[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 9, Issue 4 (September-October 2016) ::
Educ Strategy Med Sci 2016, 9(4): 295-305 Back to browse issues page
Evaluation of Teaching quality based on Hénard & Roseveare model from the PhD students perspective
MohammadReza Yusefzadeh Chosary Dr 1, Morteza Shahmoradi Mr2
1- Associate professor Department of Education, Faculity of Humanities, Buali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran , fuman47@gmail.com
2- Candidate of curriculum development (ph.d) student Department of Education, Faculity of Humanities, Buali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
Abstract:   (1321 Views)

Background and Aims: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current and desired state of teaching quality in higher education from the PhD students perspective.

Methods: Research method was survey. The study population consisted of all Ph.D students of BuAli Sina University in the 2014-2015 school years (854people)  and by the incidence ratio stratified sampling method and by using Morgan determined table, 269 were selected as sample. The Hénard & Roseveare quality teaching questionnaire(2012)  was used. Tools Validity using content validity was confirmed by experts and its reliability by using Cronbach's alpha test was calculated 92/0. For data analysis, descriptive statistics including frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation and paired t-test, ANOVA and Friedman test was used.

Results: there is a significant difference between current status (mean 1.929) and desired state (mean 4.176) in the quality teaching, there is also a significant difference between 7 policies in both the present situation and the desired situation of quality teaching; there is no significant difference Between male and female students' views about the current and desired situation of quality teaching  and Finally there is no significant difference the students view  from various faculties about the current and desired situation of quality teaching based on our policies were studied.

Conclusions: There is a difference between the existing and desired quality teaching and academic education systems and to eliminate this gap must Emphasis on quality teaching and development of measures for its realization as well as the continuing evolution of these indicators should be the core mission of educational institutions, be considered.

Keywords: quality teaching, higher education, seven policies, students
Full-Text [PDF 885 kb]   (547 Downloads)    
Article Type: Original Research | Subject: Modern Methods of Teaching Medical Sciences
Received: 2016/10/9 | Accepted: 2017/01/11 | Published: 2017/01/15
References
1. Hénard F, Roseveare D. Fostering quality teaching in higher education: Policies and Practices. An IMHE Guide for Higher Education Institutions.2012. Avaliable at: http://search.oecd.org/edu/imhe/QT%20policies%20and%20practices.pdf [Homepage]
2. Adamu AY, addamu A M, Quality assurance in Ethiopian higher education: Procedures and Practices. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.2012؛ (69): 838 – 846. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.006
3. Schussler D L, Murrell Jr P C. Quality Teaching as Moral Practice: Cultivating Practical Wisdom. In Quality and Change in Teacher Education.13nded Switzerland: Springer International Publishing: 2016. p. 277-291.
4. Sharif Zadeh A, Sharifi M. Components and Indicators of Quality Assessment in Higher Agricultural Education. In: 5 Th Conferences on Quality Assessment in University System. 27 April, 2011, Compus 2,Collage of Engineering University of Tehran. 2011. Available at:http://www.civilica.com/Paper-QAUS05-QAUS05_024.html. [Persian]
5. Pounder J .Quality teaching through transformational classroom leadership". Qual Assur Educ. 2014; 22)3 :( 273 – 285.
6. Parrish D. Promoting Quality Teaching: Phase 1 of a Case Study and Research Initiative for Progressing Evidence-Based Educational Innovations. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal (LICEJ). 2016; 7)1 :( 2198-2205. [Homepage]
7. Kochan T A, Addressing the crisis in confidence in corporations: Root causes, victims, and strategies for reform. Acad Manag Exec. 2002; 16 (3): 139–141. [Homepage]
8. Ghislandi P, Raffaghelli J. Quality teaching matters: perspectives on quality teaching for the modernization of higher education. A position paper.formazione & insegnamento. Rivista internazionale di Scienze dell'educazione e Della formazione.2014; 12(1): 57-86.
9. Pakmehr H, Jafari Sani H, Saeed Rezvani M, Karshki H. The quality of teaching in higher education: teaching or research? First National Conference on Education in Iran 1404. Tehran, Research Institute policy making Science, Technology and Industry. 2011. Available at: http://www.civilica.com/Paper-INCE01-INCE01_251.html [Persian]
10. Gholami K, Asadi M .Teachers' professional experience in relation to the phenomenon of effective teaching in higher education. Theory and Practice in Curriculum Journal.2013; 1 (2): 5-26. [Persian]
12. Marufi Y, Kiamanesh AR, Mehrmohammadi M, Ali Asgari M. Teaching Quality Evaluation in Higher Education: A study of some comment. J Curric Stud.2007; 2 (5): 81-112. [Persian]
13. Satsope M R, John M K, Kabelo C, Mahlapahlapana T. Towards a Framework for Evaluating Quality Teaching in Higher Education. Mediterr J Soc Sci. 2015; 6(4): 223-229.
14. Garbett, D. Promotion by teaching distinction: Developing resilience and cache for a track less travelled. Studying teacher education. A journal of self-study of teacher education practices. 2013; 9 (2): 108-117. [Homepage]
15. Chalmers D. A review of Australian and international quality systems and indicators of learning and teaching. Carrick Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, Australia.2007; 1(2).
16. Yousef Zadeh M, Mohebi A, Shahmoradi M. Qualitative Teaching in higher education (concepts, models, procedures and its realization criteria). Tehran: Amin Police University press؛2015. [Persian]
17. Chen C Y, Chen P C, Chen P Y. Teaching quality in higher education: an introductory review on a process-oriented teaching-quality model. Total Qual Manag Bus Excel. 2014; 25(1):36-56.
18. Zaboli R A, Malmoun Z, Hassani M. Relationship of Factors Affecting the Quality of Teaching: Structural Equation Modeling. Educ Strategy Med Sci. 2014; 7 (5):315-321. [Persian] [Homepage]
19. Rajabiyan Gharib F, Hejazi S Y, Omid M. the Importance of Teaching Quality Factors from Student's Viewpoints by Applying Artificial Neural Network Sensitivity Analysis. j agricultural edu admin res. 2014;)29):13-23. [Persian]
20. SHahidi N, Jafari P, Ghourchian N, Behbodiyan J. On the Relationship of Self-efficacy and Organizational commitment to Teaching Quality of Faculty Members in Zone of Islamic Azad University. New approach in educational administration jornal. 2013; 4( 15): 21-44. [Persian]
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

Write the security code in the box >



XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Yusefzadeh Chosary M, Shahmoradi M. Evaluation of Teaching quality based on Hénard & Roseveare model from the PhD students perspective. Educ Strategy Med Sci. 2016; 9 (4) :295-305
URL: http://edcbmj.ir/article-1-1072-en.html
Volume 9, Issue 4 (September-October 2016) Back to browse issues page
دوماهنامه علمی- پژوهشی راهبــردهای آموزش در علوم پزشکی Education Strategies in Medical Sciences
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.055 seconds with 805 queries by yektaweb 3531