Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Bb Teaching & Learning Presentation

205

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
205
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 2
  • 2. The Office of Quality, Teaching, and Learning is a service unit for academics and students. We are made up of three services – Quality Assurance (QA), Teaching and Learning Services (TLS), and Student Learning Support (SLS). Services we provide: • Teaching approaches, strategies and ideas • Professional development as a teaching academic • Student learning support • Assessment, assignments, and marking • Applying for Teaching and Learning Awards and Grants • Student evaluation of teaching (TEVAL) processes and applying student feedback3
  • 3. Bond University received the most five-star ratings out of any university in Australia in the independent 2012 Good Universities Guide Bond had an average student enrolment of 4,480 students in 2011, 1,449 of which were international students representing 85 nationalities. There are four Faculties and one Institute: • Faculty of Business: School of Business; School of Information Technology; School of Hotel, Resort & Tourism Management • Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine • Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences • Faculty of Law • Institute of Sustainable Development & Architecture4
  • 4. • Traditionally decentralised paper-based system • New electronic format inspired by former executive BUSA members • Mandatory evaluations voted in by University Teaching and Learning Committee and Academic Senate • Pilot project Semester 3, 2009 - Success5
  • 5. Table 2: Published response rates Source Response Rate (%) Response Rate (%) Paper-Based SETs Online SETs Baruch (1999) - 40 Ballantyne (2005) 55 47 Brigham Young* 71 50 Cook et al. (2000) 56 - Cornell University* 78 50 Dommeyer et al. (2004) 75 43 Griffith University (2005) 57 20 Krieg and Hartsoch (2010) 74.2 56.8 Nair et al. (2005) 56 31 Ogier (2005) 65 30 Sweep (2006) 56 23 University of North Carolina* 92 59 Watt et al. (2002) 33 33 Average 64.7 40.7 Table adapted from Nulty, D. (2008). ‘The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: What can be done?’ Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 303. *Results cited in Hartshorne, R., Lambert, R., Algozzine, B., McAlpin, V., Algozzine, M., Norris, L. & Pyke, J.G. (2011). A comparison of web-based and paper-based course evaluations at UNC Charlotte: A report prepared by The Center for Educational Measurement and Evaluation and The Center for Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from University of North Carolina Charlotte website: http://studentcourseevals.uncc.edu/sites/all/files/Website%20Report%20-%20Course%20Evaluation%20Study.pdf6
  • 6. 1. Blackboard building block – single sign-on with LMS and access to Blackboard groups/class data 2. Highest security rating 3. Extensive troubleshooting & customer support http://www.evaluationkit.com7
  • 7. • Mandatory evaluations - LMS pop-up module to encourage participation • Skip/Opt-out option • Groups tool – maintains accuracy of class allocations • Administrator level automated report builder • Content Analysis Software integration8
  • 8. • eTEVALs administered at the end of each semester • Timeframe: Week 10 - 14 • Two separate evaluations: Subject and Educator evaluations (5 point Likert) • Subject Evaluation: 5 questions, 1 open-text comment box; Educator Evaluation: 10 questions, 2 open-text comment boxes • Instructor/Administrator reports available after student results are released9
  • 9. • Access via email10
  • 10. • Access via iLearn (LMS)11
  • 11. • eTEVAL Dashboard12
  • 12. • Skip/Opt out option13
