Enhancing Academic Quality: Evaluation Practices in Higher Education
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The improvement of academic quality in higher education necessitates the implementation of innovative evaluation practices by lecturers. The emphasis on quality assurance in higher education emanated from globalisation and the aim of having common teaching standards that facilitate students' mobility within and across countries. Globalisation refers to an increasing but uneven integration of the world economy that reinforces a neoliberal logic (Sparke, 2013) and has been one of the driving forces that have allowed the expansion of higher education and the increasing relevance of quality assurance policy frameworks.
Objective: The purpose of this paper is to conduct a thorough review and investigation of the evaluation processes to ensure the robust measurement of student learning outcomes and the overall effectiveness of instructional methodologies
Methodology: The study explores the existing literatures and research findings about evaluating instructional methods and courses as they improve and enlighten pedagogical and educational practices. The methods of getting information from students regarding their perception of teaching are outlined through questionnaires (Revised Study Process Questionnaire, R-SPQ-2F of Biggs, Kember, and Leung, 2001) and self-reflection.
Results: The results suggest that in following the proposed evaluative practices, lecturers at higher education institutions can systematically implement and refine evaluation practices, thereby contributing to the overall enhancement of the academic performance and global mobility of students.
Originality/value: Given the tendency for increased need to enhance academic quality in higher education it is felt that the paper has great value contribution. There needs to be a spirit among policymakers, educators, and developers working together to ensure that academic quality in higher education is improved following certain methods.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
References
Abrams, Z. 2025. Classrooms are adapting to the use of artificial intelligence. Monitor on Psychology, 56(1). Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/monitor/2025/01/trends-classrooms-artificial-intelligence.
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. 1993. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. (2nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bessell, A., Deese, W., and Medina, A. 2007. Photo language: How a Picture Can Inspire a Thousand Words. American Journal of Evaluation 2007; 28; 558. http://aje.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/4/558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214007306372
Basheer, N., Ahmed, V., Bahroun, Z., Anane, C. 2024. Exploring Sustainability Assessment Practices in Higher Education: A Comprehensive Review through Content and Bibliometric. Sustainability 16(13), 5799; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135799 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135799
Bernstein, B. 1971a. Class, codes and control, Vol 1, theoretical studies towards a sociology of language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bernstein, B. 1971b. On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In Knowledge and control, ed. M. Young. London: Collier-Macmillan.
Bernstein, B. 1995. Code theory and its positioning: a case study in misrecognition. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 16(1): 3–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569950160101
Biggs, J. 2001. The reflective institution: Assuring and enhancing the quality of teaching and learning, Higher Education, 41, 221-238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004181331049
Biggs, B., Kember, D., and Leung, D. 2001. The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology (2001), 71, 133–149 Printed in Great Britain © 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433
Behari-Leak, K. & McKenna, S. 2017. Generic gold standard or contextualised public good? Teaching excellence awards in post-colonial South Africa, Teaching in Higher Education, 22(4), 408-422, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2017.1301910 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1301910
Boughey, C. 2001. Evaluation as a Means of Assuring Quality in Teaching and Learning: Policing or Development? In Otaala, B. & Opali, F. (eds) 2001. Teach Your Very Best: Selected Proceedings of a Regional Conference for Staff from Tertiary Institutions from SADC Countries. Safari Court & Conference Centre, Windhoek, Namibia, 1- 3 October 2001.
