Teacher self-assessment as a part of quality management

Hašková Alena; Lukáčová Danka; Noga Henryk

Science for Education Today

2019, том 9, № 2

http://sciforedu.ru

ISSN 2658-6762

DOI: 10.15293/2658-6762.1902.11

УДК 378.2

САМООЦЕНКА ПРЕПОДАВАТЕЛЯ КАК ЧАСТЬ МЕНЕДЖМЕНТА КАЧЕСТВА

А. Гашкова, Д. Лукачова (Нитра, Словакия), Х. Нога (Краков, Польша)

Проблема и цель. Саморефлексия является необходимым предварительным условием для улучшения и повышения эффективности работы преподавателя. Она должна быть включена в процессы оценки преподавателей, проводимые учебными заведениями, в которых они работают.

Основной проблемный вопрос авторского исследования, проведенного в соответствующем высшем учебном заведении, - будут ли педагогические компетенции преподавателей оцениваться студентами на более высоком уровне после введения самооценки педагогов.

Методология. В статье представлены оценочный инструментарий и методика самооценки педагога, внедренная на педагогическом факультете университета Константина философа в Нитре в рамках его внутренней системы обеспечения качества. Авторами были использованы количественные и качественные методы исследования для выявления результатов процесса оценки с точки зрения как самого преподавателя, так и студента.

Результаты. Результаты представленного исследования показывают, что внедрение самооценки педагога во внутренний механизм управления качеством оказало положительное влияние на профессиональную деятельность педагога, что нашло отражение в оценивании, проведенном студентами.

Заключение. Представленные усилия университета Константина философа по улучшению качества всех направлений своей деятельности для создания условий его долгосрочного процветания и конкурентоспособности получили национальное признание. В 2017 году словацкое Управление по стандартам, метрологии и испытаниям наградило Университет национальной премией качества Словацкой Республики. Цель этой премии - мотивировать и поддерживать органы государственного и частного секторов в постоянном совершенствовании и повышении эффективности.

Ключевые слова: оценка деятельности преподавателей, высшие учебные заведения, внутренние системы обеспечения качества, самооценка, педагогические компетенции.

* Данное исследование авторов было поддержано Агентством по научным исследованиям и разработкам (Словакия) в соответствии с контрактом № 11/1996. APVV-14-0446

Алена Гашкова - PhD, профессор кафедры Технологии и технологической информации, Педагогический факультет, Университет Константина философа, Нитра, Словакия. E- mail: ahaskova@ukf.sk

Данка Лукачова - PhD, доцент кафедры Технологии и технологической информации, Педагогический факультет, Университет Константина философа, Нитра, Словакия. E- mail: dlukacova@ukf.sk

Хенрик Нога - PhD, профессор, Технологический институт, Факультет математики, физики и технических наук, Краковский педагогический университет, Краков, Польша. E- mail: senoga@cyf-kr.edu.pl

2019, том 9, № 2 http://sciforedu.ru ISSN 2658-6762

СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

1. Ambrozy M., Králik R., Martin J. G. Determinism vs freedom: Some ethics-social implications = Deterninismo vs libertad: Algunas implicaciones etico-sociales // XLinguae. - 2017. - Vol. 10, Issue 4. - P. 48-57. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18355/XL.2017.10.04.05

2. Blasko M. Kvalita v systéme modemej vyucby. - 2nd edition. - Kosice: TU, 2013. ISBN 978-80553-1281-1

3. Brennan J., Shah T. Managing quality in higher education: An international perspective on institutional assessment and change. - Buckingham: OECD, SRHE and Open University Press, 2000. ISBN 978-0-33520673-5

4. Gregory K., Cameron C., Davies A. Self-assessment and goal-setting. - Merville BC: Connections Publishing, 2000. URL: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=%0A%20% 20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%2 0%20%20%20%20%20%20%20Self-assessment%20and%20goal-setting%0A%20%20%20% 20 %20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20 %20%20&author=K.%20Gregory&author=C.%20Cameron&author=A.%20Davies&publication_ year=2000

5. Hasková A. (Ed.) Zabezpecovanie kvality vzdelávania na vysokych skolách. - Nitra: UKF, 2013. ISBN 978-3-16-148410-0

6. Hasková A., Lachká E., Pilárik E. Information and Internal Quality Assurance in European Higher Education Institutions // Journal of the European Higher Education Area. - 2013. - Vol. 4. -P. 104-122. ISSN 2192-0109

7. Hasková A., Pilárik E., Veresová M. Management Structures and HEI Quality Assurance // Technológia vzdelávania. - 2013. - Vol. 21 (2). - P. 4-10. ISSN 1335-003X

8. Hayes D., Winyard R. (Eds.). The McDonaldization of higher education. - Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey, 2002. URL: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The%20McDonaldization %20of%20higher%20education&publication_year=2002

9. Hladík J., Vávrová S. Mechanismy fungování rozvoje autoregulace studentú. - Praha: Hnutí R., 2011. ISBN 978-80-86798-17-2

