Search results

The aim of this paper is to generate a streamlined, transparent and effective instrument to fairly measure the contribution made by each student to a group project within a higher education context. The primary aim is to moderate the grades of underperforming students at the end of the project. There is a secondary benefit in alerting underperforming students to raise their contribution mid-task or face a potentially reduced grade at the final stage.

The development of this multi-dimensional instrument is guided by findings from previous research. The quest is to minimise the instructor's administrative work load in applying a moderation-only instrument that is open-source and available at no cost. Based on the literature, the survey instrument seeks to apply a peer-based, equitable and transparent evaluation of each member's contribution to a group task. The survey is applied at mid-task and again at end-task in order to afford underperformers the opportunity to address contribution deficits during the final phase of the project.

The instrument, called TANDEM©, offers a transparent, streamlined, equitable, confidential and practical measure of each student's contribution to a graded group task. Students whose end-task contribution falls below the group average rating receive a proportional reduction in their personal grade. Additionally, the end-task moderation instrument captures a single-item holistic measure of relative contribution that may, in the future, serve as a surrogate for the multi-dimensional measures currently in place.

TANDEM© was developed with group sizes of four or five members in mind. There is no evidence to support its application to three-person groups. Moreover, the application was applied only amongst under-graduate students. It is yet to be applied across post-graduate groups and within online learning environments. Future research into diverse cultural settings would serve to advance understanding of how moderation is perceived across borders.

Several existing group grade moderation methods propose complex algorithms that are “black box” solutions from a student's perspective. In establishing a fair, streamlined, confidential and transparent process for peer-rated moderation, TANDEM© deploys a concise instrument with a relatively small administrative load. TANDEM © may be applied to all groups or can selectively be applied to groups that report moderate, strong or extreme levels of conflict.

Students will appreciate the opportunity to rate peer contributions to group projects. This will dissipate the negative social sentiment that may arise when fellow students benefit from the work of others. Those students seeking conflict resolution within the group will value the transparent and equitable moderation of grades as well as the positive social implications that follow.

This research forms part of an ongoing quest to present a moderation instrument that fairly identifies student contribution to a group project. Whilst the solution proposed is one of many existing alternatives, its focus is on a practical moderation-only instrument that can immediately be applied to a course or major. The benefits lie in the ease of application and minimal administrative workload. This constitutes an original contribution to the individual (course or major) coordinator who seeks to apply a moderation-only instrument without having to commit to an extensive, broad-based group optimisation programme.

Competition among higher education institutions has pushed universities to expand their competitive advantages. Based on the assumption that the core functions of universities are academic, understanding the teaching–learning process with the help of student evaluation of teaching (SET) would seem to be a logical solution in increasing competitiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The current paper presents a narrative literature review examining how SETs work within the concept of service marketing, focusing specifically on the search, experience, and credence qualities of the provider. A review of the various factors that affect the collection of SETs is also included.

Relevant findings show the influence of students’ prior expectations on SET ratings. Therefore, teachers are advised to establish a psychological contract with the students at the start of the semester. Such an agreement should be negotiated, setting out the potential benefits of undertaking the course and a clear definition of acceptable performance within the class. Moreover, connections should be made between courses and subjects in order to provide an overall view of the entire program together with future career pathways.

Given the complex factors affecting SETs and the antecedents involved, there appears to be no single perfect tool to adequately reflect what is happening in the classroom. As different SETs may be needed for different courses and subjects, options such as faculty self-evaluation and peer-evaluation might be considered to augment current SETs.

The purpose of this paper is to provide some references for teachers who use KidsProgram or other graphic programming tools platform for STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics) education at distance by game-based teaching. From the design of the STEAM class, teachers can know how to stimulate students’ interest in programming and cultivating their ability to innovate and solve practical problems more clearly with KidsProgram.

This paper will explain the teaching design from ten aspects and implement it in real class to see the result. The ten aspects are situations creation, knowledge popularization, raising problems, analyzing problems, concepts introduction, interface design, logic design, self-evaluation and mutual evaluation, teacher comments and extension and innovation. With the KidsProgram platform, this paper takes “The Missile Convey,” a sub-course of “Discovery Universe” as an example. Through the situation created by the teacher, students brainstorm the dangers that the earth may encounter in the universe and then learn relevant scientific knowledge. Next, students raise and analyze problems according to the situation under the guidance of the teacher. Through the interaction with teachers, students review the programming concepts and the usage of corresponding coding blocks needed for the project, like “random number.” They need to carry out interface design and logic design for the project, and complete the project. After that, the students use the self-evaluation form and the mutual evaluation form to modify and then show and share the projects to the in front of the class. After self-evaluation and peer evaluation, the teacher will make a final summary evaluation and make some suggestions for improvement. From the students’ programming productions and the interviews with them, the teaching result can be known.

