LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,113
تعداد مقالات10,208
تعداد مشاهده مقاله40,771,360
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله8,800,540
Poorkiani, Maliheh, Shokrpour, Nasrin, Faramarzian, Zohreh, bazrafcan, leila, Keshtkaran, Zahra, Bazrafkan, Leila. (1401). A 360-Degree Evaluation of Faculty Members’ Teaching Effectiveness in Larestan Medical Sciences School during Covid -19 Pandemic: A Pilot Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 11(1 (Supplement)), 140-146. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.91776.1224
Maliheh Poorkiani; Nasrin Shokrpour; Zohreh Faramarzian; leila bazrafcan; Zahra Keshtkaran; Leila Bazrafkan. "A 360-Degree Evaluation of Faculty Members’ Teaching Effectiveness in Larestan Medical Sciences School during Covid -19 Pandemic: A Pilot Study". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 11, 1 (Supplement), 1401, 140-146. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.91776.1224
Poorkiani, Maliheh, Shokrpour, Nasrin, Faramarzian, Zohreh, bazrafcan, leila, Keshtkaran, Zahra, Bazrafkan, Leila. (1401). 'A 360-Degree Evaluation of Faculty Members’ Teaching Effectiveness in Larestan Medical Sciences School during Covid -19 Pandemic: A Pilot Study', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 11(1 (Supplement)), pp. 140-146. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.91776.1224
Poorkiani, Maliheh, Shokrpour, Nasrin, Faramarzian, Zohreh, bazrafcan, leila, Keshtkaran, Zahra, Bazrafkan, Leila. A 360-Degree Evaluation of Faculty Members’ Teaching Effectiveness in Larestan Medical Sciences School during Covid -19 Pandemic: A Pilot Study. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1401; 11(1 (Supplement)): 140-146. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.91776.1224

A 360-Degree Evaluation of Faculty Members’ Teaching Effectiveness in Larestan Medical Sciences School during Covid -19 Pandemic: A Pilot Study

Journal of Health Sciences & Surveillance System
دوره 11، 1 (Supplement)، فروردین 2023، صفحه 140-146    اصل مقاله (342.41 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jhsss.2021.91776.1224
نویسندگان
Maliheh Poorkiani1؛ Nasrin Shokrpour2؛ Zohreh Faramarzian3؛ leila bazrafcan* 4؛ Zahra Keshtkaran5؛ Leila Bazrafkan* 1
1Clinical Education Research Centre, Education Development Centre, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. Adult health and critical care department. Lecturer, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman
2Department of English, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
3Department of Nursing, School of Nursing, Larestan University of Medical Sciences, Larestan, Iran
4Assistant Professor of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
5Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده
Background: Faculty members are the main pillars of universities, and their performance has a vital role in the efficiency of universities. In the current era of the Covid-19 pandemic, students’ traditional evaluation method is not sufficient, and 360-degree evaluation is recommended, or multi-rater feedback is a means of providing evaluation from various stakeholders. The aim of this study was to compare the evaluation of faculty members’ teaching effectiveness in Larestan Medical School by 360 degrees and the evaluation done by the students in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Methods: This descriptive-analytic study compared the 360 degree evaluation and the students’ ratings on faculty members’ performance at Larestan University of Medical Sciences during 2020 -2021. The statistical population consisted of all full-time professors (N=28) selected by census method and students (N=280) chosen by random cluster sampling. The materials used were six valid and reliable questionnaires filled out by students, an expert in evaluation, heads of departments, deputies, peers, and self-assessment of faculty members. Data were analyzed through SPSS software (version 23) using the Friedman test (P<0.001).
Results: The results showed a significant difference between the 360-degree evaluation and students’ ratings (P=0.05). According to the students’ attitudes, there was a significant difference between the mean scores of the faculty members’ communication skills and instructional skills (P<0.001). In addition, according to the head of departments, peers, an expert in the evaluation and self-assessment of faculty members, there was a positive and significant correlation between these two evaluations. However, there was no correlation between the heads of departments’ views and those of the deputies for education (P<0.001).
