Strategies of Measuring Teaching Effectiveness in Higher Education Systems



Top university managers are responsible for selecting and retaining qualified academic members and facilitating their career advancement opportunities. To fulfill this responsibility, the managers need to make important decisions. The value of measuring the effectiveness of teaching lies in the role it plays in providing evidence significant to making such decisive decisions about the future of the higher education system. Due to the complexity of measuring the effectiveness of teaching, universities should consider diverse strategies in order to be able to portray a comprehensive, reliable and correct picture of the academic members' performance. The criteria important to the higher education system of any country determine the factors to be measured in the process of evaluating teaching effectiveness and how this measuring should be done. This article explains a composite pattern of different strategies for evaluating teaching effectiveness, the type of tools employed, the evidence providers, the stakeholders and the type of decision making based on the evidence. These strategies can be used in decision making concerning the activities related to improving the teaching process and employment procedures of academic members


جلیلی، محمد؛ میرزازاده، عظیم و جعفریان، علی (1388). بسط مفهوم دانش پژوهی. دانش‌پژوهی آموزشی و کاربرد آن در ایران، مجله ایرانی آموزش در علوم پزشکی (9) ، 2، 180-167.
خیر، محمد (1380). ارزشیابی تدریس اثربخش در آموزش عالی با تأکید بر ارزشیابی‌های دانشجویی. دانش و پژوهش، 7، 114-93.
ذوالفقار، محسن و مهرمحمدی، محمود (1383). ارزیابی دانشجویان از کیفیت تدریس اعضای هیأت علمی رشته‌های علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌های شهر تهران، دانشور رفتار، 6، 28-17.
معروفی، یحیی؛ کیامنش، علیرضا؛ مهرمحمدی، محمود و علی‌عسکری، مجید (1386). ارزشیابی کیفیت تدریس در آموزش عالی: بررسی برخی دیدگاه‌ها. فصلنامه مطالعات برنامه درسی، 5، 112-81.
نصر، احمدرضا (1381). تحلیلی بر کیفیت ارزشیابی دانشجویان از تدریس. مجله پژوهشی دانشگاه اصفهان (علوم انسانی). 13 (1) 310-285.
وزارت علوم، تحقیقات و فنّاوری (1387). آیین‌نامه ارتقای مرتبه اعضای هیأت علمی دانشگاه‌ها و مؤسسه‌های آموزش عالی، پژوهشی و فنّاوری، (مصوب 18/8/1387).
American Association of University Professors (1974). Committee C. Statement on teaching evaluation. AAUP Bulletin, 60(2), pp. 166-170.
Berk, R. A. (2006). Thirteen strategies to measuer college teaching, Stylus Publishing, LLC, Richmonud, Virginia.
Bo-Linn, C., Gentry, J., Lowman, J., Pratt, R. W., & Zhu, R. (2004). Learning from exemplary teachers. Paper presented at the annual Lilly Conference on College Teaching, Miami University, Oxford, OH.
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: New priorities for the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Braskamp, L. A., & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1994). National survey on the reexamination of faculty roles and rewards. Princeton, NJ:
Centra, J. A. (1999). Reflective faculty evaluation: Enhancing teaching and determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, P. A. (1981). Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multisection validity studies. Review of Educational Research, 51, pp. 281-309.
Diamond, R. M. (2004). Preparing for promotion, tenure, and annual review: A faculty guide (2nd ed.). Bolton, MA: Anker.
Feldman, K. A. (1989). Instructional effectiveness of college teachers as judged by teachers themselves, current and former students, colleagues, administrators, and external observers. Research in Higher Education, 30, pp. 137-149.
Fenwick, T. J. (2001). Using student outcomes to evaluate teaching. A cautious exploration. In C. Knapper & P. Cranton (Eds.), Fresh approaches to the evaluation of teaching (New Directions for Teaching and Learning). 88, pp. 63-74.
Knapper, C. (1997). Rewards for teaching. In P. Cranton (Ed.), University challenges in faculty work: Fresh perspectives from around the world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Knapper, C., & Wright, W. A. (2001). Using portfolios to document good teaching: Premises, purposes, practices. In C. Knapper & P. Cranton (Eds.), Fresh approaches to the evaluation of teaching (New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 88, pp. 19-29.
Ory, J. c., & Braskamp, L. A. (1981). Faculty perceptions of the quality and usefulness of three types of evaluative information. Research in Higher Education, 15, pp. 271-282.
Overall, J. U., & Marsh, H. W. (1980). Students' evaluations of instruction: A longitudinal study of their stability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, pp. 321-325.
Rice, R. E. (1991). The new American scholar: Scholarship and the purposes of the university. Metropolitan Universities, 1(4), pp. 7-18.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th Ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Seldin, P. (1999). Current practices - good and bad ­nationally. In P. Seldin & Associates (Eds.), Changing practices in evaluating teaching: A practical guide to improved faculty performance and promotion/tenure decisions (pp. 1-24). Bolton, MA: Anker.
Seppanen, L. J. (1995). Linkages to the world of employment. In P. T. Ewell (Ed.), Student tracking: New techniques, new demands. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Shore, B. M., & Associates (1986). The teaching dossier: A guide to its preparation and use (rev. ed.). Ottawa: Canadian Association of University Teachers.
Shulman, L. S. (1998). Course anatomy: The dissection and analysis of knowledge through teaching. In P. Hutchings (Ed.), The course portfolio: How faculty can examine their teaching to advance practice and improve student learning. American Association for Higher Education.
Theall, M., & Franklin, J. L. (2001). Looking for bias in all the wrong places: A search for truth or a witch hunt in student ratings of instruction? In M. Theall, P. c., Abrami, & L. A. Mets (Eds.), the student ratings debate: Are they valid? How can we best use them? (New Directions for Institutional Research, 109, pp. 45-56.
Webb, J., & McEnerney, K. (1995). The view from the back of the classroom: A faculty-based peer observation program. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 6(3), pp. 145-160.