Quality Systems for a Responsible Management in the University

Abstract

Literature on university quality systems and teaching performance measurement addresses only tangentially the neutrality of measurement instruments in relation to the different teaching methodologies. This chapter explores this issue posing the following question: Should we use identical assessment instruments on teachers who apply different teaching methodologies? The authors attempt to answer this question by focusing the debate on the two most widespread methodological approaches in the university: the behaviourist and the constructivist. The study addresses this task from the perspective of measurement instruments with behavioural episodes. The authors present two instruments to assess teaching performance: one aimed at evaluating teachers who use behaviourist approaches and the other aimed at assessing teachers who apply constructivist approaches. The work reveals divergences between the two questionnaires addressing the importance of using different teaching appraisal instruments to measure, responsibly, the performance of teachers who apply different teaching methodologies.

Assessing Teaching Effectiveness in Blended Learning Methodologies: Validity and Reliability of an Instrument with Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales

“…In accordance with different authors, teaching effectiveness can be defined as the efficacy and productivity of the lecturers in the performance of their duties [ 84 , 85 , 86 ]. Even though it is true that instruments used to measure teaching effectiveness adopt different formats [ 87 , 88 ], even taking qualitative approaches [ 89 ], in most cases they are presented in the form of Likert scales. Studies such as those of Muñoz-Cantero et al [ 90 ], González-López and López-Cámara [ 91 ], Lizasoain-Hernández et al [ 16 ], or Leguey-Galan et al [ 92 ], among others, corroborate that almost all universities use Likert questionnaires for this purpose.…”