With elaborate teaching design and appropriate teaching strategies, students can flexibly use multi-disciplinary knowledge of science, technology, engineering, art and mathematics to solve problems in the process of creation, which is conducive to the cultivation and improvement of students’ comprehensive quality on KidsProgram classroom, under the guidance of STEAM education. In other words, in this class, students need to use engineering thinking to plan the whole project based on the understanding of scientific principles, design interfaces with artistic ideas, use mathematical knowledge for logical operations, and gradually solve technical problems with the above knowledge or methods in a comprehensive way.

The KidsProgram is a leading graphical programming tool platform in China in recent years. It deeply reconstructs the concept of Scratch designed by MIT. Graphic programming, a method of programming by dragging and dropping blocks containing natural languages, is different from traditional code programming. In this paper, the visualized cases in the class will be demonstrated in the “interface design” and “logic design.” This paper designs a course in STEAM education at distance via KidsProgram, hoping to provide some reference for other research on teaching of graphical programming tools.

The purpose of this study is to examine the uptake of peer vs. instructor feedback provided on written essays by undergraduates in a writing course at a public university in Saudi Arabia.

This was a classroom intervention exploratory study with 16 pairs of students attending a writing class over a period of 14 weeks.

Analysis of feedback and uptake indicated that the students incorporated a high rate (85.21%) of feedback in revising their essays. The results also showed that the quantity of students’ uptake of instructor feedback (88.77%) was higher than that of peer feedback (82.17%). In terms of the rate of uptake of global feedback focusing on content and organization vs. local feedback focusing on language and formatting, the rate of uptake of local feedback (85.34%) was slightly higher than the uptake of global feedback (84.90%). The current results also showed that the quality of feedback (peer vs. instructor feedback and global vs. local feedback) also varied. Students’ perspectives on feedback underlined their perceived value of feedback on writing, their preference for instructor feedback and the perceived benefits of providing and receiving feedback.

This study investigated an area that has been under-researched in the Saudi higher education context and it has direct implications for the provision of feedback in writing classes.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that common method variance, specifically single-source bias, threatens the validity of a university-created student assessment of instructor instrument, suggesting that decisions made from these assessments are inherently flawed or skewed. Single-source bias leads to generalizations about assessments that might influence the ability of raters to separate multiple behaviors of an instructor.

Exploratory factor analysis, nested confirmatory factor analysis and within-and-between analysis are used to assess a university-developed, proprietary student assessment of instructor instrument to determine whether a hypothesized factor structure is identifiable. The instrument was developed over a three-year period by a university-mandated committee.

Findings suggest that common method variance, specifically single-source bias, resulted in the inability to identify hypothesized constructs statistically. Additional information is needed to identify valid instruments and an effective collection method for assessment.

Institutions are not guaranteed valid or useful instruments even if they invest significant time and resources to produce one. Without accurate instrumentation, there is insufficient information to assess constructs for teaching excellence. More valid measurement criteria can result from using multiple methods, altering collection times and educating students to distinguish multiple traits and behaviors of individual instructors more accurately.

This paper documents the three-year development of a university-wide student assessment of instructor instrument and carries development through to examining the psychometric properties and appropriateness of using this instrument to evaluate instructors.

The recognition of practice in online instruction is still subject to interpretation and different approaches as a result of the rapid changes in technology and its effect on society. The purpose of this paper is to address these differences through a synthesis that can be easily accessed and consulted by educators in the field of e-learning.

This paper reviews different examples of rubrics and instruments in higher education to propose a more comprehensive rubric that constitutes a synthesis of how some institutions in HE approach best practice in this field.

The proposed comprehensive rubric emanating from the synthesis of different approaches supports the development, remixing, sharing and integration of online modules and courses by providing a single reference point with as wide a range as possible of potential pedagogical tools, facilities and approaches to e-learning.

It is not within the scope of this paper to review quality assurance processes and administrative components, but to propose a rubric for course design and self-review of faculty and higher education institutions for a better alignment with what is regarded as current standard best practice.

Instructional designers in e-learning have a new comprehensive rubric that can consult at design stage.

Different approaches towards what is called “good practice” are brought together and analysed to provide a synthesis and a single source that can be consulted by practitioners in the field of e-learning.