CN106203811A - A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality - Google Patents
A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN106203811A CN106203811A CN201610520276.1A CN201610520276A CN106203811A CN 106203811 A CN106203811 A CN 106203811A CN 201610520276 A CN201610520276 A CN 201610520276A CN 106203811 A CN106203811 A CN 106203811A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- evaluation
- course
- weight
- teacher
- class
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
- G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
- G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
- G06Q10/06395—Quality analysis or management
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q50/00—Systems or methods specially adapted for specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
- G06Q50/10—Services
- G06Q50/20—Education
- G06Q50/205—Education administration or guidance
Abstract
The present invention relates to a kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality, comprise the following steps: (1) user logs in；(2) class of subscriber is judged；(3) selecting corresponding evaluation table according to class of subscriber, user carries out marking and evaluates and according to evaluation score rating；(4) Calculation Estimation mark, evaluates PTS and teacher individual's course PTS including single courses.Compared with prior art, the present invention have practical, data message is complete, the expansionary advantage such as good.
Description
Technical field
The invention belongs to education sector, especially relate to a kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality.
Background technology
Teaching quality evaluation is the important step of school instruction process, is to improve the quality of teaching and the important hands of efficiency in school management
Section.Carry out the quality evaluation of the common full-time student taking course with teachers ' classroom teaching as object, based on entirety, be
Implement total Teaching Quality management, the final core link promoting Development of Students.
China generally launches in colleges and universities to improve the teacher teaching efficiency teaching evaluation system as core, but,
How to set up science is objective, operability is stronger Teaching evaluation system and system is still education administrative department and colleges and universities are constantly being visited
Rope and the hot issue of research.
From the point of view of to Shanghai University investigation situation, at present, there are the mode to teaching quality evaluation or a platform in each colleges and universities, and one
As be all single or the teaching evaluation main body of 2-3 dimension；The Teaching evaluation system having been carried out from current Shanghai University and
From the point of view of system, colleges and universities are not also had to set up various dimensions, design science, information full range, the teaching system of simple operation, for making religion
Learn quality evaluation work more standardization, scientific, based on students, with teachers as its main body, strengthen teachers and students' education informations interactive,
Pay close attention to students ' learning performance, while promoting teacher career development, it is achieved promote the final purpose of Development of Students, be badly in need of one
Comprehensively teaching assessment system.Realize following purpose:
(1) by undergraduate course quality is collected dynamically, evaluates and analyzed for information about comprehensively, promote and excitation religion
Teacher continues to optimize teaching process, improves and improve teaching, improves Talent-cultivating Quality.
(2) grasp school instruction present situation all-sidedly and accurately for teaching management department and provide information, for the construction of ranks of teachers
Decision-making foundation is provided.
(3) based on students, with teachers as its main body, strengthen teachers and students' education informations interactive, pay close attention to students ' learning performance,
While promoting teacher career development, it is achieved promote the final purpose of Development of Students.
Summary of the invention
Defect that the purpose of the present invention is contemplated to overcome above-mentioned prior art to exist and provide a kind of comprehensively, objectively
Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality.
The purpose of the present invention can be achieved through the following technical solutions: a kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality, is used for evaluating
The classroom instruction of all courses of full-time undergraduate course, comprises the following steps:
(1) user logs in；
(2) class of subscriber is judged；
(3) selecting corresponding evaluation table according to class of subscriber, user carries out marking and evaluates and according to evaluation score evaluation etc.
Level；
(4) Calculation Estimation mark, evaluates PTS and teacher individual's course PTS including single courses.
Described class of subscriber include student, supervise and guide, go together, teacher self and leader.
If all class of subscribers all have evaluation, then described single courses to evaluate PTS=student assessment average mark *
Student assessment weight+inspection is evaluated average mark * inspection evaluation weight+peer review average mark * peer review weight+leader and is evaluated
Average mark * leads evaluation weight+self evaluation average mark * self evaluation weight, and otherwise, described single courses evaluates PTS
=(it is same that average mark * inspection evaluation weight+peer review average mark * is evaluated in student assessment average mark * student assessment weight+inspection
Row evaluation weight+leader evaluates average mark * and leads evaluation weight+self evaluation average mark * self evaluation weight)/(1-a), its
In, student assessment weight is 55%, and inspection evaluation weight is 20%, and peer review weight is 10%, and leader's evaluation weight is
10%, self evaluation weight is 5%, and a represents and evaluates weight sum corresponding to class of subscriber being equally divided into 0, and * represents that multiplication is transported
Calculate.
