectiveness in teaching through targeted evaluation and response: connecting evaluation to teaching improvement in higher education

Smith

2008

Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the development of a model for integrating student evaluation of teaching results with academic development opportunities, in new ways that take into account theoretical and practical developments in both fields. The model is described in terms of five phases or components: (1) the basic student evaluation system; (2) an interpretive guidance system that helps lecturers understand and interpret their results; (3) a longitudinal reporting system that initiates opportunities for staff to engage in personal and professional development in the context of a learning community; (4) a structured professional development programme that builds a faculty learning community, in which the members utilise extended cycles of evaluation based on (5) a comprehensive evaluation model designed to develop and encourage the collection of evaluation data from a variety of sources concerning the quality and impact of teaching: the teacher; student learning outcomes; student experience; and the teacher's peers.

show abstract

“…Given that the two levels targeted in curriculum improvements are typically the subject or degree course level these internal surveys usually target student experiences at this two levels of aggregation. At the degree course level many institutions have chosen to adapt the national survey for use with current students (Smith et al, 2001;Ginns et al, 2007) and in some cases have also put in place internal performance-based funding systems to encourage schools and facilities to act to improve performance (Barrie et al, 2005). In the case of the University of Sydney, a large campus-based, research-intensive university, data on current students' teaching and learning experiences is gathered by a modified version of the course experience questionnaire, called the student course experience questionnaire (SCEQ).…”

Section: The Use Of Student Evaluations Of Teaching For Quality Enhanmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Linking of National Teaching Performance Indicators to Improvements in Teaching and Learning in Classrooms

Barrie

Ginns

2007

Quality in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of data from student surveys has become a common element of universities' and governments' strategies to assure the quality of university teaching. With the introduction of a new government policy in Australia in 2005, these survey-derived teaching performance indicators now determine the distribution of many millions of dollars of funding and universities are understandably keen to enhance their performance on such measures. However, the strategies by which universities might achieve these improvements are not always readily apparent and there is a real possibility that reactive responses, based on opinion rather than evidence will be the result. The paper considers the particular challenge of linking this sort of national performance indicator data with similar student survey measures of 'quality' at the level of the actual subjects students take as part of their degree course. It provides an example of how this linking might be achieved through the design of local student feedback surveys with demonstrated theoretical and psychometric relationships to these national surveys. It also considers the organisational issues affecting how such information is interpreted and responded to, to usefully inform curriculum and teaching improvement. As such, the paper presents one strategy for institutions seeking to develop local, evidence-based strategies on the basis of predictive indicators of subsequent performance on national indicators of teaching performance.

show abstract

Quality Assurance through a Continuous Curriculum Review (CCR) Strategy: Reflections on a pilot project

Cited by 7 publications

References 6 publications

The Role of the Learning Community in the Development of Discipline Knowledge and Generic Graduate Outcomes

The Role of the Learning Community in the Development of Discipline Knowledge and Generic Graduate Outcomes

Building effectiveness in teaching through targeted evaluation and response: connecting evaluation to teaching improvement in higher education

The Linking of National Teaching Performance Indicators to Improvements in Teaching and Learning in Classrooms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About