مقایسه‌ی رضایت دانشجویان از کیفیت برنامه‌ی درسی و عملکرد استادان و کارکنان دانشکده‌ی علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی دانشگاه شیراز

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

استادیار دانشگاه شیراز

چکیده

هدف از انجام تحقیق حاضر، مقایسه‌ی رضایت دانشجویان زن و مرد رشته‌های مختلف دانشکده‌ی علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی دانشگاه شیراز، از کیفیت برنامه‌ی درسی و عملکرد استادان وکارکنان مربوط است. روش تحقیق در این مطالعه، از نوع توصیفی – پیمایشی است و جامعه‌ی آماری شامل کلیه‌ی دانشجویان رشته‌های تربیت بدنی، روان‌شناسی بالینی، علوم کتابداری و اطلاع رسانی، مدیریت و برنامه ریزی آموزشی، آموزش پیش دبستانی و دبستانی و کودکان استثنایی است که در سال تحصیلی 88-87 مشغول به تحصیل بودند. با استفاده از نمونه گیری تصادفی طبقه‌ای از بین دانشجویان ترم‌های 5 و 7 رشته‌های مذکور، تعداد 181 نفر انتخاب شده و پرسشنامه‌ی برنامه‌ی درسی مدیریت ورزش دانشگاه فلوریدا (2004) بین آنان توزیع گردید. داده‌ها با استفاده از نرم افزار Spss 16 و از طریق روش‌های آماری توصیفی و T-test و تحلیل واریانس مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفتند. نتایج نشان داد که: 1) دانشجویان زن رضایت بالاتری از کیفیت عملکرد استادان خود دارند. 2) بین میزان رضایت دانشجویان زن و مرد از کیفیت عملکرد کارکنان و کیفیت برنامه‌ی درسی، تفاوت معناداری وجود ندارد. 3) بین میزان رضایت دانشجویان رشته‌های مختلف از کیفیت عملکرد کارکنان و کیفیت برنامه‌ی درسی، تفاوت معناداری وجود ندارد. 4) از دیدگاه دانشجویان، بالاترین کیفیت عملکرد، متعلق به اساتید آموزش پیش دبستانی و پایین ترین کیفیت عملکرد، متعلق به استادان علوم کتابداری و اطلاع رسانی است. 5) در کلیه‌ی رشته‌ها، بالاترین میزان رضایت دانشجویان از کیفیت دروس تخصصی و پایین ترین رضایت از دروس کارورزی و عملی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


الف. فارسی

بازرگان، عباس. (1380). ارزشیابی آموزشی. تهران: انتشارات سمت.

پارسا، عبداله. (1385). بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر برنامه‌ی درسی اجرا شده و برنامه‌ی درسی آموخته شده در دوره‌های کارشناسی دانشگاه شیراز بر اساس الگوی سه عاملی بیگز (3P). رساله‌ی دکتری برنامه ریزی درسی، دانشگاه شیراز.

کلاین، فرانسیس. (1369). استفاده از یک مدل تحقیقاتی به عنوان راهنمای فرایند برنامه‌ریزی درسی. ترجمه‌ی محمود مهر محمدی. فصلنامه تعلیم و تربیت، 21.

ب. انگلیسی

Abrami, P. C. & d'Apollonia, S. (1990). The dimensionality of ratings and their use in personnel decisions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Assel, M., Landry, S., Swank, P. & Gunnewig, S. (2007). An evaluation of curriculum, setting, and mentoring on the performance of children enrolled in prekindergarten. Reading and Writing, 20(5): 463-494.

Avador, S. (2006). For whom and for what? Bias factors in student's evaluations at educational colleges and the question of benefit for the evaluated and the organization. Dapim, 41, 10-37 (Hebrew version).

Bailey, J. (1995). Issues of teaching and learning. What is curriculum. Learning Innovation. New Letter of the Innovative Teaching Forum. UW A. June.

Basow, S. A. (2000). Best and worst professors: Gender patterns in students’ choices. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 34: 407-417.

Bean, J. P. & Vesper, N. (1994). Gender Differences in College Student Satisfaction. Association for the Study of Higher Education. Conference Paper, (Tucson).

Bojrukland, S. A., Parente, J. & Sathianatham, D. (2002). Effects of faculty interaction and feedback on gains in student skills; ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Nov 6-9 Boston.

Cashin, W. E. (1990). Students do rate different academic fields differently. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation. San Fransicisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cliff, A. F. (1998). Teacher-learners’conceptions of learning: Evid- ence of a communalist conception amongst postgraduate learners. Higher Education. 35: 205-220.

Darby, J. (2006). The Effects of Elective or Required Status of Courses on Student Evaluations. Journal of Vocational Education & Training. 58 (1): 19-29.

Davidovitch, N. & Soen, D. (2009). Myth and facts about student's survey of teaching: the links between student's evaluation of faculties and course grades. Journal of College, Nov, 6,7.

Donahue, P. (2000). Evaluating teaching. ADE Bulletin, 126: 46-47.

Feldman, K. A. (1993). College Students’ Views of Male and Female College Teachers. Part 11: Evidence from Students’ Evaluations of Their Classroom Teachers. Research in Higher Education, 34: 151-211.

Gow, L. & Kember, D. (1990). Does higher education promote inde- pendent learning. Higher Education. 19: 307-322.