The computational methods of described student assessment average mark are: before removing in all student assessment marks of every subject
After 10% and rear 10%, remaining student assessment mark is averaged.
Described teacher individual's course PTS=when term all course evaluation of teacher divide summation/teacher's course door time
Number, the described single courses that term teacher all course evaluation summation is all courses working as term teacher of working as evaluates PTS
Sum.
In described step (3), if the mark evaluated is not less than 90, then rating is excellent, if 80≤evaluation score <
90, then rating is good, if 70≤evaluation score < 80, then rating is general, if 60≤evaluation score < 70, then evaluate
Grade is qualified, if < 60, then rating is defective to evaluation score.
The range of value of the present invention is as follows:
Range of value includes the teaching of all courses of full-time undergraduate course.
Evaluation object includes Classroom Teaching and the teaching of course of " teacher " and " course ", i.e. certain course teacher
Quality.
Classification of assessment is as follows:
(1) teaching quality evaluation is divided into five big classes by the identity participating in evaluation personnel: student assessment, inspection are evaluated, colleague
Evaluation, self evaluation, leader evaluate, i.e. " five dimension one " Developmental pedagogy appraisement system.
Wherein, " student assessment " with evaluate courses taken are perceived as master, including teacher lecture level, learn emerging
Interest, course learning results etc.." teaching supervisor " and " peer review " is with teaching attitude, professional ability and the teaching water of scientificity
It is main for putting down；" teacher's self evaluation " mainly carries out oneself's anatomy to self existing teaching quality and ability aspect；Leader comments
Valency mainly carries out overall merit from the angle strengthened with improve Campus MIS to the teaching affairs of teacher.During leader evaluates
" leader " refer to whole school middle-ranking officials etc..
(2) " student assessment " is by school's undergraduate course culture scheme curricular system and course distribution situation, is carried out by whole school's course
Classification is sorted out and statistics, is divided into 8 big classifications, i.e. correspondence and devises 8 student assessment tables.
1. specialty is expanded to lead to and is known class course: basic socilalizing course (required), Scientific basis class (required, limit choosing), Specialized course
(required), specialty class (limit choosing, directivity limit choosing), general education class (required), expand elective, power generation class (must
Choosing), professional field course (Scientific basis class required, automation direction), arbitrarily take as an elective course class, humanities and art class (optionally) etc..
2. physical culture Arts course: basic socilalizing course (required), arbitrarily take as an elective course class, humanities and art class (optionally) etc..
3. foreign language class course (public English course, faculty of foreign languages course): specialty class (limit choosing), Scientific basis class (limit
Choosing), professional field course (Scientific basis class class required, professional is required), concentrate practice (required), Specialized skill (must
Repair), practice course (required), Professional knowledge class (limit choosing), expand elective, basic socilalizing course (required), arbitrarily take as an elective course
Class, general education class (required) etc..
4. put into practice class course-experimental courses: professional field course (Scientific basis class is required), Scientific basis class (limit choosing),
General education class (required), arbitrarily take as an elective course class etc..
5. put into practice class course-practice supervision: practice course (required), public compulsory course
6. put into practice class course-Course Exercise: practice course (required), concentrate practice (required), Specialized course (required)
7. put into practice class course-graduate thesis: practice course (required)
8. ideological and political education class course: basic socilalizing course (required), general education class (required)
Evaluation content is as follows:
Evaluation content is set, i.e. from " preparing according to the preparation of whole classroom instruction, process (enforcement), result three phases
Factor ", " process (enforcement) factor ", " result factor " three one-level evaluation indexes devise 5-10 two-level appraisement index.
Wherein, the Selection of Teaching Materials of preparatory stage primary evaluation teacher, situation etc. of preparing lessons；The classroom instruction of process stage primary evaluation teacher
Input degree, the content of courses, teaching technique and the aspect such as method, classroom interactions's situation；The result stage mainly allows teacher teach
Learn self-examination, evaluate the situation such as the growth of student knowledge and the lifting of ability.
Evaluation index is as follows:
(1) Classroom Teaching index system
Principle according to " science ", " practical ", " comprehensively " and " easily operation " designs the assessment indicator system of each dimension.
The full marks of (two) five big class Present Evaluation Indexes are 100 points, and each index sets " A, B, C, D, E " five evaluations etc.
Level, grade score value is respectively as follows: A:10～9；B:8.9～8；C:7.9～7；D:6.9～6；E:5.9～0, minimum score section is 0.5
Point.
