The assessment of teaching in higher education: A critical retrospect and a proposal

Johnson, Henry C.; Rhodes, Dent M.; Rumery, Robert E.

doi:10.1007/bf01569168

Cited by 21 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is not a single methodological error pointed out by Johnson et al (1975a) that this method does not involve. It is conceived and focused exclusively in terms of isolated, individual classroom activities.…”

Section: Case Study: the University Of Melbournementioning

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Teaching quality and student satisfaction: nexus or simulacrum?

Beecham¹

2009

London Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality has clear meanings when associated with specific phenomena. The relative nature of quality in commercial contexts, specifically in relation to manufactured goods, has been studied. In service industries there is no satisfactory indicator of quality. The Likert-scale questionnaire does not allow the researcher to distinguish between spontaneous and constructed responses. The penetration of the premises of human capital theory and services marketing theory in the higher education sector has introduced inapplicable assumptions about and instruments of quality control. A study of one Australian university's re-definition of itself as a market-oriented institution suggests that long-standing criticisms of the use of student questionnaires as a measure of teaching quality are well-founded.

show abstract

Section: Case Study: the University Of Melbournementioning

confidence: 89%

“…'Evaluation' is substituted for 'description' in the first point, just as Johnson et al (1975a) described, and in the second point is made an instrument of managerial control.…”

Section: Case Study: the University Of Melbournementioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching quality and student satisfaction: nexus or simulacrum?

Beecham¹

2009

London Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…What Rutherford (1982) calls the 'revitalisation' of teaching involves ascertaining what students say about the teaching they receive (Feldens 1986;Jones 1981) and course evaluation (Hofman 1983). The assessment of teaching in higher education (Johnson 1975) has wider implications for the faculty concerned with regard to professional development and career advancement. There is no dearth of experiment; student-led discussion groups (de Volder et al 1985) and other forms of'de-lecturing' (Jackson et al 1985), case-study approaches (Romm and Mahler 1986) and self-study courses (Bridge 1976) have all been advocated.…”

Section: The Subject Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two decades of higher education

Ross

1992

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Questions are asked about who should contribute to the evaluation (students, peers, consultants, administrators?) (Seldin and Wakin, 1974;Goldschmid, 1978;Perlberg, 1979), what to evaluate (teaching characteristics or learning outcomes), when to evaluate ("continuous" assessments or at the end of term/session/year), how to evaluate (what measuring instruments should be used) and, also, the importance of taking into account how these issues interact with and cannot be separated from the aims and philosophies of the discipline in particular and the institution in general (Johnson et al, 1975;Coufal and Hines, 1976;Meyer and Smith, 1977). In this context, it is of interest to note that the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle has a Doctor of Arts programme which trains people for instructional evaluation functions in college teaching.…”

Section: Examples At the Level Of The Individual Member Of Staffmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluative reviews in universities: The influence of public policies

Clarke

Birt

1982

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses issues raised by the conduct of evaluative review processes in the context of public policies. Some examples and outcomes of evaluative reviewing are discussed. The first sections deal with: the necessity for evaluative reviews, their parameters (including their scope and initiation, the levels at which they are conducted, the composition of review committees, information for evaluative reviews, completion of the review process) and the implementation of review recommendations. The significance is examined of evaluative reviews in universities for public policy, inter-institutional and intra-institutional arrangements and for the activities of individual staff members. It is concluded that if universities are to avoid having dramatic change imposed on them by governments through control of finances, they should initiate a continuous review of their role, structure and function designed to maintain access to and the quality of university education.

show abstract

The assessment of teaching in higher education: A critical retrospect and a proposal

Cited by 21 publications

References 28 publications

Teaching quality and student satisfaction: nexus or simulacrum?

Teaching quality and student satisfaction: nexus or simulacrum?

Two decades of higher education

Evaluative reviews in universities: The influence of public policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About