Conclusion: Given the views of different participants in this study and the dimensions of assessment of faculty members, it seems that 360-degree assessment is more realistic and fair to be done in universities. In general, it is suggested that professors, in order to better understand their strengths and weaknesses, should pay more attention to all stakeholders’ views in 360-degree evaluation to improve the quantity and quality of education.
کلیدواژه‌ها
360-degree evaluation؛ Faculty members؛ Teaching effectiveness؛ Medical sciences school؛ Covid-19 pandemic
مراجع
  1. Donaldson ML, Firestone W. Rethinking teacher evaluation using human, social, and material capital. Journal of Educational Change. 2021;22(4):501-34. doi: 10.1007/s10833-020-09405-z.
  2. Serin H. Student evaluations of teaching effectiveness: An instrument to increase teaching quality in higher education. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies. 2019;5(4):168-73. doi: 10.23918/ijsses.v5i4p168.
  3. Donker MH, van Vemde L, Hessen DJ, van Gog T, Mainhard T. Observational, student, and teacher perspectives on interpersonal teacher behavior: Shared and unique associations with teacher and student emotions. Learning and Instruction. 2021;73:101414. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101414.
  4. Kamali F, Yamani N, Changiz T, Zoubin F. Factors influencing the results of faculty evaluation in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Journal of education and health promotion. 2018;7. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_107_17. PMID: 29417073; PMCID: PMC5791434.
  5. McClain L, Gulbis A, Hays D. Honesty on student evaluations of teaching: effectiveness, purpose, and timing matter! Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2018;43(3):369-85. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2017.1350828.
  6. Beran TN, Rokosh JL. Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction. Instructional Science. 2007;37(2):171-84. doi: 10.1007/s11251-007-9045-2.
  7. Linse AR. Interpreting and using student ratings data: Guidance for faculty serving as administrators and on evaluation committees. Studies in educational Evaluation. 2017;54:94-106. doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.12.004.
  8. Verawardina U, Asnur L, Lubis AL, Hendriyani Y, Ramadhani D, Dewi IP, et al. Reviewing online learning facing the Covid-19 outbreak. Journal of Talent Development and Excellence. 2020;12(3s):385-92.
  9. Gordon M, Patricio M, Horne L, Muston A, Alston SR, Pammi M, et al. Developments in medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 63. Medical teacher. 2020;42(11):1202-15. doi: 10.1080/0142159x.2020.1807484. PMID: 32847456.
  10. Assunção Flores M, Gago M. Teacher education in times of COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal: national, institutional and pedagogical responses. Journal of Education for Teaching. 2020;46(4):507-16. doi: 10.1080/02607476.2020.1799709.
  11. Vala NH, Vachhani MV, Sorani AM. Study of evaluation of e-learning classes among medical students during COVID-19 pandemic phase in Jamnagar city. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2020;10(12):1040-2. doi: 10.5455/njppp.2020.10.07203202031072020.
  12. Carpenter R, Strawser MG, Dvorak K, Forde T, Krsmanovic M. The Implications of COVID-19 on Educators, Students, Curricula, and Faculty Development. Journal of Faculty Development. 2020;34(2):9-15.
  13. Murphy MP. COVID-19 and emergency eLearning: Consequences of the securitization of higher education for post-pandemic pedagogy. Contemporary Security Policy. 2020;41(3):492-505. doi: 10.1080/13523260.2020.1761749.
  14. Lederman D. Preparing for a fall without in-person classes. Inside Higher Ed. 2020 Jun 17.
  15. Golsha R, Charnaei T. Educational performance of faculty members from the students and faculty members’ point of view in Golestan University of Medical Sciences. Journal of Clinical and Basic Research. 2020;4(1):6-13. doi: 10.29252/jcbr.4.1.6.
  16. Cheng T-F, Wu H-C. A follow-up study on vocational high school principals’ opinions about 360 degree evaluation feedback and their leadership effectiveness and behavior change. Asia Pacific Education Review. 2020;21(1):65-81. doi: 10.1007/s12564-019-09608-x.