(3) teaching quality evaluation divides five grades.Hundred-mark system is as follows with grade transformational relation:
Excellent >=90；80≤good < 90；70≤in (typically) < 80；60≤qualified < 70；Defective < 60.
Evaluation methodology is as follows:
Being arranged by Educational Affairs Office " teachers ' teaching centre of development " is unified, each institute specifically organizes, " ' five dimension one ' expansionary
Teaching assessment system " (hereinafter referred to as " commenting teaching system ") carried out.Per term is sent evaluation notice, each institute histology by Educational Affairs Office
Raw, teacher logs in Shanghai University Of Electric Power by campus network or the Internet with the user identity set in set period and evaluates on the net
System, is evaluated " the teacher's course " in the range of evaluation authority.
(1) five big human subject evaluation method
1. student assessment." the interim evaluation of student " concentrates the 6-10 week being arranged in per term, takes voluntary evaluation principle；
" student's end of term is evaluated " is concentrated before being arranged in per term End-of-Course and is started, closedown first week next term of next year.
2. inspection is evaluated.School undergraduate course supervisor gos deep into undergraduate course First Line, and listen to the teacher in per term 7-9 the most at random
Joint, conscientiously fills in " teaching supervisor expert's table " and will monthly appraise result through discussion and input on time and comment teaching system.
3. peer review.Each institute (portion) is in charge of teaching president should complete colleague's configuration work within the 2nd week per term；Respectively
The per term tissue the court teacher of institute (portion) mutually listens to the teacher, and a teacher need to be listened to the teacher by 4-6 position teacher, and the teacher that listens to the teacher should conscientiously fill out
Write " peer review table ", and result input will be appraised through discussion before per term End-of-Course and comment teaching system.
4. self evaluation.Serve as before the teacher of course teaching task terminates in per term, should conscientiously fill in that " self evaluation is used
Table " and will appraise through discussion result input comment teaching system.
5. leader evaluates.School entirety middle-ranking officials must go deep into undergraduate course classroom and listen to the teacher, everyone 3-5 that should listen to the teacher of per term
Secondary class, listened course is required to be different teachers.Conscientiously fill in " leader's evaluation table ", and will appraise through discussion before per term End-of-Course
Teaching system is commented in result input.
(2) statistical method
1. single courses statistical method: " student assessment " of every subject calculates after deducting the evaluation score of before and after 10% again
" the student assessment average mark " of this subject, then by " student assessment average mark " and this subject " inspection is evaluated average
Point ", " peer review average mark ", " leader evaluates average mark ", " self evaluation " collect, be weighted adding up, draw this subject
The overall merit score of journey.
Five dimension general comment score computation method:
Single courses is evaluated PTS=student assessment average mark * 55%+ inspection and is evaluated average mark * 20%+ peer review
Average mark * 10%+ leader evaluates average mark * 10%+ self evaluation average mark * 5%.
Discontented five dimension general comment score computation method: (such as: " leader's evaluation " dimension does not evaluate score, other four dimensions
Degree has score):
Single courses evaluates PTS=[student assessment average mark * 55%+ inspection evaluation average mark * 20%+ peer review
Average mark * 10%+ self evaluation average mark * 5%]/(1-10%).
2. teacher individual's course PTS computational methods:
Teacher individual's course PTS=when term all course evaluation of teacher divide summation/teacher's course door number of times.
Compared with prior art, current existing student assessment, inspection evaluation, leader are evaluated three dimensionality evaluation by the present invention
Main body extends to five dimension Appraising subject, on the one hand excites teaching job enthusiasm, improves Classroom Teaching.A set of science,
Practical Teaching quality evaluation model the just work making teacher objectively can obtain due affirmative, thus have one
Specific education colony forms correct stable value judgment standard, the enthusiasm exciting teacher and the heat worked hard
Feelings.Meanwhile, this model is conducive to correcting in current teaching quality evaluation weight mark ranking, promotion of appraising and choosing excellent, gently educates raising, examines
The disconnected wrong understanding improved, the performance for teachers ' classroom teaching provides feedback information timely and effectively, is directly beneficial for matter of imparting knowledge to students
The raising of amount；On the other hand the management of college teaching, the beneficially raising of colleges and universities' whole learning quality are promoted.The group of research evaluation
Knit whether enforcement, index system, evaluation method etc. meet evaluation theory, if the actual grade meeting school affects classroom instruction matter
Amount factor of evaluation, sets up exercisable, the Teaching evaluation system of result fairness, to carrying out effective Classroom Teaching mould
Type, the quality of instruction to scientificity objectively, to promoting classroom instruction management, to helping school's teaching management department and teacher
I understands work effect, and the unobstructed of subject of implementation students and teacher's information and effective docking are provided platform interdynamic function,
Pinpoint the problems in time, solution problem etc., to ensureing and improve the quality of teaching to have important practical significance.