Bujak, K. R., Radu, I., Catrambone, R., MacIntyre, B., Zheng, R., & Golubski, G. 2013. A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom. Computers & Education, 68, 536–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.017
Converse, P., Wolfe, E., Huang, X., Oswald, B. 2008. Response Rates for Mixed-Mode Surveys Using Mail and E-mail/Web. American Journal of Evaluation 2008; 29; 99 originally published online Jan 8, 2008. DOI: 10.1177/1098214007313228 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214007313228
Cousin, G. 2009. Researching learning in higher education: An introduction to contemporary methods and approaches. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203884584
Drew, S., & Klopper, C. 2014. Evaluating faculty pedagogic practices to inform strategic academic, professional development: a case of cases. High Educ, 67, 349–367, 10.1007/s10734-013-9657-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9657-1
Emery, C.R., Kramer, T.R, & Tian, R.G. 2003. Return to academic standards: a critique of student evaluations of teaching effectiveness. Quality Assurance in Education 11(1): 37–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880310462074
Gamage, K. A. A., Pradeep, R. G. G. R., & de Silva, E. K. 2022. Rethinking Assessment: The Future of Examinations in Higher Education. Sustainability, 14(6), 3552. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063552 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063552
Hassan, S. & Wium, W. 2014. Quality lies in the eyes of the beholder: A mismatch between student evaluation and peer observation of teaching, Africa Education Review, 11(4), 491-511, DOI: 10.1080/18146627.2014.935000 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2014.935000
http://www.sinclair.edu/about/learning/assessment/resources/atm/cat/
Jackson, L. 2016. Globalization and Education. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Retrieved 12 Nov. 2024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.52
Kulik, J.A. 2001. Student ratings: validity, utility, and controversy. New Directions for Institutional Research, 27(5): 9–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.1
Luckett, K. 2010. A 'Quality Revolution' Constrained? A Critical Reflection on Quality Assurance Methodology from the South African Higher Education Context, Quality in Higher Education 16(1). DOI: 10.1080/13538321003679556 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538321003679556
Lam, Y. Y. 2010. Impact of Globalization on Higher Education: An Empirical Study of Education Policy & Planning of Design Education in Hong Kong. International Education Studies, 3(4), 73-85. Canadian Center of Science and Education. Available at CCSE DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v3n4p73
Marton, F., G. Dall’Alba and E. Beaty. 1993. Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(3): 277–300.
Marton, F., and R. Saljö, 1997. Approaches to learning. In The experiences of learning, in F. Marton, D. Hounsell and N. Entwistle. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
McCormack, C. 2005. Reconceptualizing student evaluation of teaching: an ethical framework for changing times, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30:5, 463-476, DOI: 10.1080/02602930500186925 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500186925
Namaghi, S.A.O. 2010. A data-driven conceptualization of teacher evaluation. The Qualitative Report, 15(6): 1504–1522.
Nsibande, R., & Garraway, J. 2011. Professional development through formative evaluation. International Journal for Academic Development, 16 Number 2, 97-107, 10.1080/1360144X.2011.568279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2011.568279
Nygaard, C., & Belluigi, D. Z. 2011. A proposed methodology for contextualised evaluation in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(6), 657–671. doi:10.1080/02602931003650037. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003650037
Patton, M. 1982. Practical Evaluation. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications
Pounder, J.S. 2007. Is student evaluation of teaching worthwhile? Quality Assurance in Education, 15(2): 178–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880710748938
Rhodes University. 2018. Rhodes University Ethical Standards Committee (RUESC). Guidelines on the Ethical use of Student Data in Teaching and Learning. (Unpublished).
Saljö, R. 1979. Learning about learning. Higher Education, 8(4): 443–451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01680533
Simmons, T.L. 1996. Student evaluation of teachers: professional practice or punitive policy? Shiken: JALT Testing and Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 1(1):12–19.
Singh, N., & Papa, R. 2010. The Impacts of Globalization in Higher Education. The Connexions Project. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. Available at Connexions
Souto-Otero, M. 2020. Globalization of Higher Education, Critical Views. In: Teixeira, P.N., Shin, J.C. (eds) The International Encyclopedia of Higher Education Systems and Institutions. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8905-9_215 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8905-9_215
Sparke, M. 2013. Introducing Globalisation: Ties, Tensions, and Uneven Integration. Malden/Oxford: Wiley.
Sproule, R. 2002. The underdetermination of instructor performance by data from the student evaluation of teaching. Economics of Education Review, 21(3): 287–294. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7757(01)00025-5
Stierer, B. 2008. Learning to write about teaching: understanding the writing demands of lecturer development programmes in higher education. In R Murray (Ed.). The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (pp. 34-15). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Ujomudike, P.O. 2015. Ubuntu Ethics. In H. ten Have (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham, 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_428-1
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_428-1
Watson, S. 2003. Closing the Feedback Loop: Ensuring Effective Action from Student Feedback. Tertiary, Education and Management, 9, 145-157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2003.9967099
Yang, R. 2003. Globalisation and Higher Education Development: A Critical Analysis. International Review of Education 49, 269–291. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025303303245 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025303303245
Zhou, J. 2022. Global learning: Definition, assessment, and approaches. Journal of Global Education and Research, 6(2), 115-132. https://www.doi.org/10.5038/2577-509X.6.2.1148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5038/2577-509X.6.2.1148