  • 13. Imposed Week 12 sanction increased response rate Table 1: Week 12 Response Rate Results - (30/03/2012) Response Rates (%) Level Subject evaluation Educator evaluation Overall Bond Educator Evaluation 50.66% (+12.91%) - Bond Subject Evaluation 55.72% (+13.06%) Faculty of Business Business 58.98% (+13.82%) 55.54% (+14.03%) IT 55.95% (+10.41%) 51.38% (+11.32%) HRTM 56.69% (+14.01%) 51.59% (+13.37%) Institute of Sustainable Development and Architecture School of Sustainable Development 55.30% (+17.25%) 49.77% (+18.94%) School of Architecture 46.10% (+10.39%) 43.51% (+8.45%) Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences 53.27% (+11.98%) 46.13% (+11.72%) Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine School of Health Sciences 58.13% (+7.72%) 54.31% (+10.96%) School of Medicine 60.49% (+3.70%) 53.81% (+3.01%) Faculty of Law 54.27% (+15.74%) 50.80% (+16.96%) Bond College/BUELI 71.38% (+21.69%) 69.47% (+28.84%) Opt-Out Option Responses Opt-Out 400 (+312) 970 (+630)14
  • 14. Response rates of nearly 90% on the Likert scale items of online student evaluation of teaching in the first semester of whole-of-university implementation. Table 2: Final Response Rate Results - (23/04/2012) Response Rates (%) Level Subject evaluation Educator evaluation Overall Bond Educator Evaluation 86.04% (+0.03%) - Bond Subject Evaluation 89.22% (+0.23%) Faculty of Business Business 91.54% (+0.08%) 90.48% (+0.10%) IT 86.61% (+0.45%) 83.03% (+0.16%) HRTM 88.54% (+0.00%) 87.90% (+0.00%) Institute of Sustainable Development and Architecture School of Sustainable Development 90.52% (+0.14%) 89.72% (+0.69%) School of Architecture 82.47% (+0.65%) 82.47% (+0.00%) Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences 87.63% (+0.31%) 85.19% (+0.60%) Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine School of Health Sciences 88.95% (+0.00%) 88.24% (+0.00%) School of Medicine 72.84% (+1.85%) 61.52% (+0.47%) Faculty of Law 90.94% (+0.24%) 89.51% (+0.37%) Bond College/BUELI 88.05% (+0.94%) 86.95% (+0.84%) Opt-Out Option Responses Opt-Out 1097 (+6) 2514 (+13)15
  • 15. Trend of responses during the evaluation period Notable spike at Week 12 – Imposed sanction for non-respondents16
  • 16. Continued success – Semester 2, 2012 Subject Evaluation Educator Evaluation Actual Response Rate 82.57% (+2%) 82.84% (+8%) Opt Out Response Rate 1,478 (+13%) 2,516 (+13%) Aggregated Response Rate 96.31% (+7%) 96.16% (+10%) • Increased awareness and support from students and faculty • Contributing to a culture of evaluation17
  • 17. http://www.bond.edu.au/etevals18
  • 18. • Closing the loop on student feedback • Inspired by former executive members of BUSA • TEQSA - Provider Standards: - Standard 5.6 - Standard 4.2 • Bond University initiative19
  • 19. Quality Assurance and eSETs close approved for publication (Semester a) (Week 2 Semester c) Faculty Associate Dean Teaching & Quantitative and Learning review and approve Qualitative data analysed Administrator review and Administrator eSET action SER report access items (if applicable) (Semester b) Subject Coordinator selects the  Subject Coordinators may decide that the comments cannot be actioned (“didn’t like this subject”); “No action Taken”  there may be no negative comments to action;Button and "Submit" button and  Positive comments cannot be actioned (“loved thisSER remains unchanged 20 subject”)
  • 20. 21
  • 21. 22
  • 22. Administration Communication eTEVALs Collaboration Publication23
  • 23. Knight, D., Naidu, V. & Kinash, S. (2012, Oct). Achieving high student evaluation of teaching response rates through a culture of academic- student collaboration. Paper to be presented at the Australasian Higher Education Evaluation Forum 2012, Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia. Kinash, S., Knight, D. & Hives, L. (2011). Student perspective on electronic evaluation of teaching. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 8(1), 86-97. Kinash, S., Naidu, V. & Wood, K. http://works.bepress.com/shelley_kinash (2012). Electronic teaching evaluation: Student perceptions and teacher responses. Education Technology Solutions, 48, 60-62.24
  • 24. 25

×