Accompanying drawing explanation
Fig. 1 is the flow chart of the present invention.
Detailed description of the invention
The present invention is described in detail with specific embodiment below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
As it is shown in figure 1, a kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality, for evaluating the classroom religion of all courses of full-time undergraduate course
Learn, comprise the following steps:
(1) user logs in；
(2) class of subscriber is judged；
(3) selecting corresponding evaluation table according to class of subscriber, user carries out marking and evaluates and according to evaluation score evaluation etc.
Level；
(4) Calculation Estimation mark, evaluates PTS and teacher individual's course PTS including single courses.
Described class of subscriber include student, supervise and guide, go together, teacher self and leader.
If all class of subscribers all have evaluation, then described single courses to evaluate PTS=student assessment average mark *
Student assessment weight+inspection is evaluated average mark * inspection evaluation weight+peer review average mark * peer review weight+leader and is evaluated
Average mark * leads evaluation weight+self evaluation average mark * self evaluation weight, and otherwise, described single courses evaluates PTS
=(it is same that average mark * inspection evaluation weight+peer review average mark * is evaluated in student assessment average mark * student assessment weight+inspection
Row evaluation weight+leader evaluates average mark * and leads evaluation weight+self evaluation average mark * self evaluation weight)/(1-a), its
In, student assessment weight is 55%, and inspection evaluation weight is 20%, and peer review weight is 10%, and leader's evaluation weight is
10%, self evaluation weight is 5%, and a represents and evaluates weight sum corresponding to class of subscriber being equally divided into 0, and * represents that multiplication is transported
Calculate.
The computational methods of described student assessment average mark are: before removing in all student assessment marks of every subject
After 10% and rear 10%, remaining student assessment mark is averaged.
Described teacher individual's course PTS=when term all course evaluation of teacher divide summation/teacher's course door time
Number, the described single courses that term teacher all course evaluation summation is all courses working as term teacher of working as evaluates PTS
Sum.
In described step (3), if the mark evaluated is not less than 90, then rating is excellent, if 80≤evaluation score <
90, then rating is good, if 70≤evaluation score < 80, then rating is general, if 60≤evaluation score < 70, then evaluate
Grade is qualified, if < 60, then rating is defective to evaluation score.
The range of value of the present invention is as follows:
Range of value includes the teaching of all courses of full-time undergraduate course.
Evaluation object includes Classroom Teaching and the teaching of course of " teacher " and " course ", i.e. certain course teacher
Quality.
Classification of assessment is as follows:
(1) teaching quality evaluation is divided into five big classes by the identity participating in evaluation personnel: student assessment, inspection are evaluated, colleague
Evaluation, self evaluation, leader evaluate, i.e. " five dimension one " Developmental pedagogy appraisement system.
Wherein, " student assessment " with evaluate courses taken are perceived as master, including teacher lecture level, learn emerging
Interest, course learning results etc.." teaching supervisor " and " peer review " is with teaching attitude, professional ability and the teaching water of scientificity
It is main for putting down；" teacher's self evaluation " mainly carries out oneself's anatomy to self existing teaching quality and ability aspect；Leader comments
Valency mainly carries out overall merit from the angle strengthened with improve Campus MIS to the teaching affairs of teacher.During leader evaluates
" leader " refer to whole school middle-ranking officials etc..
(2) " student assessment " is by school's undergraduate course culture scheme curricular system and course distribution situation, is carried out by whole school's course
Classification is sorted out and statistics, is divided into 8 big classifications, i.e. correspondence and devises 8 student assessment tables.
1. specialty is expanded and logical is known class course (table 1): basic socilalizing course (required), Scientific basis class (required, limit choosing), specially
Industry class (required), professional class (limit choosing, directivity limit choosing), general education class (required), expansion elective, power generation class
(essential), professional field course (Scientific basis class required, automation direction), arbitrarily take as an elective course class, humanities and art class (optionally) etc..
2. physical culture Arts course (table 2): basic socilalizing course (required), arbitrarily take as an elective course class, humanities and art class (optionally)
Deng.
