Teaching evaluation is a relatively new concept in higher education in Vietnam, both in theory and practice. Currently, this concept is understood and implemented in many different ways. This article aims to provide some information on the basic concepts of teaching evaluation and some specific methods of implementation in higher education.
Teaching evaluation is a relatively new concept in higher education in Vietnam, both in theory and practice. Currently, this concept is understood and implemented in many different ways. This article aims to provide some information on the basic concepts of teaching evaluation and some specific methods of implementation in higher education.
Concluding the National Conference on the Quality of Higher Education on January 5, 2008, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education and Training Nguyen Thien Nhan emphasized: “Regarding lecturers, the Ministry of Education and Training has been and continues to issue regulations on lecturers and lecturer standards for each position. All university lecturers must have teaching and research capabilities and must be evaluated by students and colleagues on professional qualifications, pedagogical skills, educational management capacity…[1]. In the set of standards for evaluating the quality of university education, issued under Decision No. 65/2007/QD-BGDĐT dated November 1, 2007, Article 7, Standard 4 on Training Activities also stipulates that “…there is a plan and method for reasonably evaluating the teaching activities of lecturers” and “…learners can participate in evaluating the teaching quality of lecturers at the end of the course” (Article 9, Standard 6) Regarding Learners ) [2]. Thus, evaluating the teaching activities of lecturers, or what can be called teaching evaluation, is an indispensable requirement for a training institution to ensure and improve the quality of education.
However, the concept of teaching evaluation is currently understood and implemented in many different ways. This article aims to provide some information on the basic concepts of teaching evaluation and some specific implementation methods in higher education.
There are many reasons to collect evaluation information on lecturers' teaching work. Lecturers want to know whether their teaching is effective or not. Administrators want to know if the subjects attract many students. The principal and head of department want concrete evidence in evaluating their staff. Data from the teaching evaluation will help lecturers adjust and improve the content and methods of teaching, or in other words, "self-adjust teaching activities" [3], creating a better learning environment for students. This data is also a basis for management levels to refer to in promotion, upgrading or salary increase [4].
Traditionally, two types of educational assessment can be distinguished: formative evaluation and summative evaluation.
Formative evaluation focuses on collecting and using “diagnostic” information to improve teaching and learning activities. This type of evaluation aims to identify areas that need improvement rather than evaluating what has been done or promoting teaching achievements [5]. This type of evaluation is mainly carried out by teachers at any time during the semester, either in the classroom or at other locations (internet, laboratory, field trip, fieldwork...). Feedback can be obtained from various sources such as: teacher self-evaluation, student evaluation, peer evaluation and mentor evaluation (for young teachers and trainee teachers). The tools used can be questionnaires (paper or online).
The summative evaluation is conducted to assess the effectiveness of a lecturer's teaching activities. The results of this evaluation are used for appointing lecturers to positions or for promotions, awards, or salary increases. Faculty and university leaders may also use these results to decide on changes to the content, curriculum, or subjects taught by lecturers. This evaluation is usually conducted after the completion of a course or at a specific point in the lecturer's career. To ensure comprehensiveness and representativeness, this evaluation is conducted in various forms, such as:
It is important to note that the two types of evaluation must be separate. Prospective evaluation is geared towards the future, meaning that teachers should develop their strengths and overcome existing weaknesses in their teaching activities. Conversely, retrospective evaluation is geared towards the past, meaning that it aims to evaluate the specific achievements that teachers have obtained. Teachers will usually try to hide their weaknesses if they know that the results of the prospective evaluation are used to make certain decisions related to their careers. If these decisions need to be made, the data obtained must be independent of the prospective evaluation process. Therefore, information obtained in prospective evaluation should not be used for retrospective evaluation unless the teacher voluntarily agrees, and those involved in prospective evaluation should not provide information for retrospective evaluation [6].
Student ratings of teaching are commonly used in both formative and final assessments. In most universities abroad, this is mandatory. For promotion or advancement purposes, student evaluation data needs to be collected repeatedly throughout the academic year using various methods. The data provided will gradually accumulate in the instructor's file as evidence of teaching progress. Information obtained from students can be used by instructors to improve their teaching, to identify strengths and weaknesses in teaching different subjects and classes. Information gathered from students after a few years will also be useful for supplementing and updating course content.
By using the same set of questions, student-based teaching evaluation has the advantage of assessing all instructors according to a common standard and easily making comparisons between subjects and disciplines. The data obtained is also used to review the training objectives of the department/faculty. Structured questionnaires are often used for large student groups and for subjects with similar objectives and teaching methods. For classes with a small number of students, some open-ended questions should be included to gather more direct information about the instructor and the subject.
Student-based assessment has the following limitations:
* There are some specific areas of teaching quality that students cannot accurately assess, such as objectives, course content, and student learning activity assessment [7]. Therefore, to minimize this, it is necessary to use various opinion-gathering techniques in addition to conventional questionnaires.
* There are several factors that are difficult to control, such as students' motivation, the complexity of the material, and the difficulty level of the subject. Therefore, when analyzing the results, it is necessary to rely on multiple data sources and comparisons between different subjects.
* Teachers often have different abilities, approaches, and teaching goals, and a pre-existing set of questions cannot adequately assess their teaching activities.
Regarding the content of the evaluation, it is necessary to focus on basic issues such as: the content and teaching methods of teachers; teaching materials and class time of teachers; the responsibility and enthusiasm of teachers in teaching students; encouraging creativity and respecting independent thinking of students in learning; fairness in testing and evaluation by teachers; advising and guiding students' learning activities; and pedagogical style [3]. For example, the survey form that Hue University of Education is using includes 3 contents:
Part A consists of 20 questions, divided into 5 groups:
- Group 1: Questions 1 to 5 contain content related to knowledge.
- Group 2: Questions 6 to 10 cover topics related to teaching methods.
- Group 3: Questions 11 to 13 cover topics related to the use of learning resources and materials.
- Group 4: Questions 14 to 16 cover topics related to student assessment and evaluation.
- Group 5: Questions 17 to 20 cover topics related to the relationship and communication between teachers and students.
The requirement for this section is for students to choose one of the following levels of agreement: 1. Strongly disagree 2. Disagree 3. Agree 4. Strongly agree.
Part B consists of 5 multiple-choice questions. Each question has 4 different options regarding methods commonly used by instructors in teaching and assessment.
Part C consists of two open-ended questions; this section is for students to provide comments and suggestions regarding the instructor being evaluated.
Teaching evaluation is a relatively new undertaking in Vietnam's higher education system, both in theory and practice. Currently, many universities nationwide have implemented this process, especially following the issuance of Circular No. 1276/BGDĐT-NG dated February 20, 2008, by the Ministry of Education and Training, which provides guidance on organizing feedback collection from students regarding lecturers' teaching activities. Despite initial difficulties, teaching evaluation is an inevitable trend and a mandatory undertaking; therefore, thorough preparation, both theoretically and practically, is necessary to successfully carry out this important task, contributing to ensuring and continuously improving the quality of education.
•Dr. Le Dinh
Hue University of Education
Author:i333
Newer news
Older news