10. Kompoltová S. Pohl'ad ucitel'a na svoje rétorické sposobilosti // Pedagogická revue. - 2000. -Vol. 52 (1). - P. 34-42. ISSN 1335-1982

11. Kondrla P., Králik R. Authentic being and moral conscience // European Journal of Science and Theology. - 2016. - Vol. 12, Issue 4. - P. 155-164. ISSN 1842-8517 URL: http://www.ejst.tuiasi.ro/Files/59/15_Kondrla%20&%20Kralik.pdf

12. Králik R., Lenovsky L., Pavlíková M. A few comments on identity and culture of one ethnic minority in central Europe // European Journal of Science and Theology. - 2018. - Vol. 14, Issue 6. - P. 63-76. ISSN 1842 - 8517

13. Liu S., Tan M., Meng Z. Impact of Quality Assurance on Higher Education Institutions: A Literature Review // Higher Education Evaluation and Development. - 2015. - Vol. 9 (2). - P. 1734. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6197/HEED.2015.0902.02

14. Magová L., Bad'ová P., Bobonová I., Csáky A., Ceretková S., Fandelová E., Zilová R. Hodnotenie kompetencií ucitel'ov v európskom a slovenskom kontexte. - Praha: Verbum, 2016. ISBN 978-80-87800-28-7

15. Minelli E., Rebora G., Turri M., Huisman J. The impact of research and teaching evaluation at universities: Comparing an Italian and a Dutch case // Quality in Higher Education. - 2006. -Vol. 12 (2). - P. 109-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320600916668

Science for Education Today

2019, том 9, № 2

http://sciforedu.ru

ISSN 2658-6762

16. Ross J. A. The reliability, Validity and Utility of Self-Assessment // Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. - 2006. - Vol. 11 (10). - P. 1-13. URL: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=11&n=10

17. Shah M. Ten years of external quality audit in Australia: Evaluating its effectiveness and success // Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. - 2012. - Vol. 37 (6). - P. 761-772. ISSN 15317714

18. Stensaker B. Trance, transparency and transformation: The impact of external quality monitoring on higher education // Quality in Higher Education. - 2003. - Vol. 9 (2). - P. 151-159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320308158

19. Veresova M., Ceresnfk M. Vysledky vzdelavania a ich implementacia do studijnych programov. -Nitra: UKF, 2013. ISBN 978-80-558-0247-3

20. Veresova M., Zilova R., Vozar L. Kvalita vzdelavania na UKF v Nitre: monitoring a vyhodnotenie implementacie europskych noriem a smernic (ESG). - Nitra: UKF, 2012. ISBN 978-80-558-0175-9

21. Zahorec J. Tvorba kurikul pripravy ucitel'ov v zamerani na didakticko-technologicke kompetencie: Vysledky pilotneho vyskumu // Lifelong Learning - celozivotni vzdelavam. -2018. - Vol. 8 (1). - P. 61-85. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11118/lifele2018080161

2019, Vol. 9, No. 2 http://en.sciforedu.ru/

ISSN 2658-6762

DOI: 10.15293/2658-6762.1902.11

Alena Haskova Prof. PhD.

Department of Technology and Technology Information, Faculty of Education,

Constantine the Philosopher University, Nitra, Slovak Republic. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8592-7451 E- mail: ahaskova@ukf.sk Danka Lukacova Assoc. prof. PhD.,

Department of Technology and Technology Information, Faculty of Education,

Constantine the Philosopher University, Nitra, Slovak Republic. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0186-5447 E- mail: dlukacova@ukf.sk Henryk Noga, Prof. PhD.

Institute of Technology, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Technical Science,

Pedagogical University of Cracow, Cracow, Poland. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7073-3443 E- mail: senoga@cyf-kr.edu.pl

Introduction. Self-reflection is an essential precondition to improve and enhance teacher's performance. It should be included in evaluation processes of teachers conducted by educational institutions. The main research question of the case study carried out in the concerned higher education institution was whether teachers'pedagogical competencies would be evaluated by students at a higher level after the introduction of teachers' self-assessment.

Materials and Methods. The paper presents assessment tools and methodology of teachers' self-assessment which have been implemented at the Faculty of Education at Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra within the framework of its internal quality assurance system. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were used to reveal the results of the evaluation process from the assessee's perspective, as well as from the evaluator's point of view.

Results. The results of the presented case study show that introduction of teachers' self-assessment into the internal mechanism of the quality management has had a positive influence on teachers' professional performance, which has been reflected in assessments conducted by students.

Conclusions. The efforts of Constantine the Philosopher University aimed at quality assurance of all areas of its activities to ensure conditions for its long-term prosperity and competitiveness have also acquired a national recognition. In 2017 the Slovak Office for Standards, Metrology and Testing awarded the University with the National Quality Award of the Slovak Republic. The aim of this award is to motivate and support public and private sector bodies in continuous improvement and increasing efficiency.