3. foreign language class course (public English course, faculty of foreign languages curriculum schedule 3): specialty class (limit choosing), Scientific basis class (limit
Choosing), professional field course (Scientific basis class class required, professional is required), concentrate practice (required), Specialized skill (must
Repair), practice course (required), Professional knowledge class (limit choosing), expand elective, basic socilalizing course (required), arbitrarily take as an elective course
Class, general education class (required) etc..
4. put into practice class course-experimental courses (table 4): professional field course (Scientific basis class is required), Scientific basis class (limit
Choosing), general education class (required), arbitrarily take as an elective course class etc..
5. put into practice class course-practice supervision (table 5): practice course (required), public compulsory course
6. put into practice class course-Course Exercise (table 6): practice course (required), concentrate practice (required), Specialized course
(required)
7. put into practice class course-graduate thesis (table 7): practice course (required)
8. ideological and political education class course (table 8): basic socilalizing course (required), general education class (required)
Evaluation content is as follows:
Evaluation content is set, i.e. from " preparing according to the preparation of whole classroom instruction, process (enforcement), result three phases
Factor ", " process (enforcement) factor ", " result factor " three one-level evaluation indexes devise 5-10 two-level appraisement index.
Wherein, the Selection of Teaching Materials of preparatory stage primary evaluation teacher, situation etc. of preparing lessons；The classroom instruction of process stage primary evaluation teacher
Input degree, the content of courses, teaching technique and the aspect such as method, classroom interactions's situation；The result stage mainly allows teacher teach
Learn self-examination, evaluate the situation such as the growth of student knowledge and the lifting of ability.
Evaluation index is as follows:
(1) Classroom Teaching index system
Principle according to " science ", " practical ", " comprehensively " and " easily operation " designs the assessment indicator system of each dimension.
The full marks of (two) five big class Present Evaluation Indexes are 100 points, and each index sets " A, B, C, D, E " five evaluations etc.
Level, grade score value is respectively as follows: A:10～9；B:8.9～8；C:7.9～7；D:6.9～6；E:5.9～0, minimum score section is 0.5
Point.
(3) teaching quality evaluation divides five grades.Hundred-mark system is as follows with grade transformational relation:
Excellent >=90；80≤good < 90；70≤in (typically) < 80；60≤qualified < 70；Defective < 60.
Evaluation methodology is as follows:
Being arranged by Educational Affairs Office " teachers ' teaching centre of development " is unified, each institute specifically organizes, " ' five dimension one ' expansionary
Teaching assessment system " (hereinafter referred to as " commenting teaching system ") carried out.Per term is sent evaluation notice, each institute histology by Educational Affairs Office
Raw, teacher logs in Shanghai University Of Electric Power by campus network or the Internet with the user identity set in set period and evaluates on the net
System, is evaluated " the teacher's course " in the range of evaluation authority.
(1) five big human subject evaluation method
1. student assessment." the interim evaluation of student " concentrates the 6-10 week being arranged in per term, takes voluntary evaluation principle；
" student's end of term is evaluated " is concentrated before being arranged in per term End-of-Course and is started, closedown first week next term of next year.
2. inspection is evaluated.School undergraduate course supervisor gos deep into undergraduate course First Line, and listen to the teacher in per term 7-9 the most at random
Joint, conscientiously fills in " teaching supervisor expert's table " and will monthly appraise result through discussion and input on time and comment teaching system.
3. peer review.Each institute (portion) is in charge of teaching president should complete colleague's configuration work within the 2nd week per term；Respectively
The per term tissue the court teacher of institute (portion) mutually listens to the teacher, and a teacher need to be listened to the teacher by 4-6 position teacher, and the teacher that listens to the teacher should conscientiously fill out
Write " peer review table ", and result input will be appraised through discussion before per term End-of-Course and comment teaching system.
4. self evaluation.Serve as before the teacher of course teaching task terminates in per term, should conscientiously fill in that " self evaluation is used
Table " and will appraise through discussion result input comment teaching system.
5. leader evaluates.School entirety middle-ranking officials must go deep into undergraduate course classroom and listen to the teacher, everyone 3-5 that should listen to the teacher of per term
Secondary class, listened course is required to be different teachers, conscientiously fills in " leader's evaluation table ", and will appraise through discussion before per term End-of-Course
Teaching system is commented in result input.
(2) statistical method
1. single courses statistical method: " student assessment " of every subject calculates after deducting the evaluation score of before and after 10% again
" the student assessment average mark " of this subject, then by " student assessment average mark " and this subject " inspection is evaluated average
Point ", " peer review average mark ", " leader evaluates average mark ", " self evaluation " collect, be weighted adding up, draw this subject
The overall merit score of journey.
