Abstract
AbstractSurvey-based formats of assessing teaching quality in higher education are widely used and will likely continue to be used by higher education institutions around the world as various global trends contributing to their widespread use further evolve. Although the use of mobile devices for course evaluation continues to grow, there remain some unresolved aspects of the classic paper and web-based modes of evaluation. In the current study, the multigroup confirmatory factor analysis approach (MGCFA), an accepted methodological approach in general mixed-method survey research, was chosen to address some of the methodological issues when comparing these two evaluation modes. By randomly assigning one of the two modes to 33 continuing training courses at a Swiss higher education institution, this study tested whether the two different modes of assessing teaching quality yield the same results. The practical implications for course evaluation practice in institutions of higher education as well as the implications and limitations of the chosen methodological approach are discussed.
Funder
Swiss Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Education
Reference50 articles.
1. Avery, R. J., Bryant, W. K., Mathios, A., Kang, H., & Bell, D. (2006). Electronic course evaluations. Does an online delivery system influence student evaluations? Journal of Economic Education, 37(1), 21–37.
2. Barkhi, R., & Williams, P. (2010). The impact of electronic media on faculty evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 241–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902795927.
3. Bialosiewicz, S., Murphy, K., & Berry, T. (2013). An introduction to measurement invariance testing. Do our measures measure up? The critical role of measurement invariance. Claremont.
4. Biemer, P. P., De Leeuw, E. D., Eckman, S., Edwards, B., Kreuter, F., Lyberg, L. E., … West, B. T. (2017). Total survey error in practice. Hoboken: Wiley.
5. Borch, I., Sandvoll, R., & Risør, T. (2020). Discrepancies in purposes of student course evaluations: what does it mean to be “satisfied”? Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09315-x.
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献