Johns Hopkins University, MD 21044, USA.
Med Teach. 2013;35(1):15-26. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.732247. Epub 2012 Oct 26.
Despite thousands of publications over the past 90 years on the assessment of teaching effectiveness, there is still confusion, misunderstanding, and hand-to-hand combat on several topics that seem to pop up over and over again on listservs, blogs, articles, books, and medical education/teaching conference programs. If you are measuring teaching performance in face-to-face, blended/hybrid, or online courses, then you are probably struggling with one or more of these topics or flashpoints.
To decrease the popping and struggling by providing a state-of-the-art update of research and practices and a "consumer's guide to trouble-shooting these flashpoints."
Five flashpoints are defined, the salient issues and research described, and, finally, specific, concrete recommendations for moving forward are proffered. Those flashpoints are: (1) student ratings vs. multiple sources of evidence; (2) sources of evidence vs. decisions: which come first?' (3) quality of "home-grown" rating scales vs. commercially-developed scales; (4) paper-and-pencil vs. online scale administration; and (5) standardized vs. unstandardized online scale administrations. The first three relate to the sources of evidence chosen and the last two pertain to online administration issues.
Many medical schools/colleges and higher education in general fall far short of their potential and the available technology to comprehensively assess teaching effectiveness. Specific recommendations were given to improve the quality and variety of the sources of evidence used for formative and summative decisions and their administration procedures.
Multiple sources of evidence collected through online administration, when possible, can furnish a solid foundation from which to infer teaching effectiveness and contribute to fair and equitable decisions about faculty contract renewal, merit pay, and promotion and tenure.
尽管在过去的 90 年里，有数千篇关于教学效果评估的出版物，但在一些似乎在列表服务、博客、文章、书籍和医学教育/教学会议计划中反复出现的主题上，仍然存在混淆、误解和肉搏战。如果您正在面对面、混合/混合或在线课程中衡量教学表现，那么您可能正在努力解决这些主题或热点中的一个或多个问题。
通过提供最新的研究和实践更新以及解决这些热点问题的“消费者指南”，减少弹出和挣扎。
定义了五个热点问题，描述了突出问题和研究，最后提出了具体的具体建议，以推进这些热点问题。这些热点问题是：（1）学生评分与多种证据来源；（2）证据来源与决策：哪个先来？（3）“本土”评分量表的质量与商业开发的量表；（4）纸笔与在线量表管理；以及（5）标准化与非标准化在线量表管理。前三个与选择的证据来源有关，后两个与在线管理问题有关。
许多医学院/学院和高等教育机构远远没有发挥其潜力和现有的技术来全面评估教学效果。提出了具体建议，以提高形成性和总结性决策及其管理程序中使用的证据来源的质量和多样性。
通过在线管理收集的多种证据来源，如果可能的话，可以为推断教学效果提供坚实的基础，并有助于对教师合同续签、绩效工资以及晋升和终身教职做出公平和公平的决策。