Five dimension general comment score computation method:
Single courses is evaluated PTS=student assessment average mark * 55%+ inspection and is evaluated average mark * 20%+ peer review
Average mark * 10%+ leader evaluates average mark * 10%+ self evaluation average mark * 5%.
Discontented five dimension general comment score computation method: (such as: " leader's evaluation " dimension does not evaluate score, other four dimensions
Degree has score):
Single courses evaluates PTS=[student assessment average mark * 55%+ inspection evaluation average mark * 20%+ peer review
Average mark * 10%+ self evaluation average mark * 5%]/(1-10%).
2. teacher individual's course PTS computational methods:
Teacher individual's course PTS=when term all course evaluation of teacher divide summation/teacher's course door number of times.
Table 1 specialty expands logical knowledge course class (except physical culture, art, foreign language, think of political affairs class)
Table 2 physical culture Arts course
Table 3 foreign language class course [public English course, specialty Foreign Language Curriculum]
Class curriculum experiment course put into practice by table 4
Table 5 is put into practice class course practice and is instructed
Class course Course Exercise put into practice by table 6
Class course graduate thesis put into practice by table 7
Table 8 basic socilalizing course-think of political affairs class
Table 9 teaching supervisor expert's table
Table 10 colleague's table
Table 11 leader's table
Table 12 self evaluation
Course name: participate in evaluation and electing teacher's name:
Time: date
Claims (6)
1. an Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality, for evaluating the classroom instruction of all courses of full-time undergraduate course, its feature exists
In, comprise the following steps:
(1) user logs in；
(2) class of subscriber is judged；
(3) selecting corresponding evaluation table according to class of subscriber, user carries out marking and evaluates and according to evaluation score rating；
(4) Calculation Estimation mark, evaluates PTS and teacher individual's course PTS including single courses.
A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality the most according to claim 1, it is characterised in that described class of subscriber includes learning
Give birth to, supervise and guide, go together, teacher self and leader.
A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality the most according to claim 2, it is characterised in that if all class of subscribers all have
Evaluate, then described single courses is evaluated PTS=student assessment average mark * student assessment weight+inspection and is evaluated average mark *
Inspection evaluation weight+peer review average mark * peer review weight+leader evaluates average mark * and leads evaluation weight+self evaluation
Average mark * self evaluation weight, otherwise, described single courses evaluates PTS=(student assessment average mark * student assessment power
Weight+inspection is evaluated average mark * inspection evaluation weight+peer review average mark * peer review weight+leader and is evaluated average mark * neck
Lead evaluation weight+self evaluation average mark * self evaluation weight)/(1-a), wherein, student assessment weight is 55%, and inspection is commented
Valency weight is 20%, and peer review weight is 10%, and leader's evaluation weight is 10%, and self evaluation weight is 5%, and a represents and comments
Valency is equally divided into the weight sum corresponding to class of subscriber of 0, and * represents multiplying.
A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality the most according to claim 1, it is characterised in that described student assessment average mark
Computational methods be: after removing front 10% and rear 10% in all student assessment marks of every subject, remaining Students ' Evaluation
Valency mark is averaged.
A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality the most according to claim 1, it is characterised in that described teacher individual's course is total
Score=when term all course evaluation of teacher divide summation/teacher's course door number of times, described when term all courses of teacher comment
Valency summation is that the single courses of all courses working as term teacher evaluates PTS sum.
