| 赵伟春,徐云飞,吴昊,等.非教学因素对高校学生评教的影响及其启示——以浙江中医药大学生命科学学院为例[J].浙江中医药大学学报,2019,43(2):134-139. |
| 非教学因素对高校学生评教的影响及其启示——以浙江中医药大学生命科学学院为例 |
| Influence of Non-teaching Factors on College Students' Evaluation of Teaching and Its Enlightenment——Based on Data from the School of Life Sciences, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University |
| DOI：10.16466/j.issn1005-5509.2019.02.004 |
| 中文关键词: 学生评教 课堂教学 教师背景 课程性质 学生属性 |
| 英文关键词: students' evaluation of teaching classroom teaching teacher background curriculum nature student attributes |
| 基金项目:浙江省高等教育课堂教学改革项目(kg20160592)；浙江省高等教育教学改革项目(jg2015231)；浙江中医药大学“课程思政”教学团队 |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 2142 |
| 全文下载次数: 1161 |
| 中文摘要: |
| [目的]分析非教学因素对高校学评教结果的影响，为优化学评教体系提供依据。[方法]采用最小显著性差异(Least—Significant Difference，LSD)法单因素方差分析法和线性回归分析法统计分析浙江中医药大学生命科学学院9个学期、6个课程类别、36门课程、46名教师、4个年级学生的学评教数据，阐述教师背景(年龄、性别、职称)、课程性质(课程类别、课程名称)和学生属性(年级、计分人数、有效计分率)等非教学因素对学评教的影响。[结果]不同教师的学评教得分存在一定的差异。在不同课程类别间，专业课和公选课的学评教得分显著高于学科基础课和公共基础课。不同课程间学评教得分差异显著。学评教得分随着学生年级升高而呈三级阶梯状显著升高。教师的年龄、性别和职称以及学生的计分人数及有效计分率对学评教无显著影响。[结论] 影响学评教的主要非教学因素为课程类别、课程名称和学生年级。对学评教工作提出了相应的可行性建议与优化方案。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| [Objective]This study analyzes the influence of non-teaching factors on the results of students' evaluation of teaching in universities, and provides the basis for further optimizing the evaluation teaching system. [Methods] The single factor variance of LSD method and linear correlation analysis are used to analyze the data of 9 semesters, 6 course categories, 36 courses, 46 teachers, and 4 grades students at the School of Life Sciences of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University were collected for statistical analysis. The correlation between the non-teaching factors, such as teacher background (age, gender, title), curriculum nature(course categories, course contents) and student attributes(grade, score number, effective score rate), and student evaluation scores were expounded.[Results] There are statistically differences in the evaluation results of different teachers. There are significant differences among different categories of courses. The subject basic and public basic courses have the lower academic evaluation scores, and professional courses and public election courses have the higher academic evaluation scores. There are significant differences among the different courses. The score of the students’ evaluation of teaching increased significantly with the increase of the student grade. The ages, gender and professional title of teachers, the number of scoring students, and the effective scoring rate have no significant influence on students' evaluation of teaching. [Conclusion] The main non-teaching factors that affect students' evaluation of teaching are course types, course names and student grades. Stemmed from the analysis, we propose feasible suggestions to improve course evaluation and optimize its practice. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|