Greenwald, A. G. & Gillmore, G. M. (1997). No pain, no gain? The importance of measuring course workload in student ratings of instruction, Journal of Educational Psychology, 89.

Griffith, Kevin. (1996). First‑Year Composition and Student Retention: The Neglected Goal. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication. ED 397412.

Hancock, G. R., Shannon, D. M. & Trentham, L. I. (1992). Student and teacher gender in ratings of university faculty: Results from five colleges of study. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 6: 235-248.

Harrison, P. D., Douglas, D. K. and Burdsal, C. A. (2004). The relative merits of different types of overal evaluations of teaching  effectiveness. Research in Higher Education. 45(3): 311-323.

Haskell, R. E. (1997). Academic Freedom,Tenure, and Student Evaluation of Faculty. Education Policy Analysis Archives. 5 (6).

Hativa, N. (2008). Myths and facts evaluation surveys by students, Al-Agova, 7, 13-14 (Hebrew version).

Heine, R. & Maddox, E. (2008). Student perceptions of the faculty course evaluation process: An explanatory study, Proceedings of ASBBS, 15 (1).

Ho, A., Watkins, D. & Kelly, M. (2001). The conceptual change approach to improving teaching and learning: An evaluation of a Hong Kong staff development programme, Higher Education, 42: 143- 169.

Jaasma, M. A. & Koper, R. J. ) 1999(. Out‑of‑Class Communication between Students and Faculty: the relationship to instructor immediacy, trust and control, and to student motivation. Vancouver. BC: Annual Meeting of the Western States Communication Association; Arlington, VA: ERIC Document Reproduction Service. ED 427 380.

 

Jackling, Beverley. (2000). Influences of student interest and perceptions of teaching on the quality of learning in first year Accounting. http: // www. Deakin.au / facbuslaw / schaccfin / publications /wor kingpapers/2000.pdf.

Johnson, G. M. (1994). Undergraduate student attrition.A comparison of students who withdraw and students who persist. Alberta Journal of Educational Research. 28 (6): 484‑495.

Kember, D. & McKay, J. (1996). Action research into the quality of student learning. Journal of Higher Education. 67 (5): 528-554.

Key, S. (1979). “Sex bias in students’ responses”, News for Teachers of Political Science: A Publication of the American Political Science Association, 23: 17-19.

Marsh, H. W. & Roche, L. A. (2000). Effects of grading leniency and low workloads on students’ evaluations of teaching: Popular myth, bias, validity or innocent bystanders? Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 (1): 203-228.

McKeachie, W. J. (1996). Do we need norms of student ratings to evaluate faculty? Instructional Evaluation and Faculty Development, 15 (1 & 2): 14-17.

Noel, L., Levitz, R. & Saluri, D. (1985). Increasing student retention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Nordval, R. C. & Braxton, J. M. (1996). An alternative definition of quality of undergraduate college education. Journal of Higher Education. 67 (5): 483-497.

Pratt, D. (1980). Curriculum-Design and Development. Harcourt Brace Jovanovick INC. New York.

Sedlacek, W. E. (1987). Black students on white campuses: Twenty years of Research. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28: 484-495.

Sheppard, C. & Gilbert, J. (1991). Course design, teaching method and student epistemology. Higher Education, 22: 229-249.

Smith, B. (2007). Student rating of teaching effectiveness: An analysis of end of course evaluation of faculty. College Student Journal, Dec 2007; 41, 4.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

 

Trigwell, K. & Prosser, M. (1991). Relating approaches to study and quality of learning outcomes at the course level. B.J. edu. Psy. 265-275.

Trohalides, S. (2008). Technology-Enhanced Curriculum in a Community College Fitness Program: Measuring the Impact on Commitment and Student Course Satisfaction, Dissertation Submitted in Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education, Walden University, Ed.D. Program.

Trout, Paul. (2000). Low marks for top teachers. Washington Post, March 13: A17.

Van der Werf, MJ., Mbaye A., Sow S., Gryseels B. & de Vlas SJ. (2002). Evaluation of staff performance and material resources for integrated schistosomiasis control in northern Senegal. Tropical Medicine and International Health, Jan. 7(1): 70-79.

Villella, J. W. ( 1998 ). Freshmen involvement in a pennsylvania state university and its effect on grade point average and satisfaction with the institution, DAI- A 57/12, p. 5080.

Volkwein, J., King, M. and Terenzini, P. (1986). Student-Faculty Relationships and Intellectual Growth Among Transfer Students. Journal of Higher Education, 57 (4): 413-30.

Walker, S. (2001). Evaluation, Discription and Effects of Distance educeation. Learning Environments in Higher Education. In R. Ham & J.Whoosley, Ninth Distance Education.

Wetzel, J. N., O’Toole, D. & Peterson, S. (1999). Factors affecting student retention probabilities: A Case Study. Journal of Economics & Finance, 23 (1): 45-55.

Willett, L. H. (2007). Comparison of instructional effectiveness of full-and part time faculty. Community / Junior College Research Quarterly, 5: 23-30.

Young, S. & Shaw, D. G. (1999). Profiles of effective college and university teachers. Journal of Higher Education. 20 (6): 670-686.

Zeegers, P. (2002). A revision of Biggs Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ). Higher Education Research and Development, 21 (1): 73-90.