Suppr超能文献

一项基于证据的同伴教学评估计划的评估

Evaluation of an evidence-based peer teaching assessment program.

作者信息

Hansen Laura B, McCollum Marianne, Paulsen Susan M, Cyr Thomas, Jarvis Catherine L, Tate Glenda, Altiere Ralph J

机构信息

School of Pharmacy, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center, Denver, CO 80262, USA.

出版信息

Am J Pharm Educ. 2007 Jun 15;71(3):45. doi: 10.5688/aj710345.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine faculty perceptions about an evidence-based peer teaching assessment system.

METHODS

Faculty members who served as instructors and assessors completed questionnaires after year 1 (2002-2003) and year 4 (2005-2006) of the peer assessment program. Factors were evaluated using a Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) and included logistics, time, fostering quality teaching, diversifying teaching portfolios, faculty mentoring, and value of structured discussion of teaching among faculty members. Mean responses from instructors and assessors were compared using student t tests.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven assessors and 52 instructors completed survey instruments. Assessors and instructors had positive perceptions of the process as indicated by the following mean (SD) scores: logistics = 4.0 (1.0), time = 3.6 (1.1), quality teaching = 4.0 (0.9), diversifying teaching portfolios = 3.6 (1.2), faculty mentoring = 3.9 (0.9), and structured discussion of teaching = 4.2 (0.8). Assessors agreed more strongly than instructors that the feedback provided would improve the quality of lecturing (4.5 vs. 3.9, p < 0.01) and course materials (4.3 vs. 3.6, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This peer assessment process was well-accepted and provided a positive experience for the participants. Faculty members perceived that the quality of their teaching would improve and enjoyed the opportunity to have structured discussions about teaching.

摘要

目的

确定教师对基于证据的同伴教学评估系统的看法。

方法

担任教师和评估者的教员在同伴评估计划的第1年(2002 - 2003年)和第4年(2005 - 2006年)后完成问卷调查。使用李克特量表(1 = 强烈不同意;5 = 强烈同意)对各项因素进行评估,这些因素包括后勤、时间、促进高质量教学、使教学组合多样化、教师指导以及教师之间关于教学的结构化讨论的价值。使用学生t检验比较教师和评估者的平均回复。

结果

27名评估者和52名教师完成了调查问卷。评估者和教师对该过程持积极看法,以下是平均(标准差)得分情况:后勤 = 4.0(1.0),时间 = 3.6(1.1),高质量教学 = 4.0(0.9),使教学组合多样化 = 3.6(1.2),教师指导 = 3.9(0.9),以及教学的结构化讨论 = 4.2(0.8)。评估者比教师更强烈地认同所提供的反馈将提高授课质量(4.5对3.9,p < 0.01)和课程材料质量(4.3对3.6,p < 0.01)。

结论

这种同伴评估过程得到了广泛认可,并为参与者提供了积极的体验。教师们认为他们的教学质量会提高,并享受有机会进行关于教学的结构化讨论。

相似文献

3
A peer review process for classroom teaching.课堂教学的同行评审过程。
Am J Pharm Educ. 2009 Aug 28;73(5):79. doi: 10.5688/aj730579.

引用本文的文献

1
Coproducing a Faculty Feedback Program for School of Medicine Educators.为医学院教育工作者共同制定一个教师反馈计划。
Med Sci Educ. 2024 Nov 9;35(1):381-388. doi: 10.1007/s40670-024-02203-9. eCollection 2025 Feb.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验