A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality the most according to claim 1, it is characterised in that in described step (3), if commenting
The mark of valency is not less than 90, then rating is excellent, if 80≤evaluation score < 90, then rating is good, if 70≤evaluate and divide
Number < 80, then rating is general, if 60≤evaluation score < 70, then rating is qualified, if evaluation score < 60, then comment
It is defective for determining grade.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201610520276.1A CN106203811A (en) | 2016-07-05 | 2016-07-05 | A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201610520276.1A CN106203811A (en) | 2016-07-05 | 2016-07-05 | A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN106203811A true CN106203811A (en) | 2016-12-07 |
Family
ID=57465548
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201610520276.1A Pending CN106203811A (en) | 2016-07-05 | 2016-07-05 | A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN106203811A (en) |
Cited By (17)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN107085721A (en) * | 2017-06-26 | 2017-08-22 | 厦门劢联科技有限公司 | A kind of intelligence based on Identification of Images patrols class management system |
| CN107169649A (en) * | 2017-05-11 | 2017-09-15 | 安徽谦通信息科技有限公司 | A kind of teacher's Intelligent examining evaluation management system |
| CN107945077A (en) * | 2017-12-21 | 2018-04-20 | 四川文理学院 | Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality and device |
| CN108805405A (en) * | 2018-05-02 | 2018-11-13 | 浙江建设职业技术学院 | A kind of teaching assessment system and its construction method |
| CN110009234A (en) * | 2019-04-09 | 2019-07-12 | 湖南生物机电职业技术学院 | Class evaluation method is admired in a kind of think of political affairs based on big data |
| CN110046667A (en) * | 2019-04-19 | 2019-07-23 | 华东交通大学 | A kind of Method of Teaching Appraisal based on deep neural network study score data pair |
| CN110046813A (en) * | 2019-04-08 | 2019-07-23 | 刘玥 | A kind of generation method and system of method for student synthetic quality report |
| CN110046807A (en) * | 2019-03-29 | 2019-07-23 | 成都乐陪信息科技有限公司 | Teachers'Growth evaluation method and system based on electronic record appraisal management |
| CN110147964A (en) * | 2019-05-24 | 2019-08-20 | 焦作大学 | Talent evaluation system based on big data technology |
| CN110188976A (en) * | 2019-04-04 | 2019-08-30 | 中国平安财产保险股份有限公司 | Grade appraisal procedure, device, equipment and storage medium based on data analysis |
| CN111291966A (en) * | 2020-01-13 | 2020-06-16 | 台州学院 | Teacher teaching quality evaluation system and method thereof |
| CN111369140A (en) * | 2020-03-04 | 2020-07-03 | 四川宇德中创信息科技有限公司 | Teaching evaluation system and method |
| CN111915224A (en) * | 2020-08-21 | 2020-11-10 | 广州云蝶科技有限公司 | Teaching evaluation system |
| CN112381693A (en) * | 2020-12-07 | 2021-02-19 | 上海光数信息科技有限公司 | Method and system for managing and optimizing textbook courses |
| CN112686789A (en) * | 2021-01-11 | 2021-04-20 | 重庆电子工程职业学院 | Intelligent evaluation method for classroom teaching effect of colleges and universities |
| CN113256065A (en) * | 2021-04-22 | 2021-08-13 | 浙江工业大学 | Method and system for evaluating and analyzing reasons of student teaching based on satisfaction information |
| CN115759849A (en) * | 2022-11-23 | 2023-03-07 | 华中师范大学 | Classroom teaching quality evaluation method and system aiming at differentiated teaching requirements |
Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN102708463A (en) * | 2012-05-18 | 2012-10-03 | 苏州慧飞信息科技有限公司 | Teaching quality comprehensive assessment system |
-
2016
- 2016-07-05 CN CN201610520276.1A patent/CN106203811A/en active Pending
Patent Citations (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN102708463A (en) * | 2012-05-18 | 2012-10-03 | 苏州慧飞信息科技有限公司 | Teaching quality comprehensive assessment system |
Cited By (19)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN107169649A (en) * | 2017-05-11 | 2017-09-15 | 安徽谦通信息科技有限公司 | A kind of teacher's Intelligent examining evaluation management system |
| CN107085721A (en) * | 2017-06-26 | 2017-08-22 | 厦门劢联科技有限公司 | A kind of intelligence based on Identification of Images patrols class management system |
| CN107945077A (en) * | 2017-12-21 | 2018-04-20 | 四川文理学院 | Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality and device |
| CN108805405A (en) * | 2018-05-02 | 2018-11-13 | 浙江建设职业技术学院 | A kind of teaching assessment system and its construction method |
| CN110046807A (en) * | 2019-03-29 | 2019-07-23 | 成都乐陪信息科技有限公司 | Teachers'Growth evaluation method and system based on electronic record appraisal management |
| CN110188976A (en) * | 2019-04-04 | 2019-08-30 | 中国平安财产保险股份有限公司 | Grade appraisal procedure, device, equipment and storage medium based on data analysis |
| CN110046813A (en) * | 2019-04-08 | 2019-07-23 | 刘玥 | A kind of generation method and system of method for student synthetic quality report |