  17. Cormack CL, Jensen E, Durham CO, Smith G, Dumas B. The 360-degree evaluation model: A method for assessing competency in graduate nursing students. A pilot research study. Nurse education today. 2018;64:132-7. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.01.027. PMID: 29476959.
  18. Berger JS, Pan E, Thomas J. A randomized, controlled crossover study to discern the value of 360-degree versus traditional, faculty-only evaluation for performance improvement of anesthesiology residents. The Journal of Education in Perioperative Medicine: JEPM. 2009;11(2). doi: 10.46374/volxi-issue2-berger. PMID: 27175385; PMCID: PMC4719529.
  19. Kornegay JG, Kraut A, Manthey D, Omron R, Caretta‐Weyer H, Kuhn G, et al. Feedback in medical education: a critical appraisal. AEM education and training. 2017;1(2):98-109. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10024. PMID: 30051017; PMCID: PMC6001508.
  20. Balmer DF, Tenney-Soeiro R, Mejia E, Rezet B. Positive change in feedback perceptions and behavior: a 10-year follow-up study. Pediatrics. 2018;141(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2017-2950. PMID: 29217671.
  21. Motlagh M, Jahanmardi A. Student Ratings of Instruction: True or False. 2002.
  22. Berk RA. Beyond student ratings: Fourteen other sources of evidence to evaluate teaching. Handbook of quality assurance for university teaching: Routledge; 2018. p. 317-44.
  23. Rahimi M, ZAROOJ HR, Darabian M, Taherian AA, Khosravi A. Teacher evaluation by students: A comprehensive approach. 2012.
  24. Berk RA. Start spreading the news: Use multiple sources of evidence to evaluate teaching. The Journal of Faculty Development. 2018;32(1):73-81.
  25. Waddell G, Williamon A. Measuring the audience. InScholarly Research in Music 2022 (pp. 217-228). Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781003153924-18.
  26. Yang Y-Y, Lee F-Y, Hsu H-C, Huang C-C, Chen J-W, Cheng H-M, et al. Assessment of first-year post-graduate residents: usefulness of multiple tools. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association. 2011;74(12):531-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcma.2011.10.002. PMID: PMC7105044.
  27. Hensel R, Meijers F, van der Leeden R, Kessels J. 360 degree feedback: how many raters are needed for reliable ratings on the capacity to develop competences, with personal qualities as developmental goals? The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2010;21(15):2813-30. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2010.528664
  28. Kanaslan EK, Iyem C. Is 360-degree feedback appraisal an effective way of performance evaluation. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2016;6(5):172-82. doi: 10.6007/ijarbss/v6-i5/2124
  29. Donnon T, Al Ansari A, Al Alawi S, Violato C. The reliability, validity, and feasibility of multisource feedback physician assessment: a systematic review. Academic Medicine. 2014;89(3):511-6. doi: 10.1097/acm.0000000000000147. PMID: 24448051.
  30. Morrison JQ, Hutchinson CE, Talapatra D. Evaluating the performance of school psychologists: Current status and future directions with a 360‐degree evaluation process. Psychology in the Schools. 2020;57(5):699-717. doi: 10.1002/pits.22360.
  31. Higgins RS, Bridges J, Burke JM, O'Donnell MA, Cohen NM, Wilkes SB. Implementing the ACGME general competencies in a cardiothoracic surgery residency program using 360-degree feedback. The Annals of thoracic surgery. 2004;77(1):12-7. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2003.09.075. PMID: 14726026.
  32. Hinojosa AS, Gardner WL, Walker HJ, Cogliser C, Gullifor D. A review of cognitive dissonance theory in management research: Opportunities for further development. Journal of Management. 2017;43(1):170-99. doi: 10.1177/0149206316668236
  33. Reisoğlu I, Topu B, Yılmaz R, Karakuş Yılmaz T, Göktaş Y. 3D virtual learning environments in education: A meta-review. Asia Pacific Education Review. 2017;18(1):81-100. doi: 10.1007/s12564-016-9467-0
  34. Care E, Kim H, Vista A, Anderson K. Education System Alignment for 21st Century Skills: Focus on Assessment. Center for Universal Education at The Brookings Institution. 2018.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 415
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 277


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب