Volume 7, Issue 1, February 2019, Page: 42-49
Measuring Quality Teaching: Developing a Process Focused Framework
Li Yan, Department of Finance and Economics, Tianjin City Vocational College, Tianjin, China
Gao Yang, Department of Finance and Economics, Tianjin City Vocational College, Tianjin, China
Received: Apr. 29, 2019;       Published: Jun. 15, 2019
DOI: 10.11648/j.sjedu.20190701.18      View  45      Downloads  12
Abstract
There is international acknowledgement that the ability of industry and nations to meet the competitive challenges of a growing global economy is often determined by the acquired industry relevant, knowledge, skills and attitudes of its workforce. A significant factor impacting on the level of success achieved by individuals can be directly related to the quality of the teaching experienced in formal Tertiary Vocational Education and Training (TVET) educational settings. The purpose of this paper is to explore, through a documented Chinese case-study of Tianjin City Vocational College, how quality teaching can be measured. The project methodology used was based on an intuitive-rational approach segmented into three (3) phases; preparation, process and reporting. The preparation phase focused on defining quality teaching and developing four research instruments to investigate quality teaching practices. The process phase involved gathering and analysing data generated from questionnaires, classroom observations and interviews. The reporting phase presented the findings of the research to relevant stakeholders. In reviewing the initial findings, it was acknowledged that the framework proposed does not match other quality evaluation methodologies in this area. This is partially because this evaluation methodology used focused on the actual teaching and learning experienced by participants. This measurement of the process at the point of delivery, rather than the outcomes at the point of completion, provides a detailed overview of the current educational climate and teaching practices of the institution being investigated. The data generated allows institutional response to improving teaching quality to be pro-active, impacting on current teaching practices, rather than reactive, focusing on past teaching practices. It was concluded that the evaluation framework created, and the associated research instruments developed, were robust and reliable. It was argued that they could be used with confidence by TVET institutions who want to pro-actively improve the teaching quality experienced by their learners.
Keywords
Quality Teaching, Person-Environment Fit, Direct Assessment, Evaluation
To cite this article
Li Yan, Gao Yang, Measuring Quality Teaching: Developing a Process Focused Framework, Science Journal of Education. Vol. 7, No. 1, 2019, pp. 42-49. doi: 10.11648/j.sjedu.20190701.18
Reference
[1]
Hu, S., & Mccormick, A. C. (2012). An engagement-based student typology and its relationship to college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 53 (7), 738-754. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11162-012-9254-7
[2]
Zhang, D., & Campbell, T. (2015). An examination of the impact of teacher quality and opportunity gap on student science achievement in China. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 13 (3), 489-513.
[3]
Kalin, J., Peklaj, C., Pecjak, S., Levpuscek, M., & Zulian, M. (2017). Elementary and Secondary School Students' Perceptions of Teachers' Classroom Management Competencies. CEPS Journal, 7 (4), 37-62.
[4]
Nooruddin, S. s. (2017). Technical and Vocational Education and Training for Economic Growth in Pakistan. Journal Of Education & Educational Development, 4 (1), 130-141.
[5]
Peklaj, C. (2015). Teacher Competencies through the Prism of Educational Research. CEPS Journal, 5 (3), 183-204.
[6]
Wiseman, A. a., & Al-bakr, F. f. (2013). The elusiveness of teacher quality: A comparative analysis of teacher certification and student achievement in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Prospects (00331538), 43 (3), 289-309.
[7]
Clayton, J (2009) Evaluating online learning environments: The development and validation of an online learning environment instrument. Köln, Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
[8]
Shidler, L. (2009). The Impact of Time Spent Coaching for Teacher Efficacy on Student Achievement. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36 (5), 453-460.
[9]
Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 1 (1), 68-93.
[10]
Sink, C. A., & Spencer, L. R. (2005). My Class Inventory-Short Form as an accountability tool for elementary school counselors to measure classroom climate. Professional School Counseling, 9 (1),
[11]
Kyungv Ryung K., & Eun H, (2018). The relationship between teacher efficacy and student academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Social Behaviour & Personality: An International Journal, 46 (4), 529-540.
[12]
Hattie, J. (2015): The Applicability of Visible Learning to Higher Education. In: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1 (1), 79-91.
[13]
Stuckey HL. Three types of interviews: Qualitative research methods in social health. J Soc Health Diabetes [serial online] 2013 [cited 2018 Jun 27]; 1:56-9. Available from: http://www.joshd.net/text.asp?2013/1/2/56/115294
[14]
McLeod, S. A. (2014). The interview method. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/interviews.html
[15]
Kaufman, J. & Junker, B. (2011). What drives alignment between teachers’ survey self-reports and classroom observations of standards-based mathematics instruction? SREE Fall 2011 Conference
[16]
Khachatryan, E. (2015). Feedback on teaching from observations of teaching: What do administrators say and what do teachers think about it? NASSP Bulletin, 99 (2), 164-188.
Browse journals by subject