| CN110009234A (en) * | 2019-04-09 | 2019-07-12 | 湖南生物机电职业技术学院 | Class evaluation method is admired in a kind of think of political affairs based on big data |
| CN110046667B (en) * | 2019-04-19 | 2022-08-12 | 华东交通大学 | Teaching evaluation method based on deep neural network learning scoring data pair |
| CN110046667A (en) * | 2019-04-19 | 2019-07-23 | 华东交通大学 | A kind of Method of Teaching Appraisal based on deep neural network study score data pair |
| CN110147964A (en) * | 2019-05-24 | 2019-08-20 | 焦作大学 | Talent evaluation system based on big data technology |
| CN111291966A (en) * | 2020-01-13 | 2020-06-16 | 台州学院 | Teacher teaching quality evaluation system and method thereof |
| CN111369140A (en) * | 2020-03-04 | 2020-07-03 | 四川宇德中创信息科技有限公司 | Teaching evaluation system and method |
| CN111369140B (en) * | 2020-03-04 | 2024-02-27 | 四川宇德中创信息科技有限公司 | Teaching evaluation system and method |
| CN111915224A (en) * | 2020-08-21 | 2020-11-10 | 广州云蝶科技有限公司 | Teaching evaluation system |
| CN112381693A (en) * | 2020-12-07 | 2021-02-19 | 上海光数信息科技有限公司 | Method and system for managing and optimizing textbook courses |
| CN112686789A (en) * | 2021-01-11 | 2021-04-20 | 重庆电子工程职业学院 | Intelligent evaluation method for classroom teaching effect of colleges and universities |
| CN113256065A (en) * | 2021-04-22 | 2021-08-13 | 浙江工业大学 | Method and system for evaluating and analyzing reasons of student teaching based on satisfaction information |
| CN115759849A (en) * | 2022-11-23 | 2023-03-07 | 华中师范大学 | Classroom teaching quality evaluation method and system aiming at differentiated teaching requirements |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN106203811A (en) | A kind of Evaluation Method of Teaching Quality | |
| Fatiani et al. | Practicing Cooperative Learning Model Using Picture Cube and Story Marker to Improve Writing Skills | |
| Töman | Investigation of Reflective Teaching Practice Effect on Training Development Skills of the Pre-Service Teachers. | |
| CN106780208A (en) | The method of achievement of being imparted knowledge to students using the more different disciplinary faculties of LT fractional statisticses instruments | |
| Huang et al. | Comprehensive Evaluation of Teaching Quality of Public Physical Education in Colleges and Universities. | |
| Hicyilmaz et al. | A New Approach in the Professional Development of Prospective Visual Arts Teachers: A Lesson Study Model. | |
| González-Andrés et al. | The use of rubrics to assess competences | |
| Marta et al. | A Implementation of Contextual Approach to Improve Motivation and Student Learning Outcomes in Class VI Learning Science Learning SD Negeri 24 Ganting Singgalang | |
| Tai et al. | Measuring teacher competency for the era of education 4.0: A study in Malaysian secondary schools | |
| Katiliūtė | Students' perception of the quality of studies: differences between the students according to their academic performance | |
| Salehi et al. | Teachers’ perceptions of high-stakes tests: a washback study | |
| Tang et al. | A new fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model for influencing factors of physical education | |
| Xia et al. | Comprehensive Evaluation for Teaching Quality of College Faculty. | |
| TWM606688U (en) | Cloud intelligent item bank system for scoring knowledge point | |
| Mantra et al. | Intensive Collaborative Learning Workshop to Enhance Private Teachers' Teaching Competence | |
| Huang et al. | Construction of wisdom classroom for English majors based on back propagation | |
| Uličná | Professional vision of future English language teachers: subject-specific noticing and knowledge-based reasoning. | |
| Dericioğlu et al. | Case study on the applicability of STEM education approach in Northern Cyprus education system according to the opinions of school administrators | |
| Bargagliotti et al. | A Commentary on Elementary Teacher Preparation to Teach Statistics. | |
| Al-Kandari et al. | Difficulties faced by science teachers in selected public schools in Kuwait: a descriptive study | |
| Floreno | School Learning Action Cell SLAC Among Secondary School Teachers under New Normal | |
| Calhoun | A Wide-Angle Lens: How To Increase the Variety, Collection, and Use of Data for School Improvement. | |
| Klaharn | Development of a Training Course Focusing on Teachers’ Analytical Thinking Skills in Measurement and Evaluation | |
| Ozmusul et al. | School Policies and Practices at Upper Secondary Schools in Turkey According to PISA 2009 Data. | |
| Rider et al. | Differences in students’ use of computer simulation tools and reasoning about empirical data and theoretical distributions |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| C06 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| C10 | Entry into substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| RJ01 | Rejection of invention patent application after publication | ||
| RJ01 | Rejection of invention patent application after publication |
Application publication date: 20161207 |