Teacher's self-assessment as a part of quality management

Abstract

159

Keywords

Evaluation of teacher performance; Higher education institutions (HEIs); Internal quality assurance systems; Self-assessment; Teaching competences. Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Slovak Research and Development Agency under the contract No. APVV-14-0446.

Introduction

Issue of the higher education institutions (HEIs) quality is most often linked to results of evaluations which are done by various agencies. In Slovakia rankings done by the Academic Ranking and Rating Agency (ARRA) are perceived as an official qualitative status of the particular HEIs. In 2015 this independent Slovak civil association, established in 2004 with the objective to assess the quality of Slovak HEIs and to stimulate positive changes in Slovak higher education, issued already its eleventh evaluation of the faculties of Slovak HEIs (ARRA, 2015)1. The annual HEI assessment report is based on publicly open and verifiability data on education and research results achieved by the faculties in 2014. In this way indicators, based on which the HEIs quality is assessed, are such data as: number of teachers per 100 full-time and part-time students, number of professors and associated professors per100 full-time and part-time students, ratio of professors, associated professors and teachers with the Ph.D. title to the total number of the teachers, ratio of professors and associated professors to the total number of the teachers, ratio of the number of applicants for the study to the planned number of accepted applicants, ratio of the number of enrolled students to the number of accepted applicants, ratio of foreign students to the total number of full-time students, ratio of the number of students studying abroad in frame of the ERASMUS mobility and the total number of full-time

1 ARRA. Ranking 2015. 2015. Available at: http://www.arra.sk/ranking-2015

students in Slovakia sent abroad for ERASMUS study stay in the concerned academic year, etc. Although the agency constantly updates the information based on which the HEIs and their faculties are assessed, it is obvious that its evaluation, as to the evaluation of the teaching process and its achievements, follows quantitative approaches and the qualitative ones are missing here. To evaluate the quality of education, a very important aspect is self-reflection of teachers involved in the education processes. This self-reflection helps to evaluate work performed by the teacher, approaches to students, communication with them, to analyse and compare teacher's professional (teaching) experiences in a conscious way. It helps the teacher to find out stimuli and impulses to improve and enhance his/her teaching activities (Kompoltova, 2000). According Petty (2014)2 the purpose of the self-assessment is to learn the general principles of what works and consequently use these principles to work out how to teach better in the future.

In relation to teaching self-evaluation methods are more often used to assess students' activities and results than the teacher's ones (students' self-assessments versus teachers' self-assessments). Moreover in some cases the use of these methods evokes questions on their reliability (Gregory, Cameron & Davies, 2000; Ross, 2006).

2 Petty G. Teaching Today: a Practical Guide. 5th edition. Oxford University Press Publ., 2014.

160

Self-reflection can be unconscious or conscious (Kajanova, 20133). Within the systems of quality education assessment self-assessment tools are used consciously, together with further methods used for the quality assessment. A further method can be for example evaluation of the teacher done by the students. These evaluations of teachers, carried out periodically at the end of the semesters, are becoming a common part of monitoring processes aimed at the level of teaching in most of the HEIs in Slovakia. Usually they are carried out by means of a questionnaire in which the students express their opinions, notes, remarks to various aspects of teaching they have been enrolled in, as well as to the competences and performances of the relevant teachers. Despite the tendency to make these processes objective, it is obvious from these questionnaire survey results that the respondents have their own inner reasons, motivations leading them very often to significantly subjective statements. Just in this context it is very important to ask the teachers for their self-assessment which can significantly increase objectification of the assessment of teaching processes at the HEI. Moreover the self-assessment helps to obtain a more reliable feed-back on teaching processes and their results, and enables to react promptly to nonfunctional components of teaching methodologies what consequently can help to improve the quality of the teacher's teaching programs (Blasko, 2013).

According Turek (2010) 4 the main assessment tools (methodologies) used in quality management of teaching are questionnaires, interviews, observations, statistical methods, SWOT analysis and brainstorming. Blasko (2013) ranks also teacher's self-assessment to the tools serving for teaching quality measurement.

Constantine the Philosopher University started to deal systemically with the issues of quality evaluation and quality assurance in the academic year 2011/2012 (Hasková, 2013; Veresová, Zilová & Vozár, 2012). The main intention of this initiative was to design its own institutional system of quality education assurance which would enforce principles of culture and quality education at all levels of the university. At the same time the designed system was to follow the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ENQA, 20065; ENQA, 20156), so-called ESG guidelines, adopted in 2005 at the Bergen meeting of ministers responsible for tertiary education (EHEA, 2005)7.

In accordance with the university system of quality management, the Faculty of Education included into its self-evaluation processes carried out within the quality assurance system several monitorings (PF UKF, 2013 8 ; Veresová & Ceresník, 2013):

- monitoring of students' learning achievements in particular study subjects,

- monitoring of state exam results,

3 Kajanová J. Evaluation in the Pedagogical Process.

Management in 21st century: problems and starting points. Trencín, Vysoká skola manazmentu Publ., 2013, pp. 260-265.

4 Turek I. Didactics. Bratislava, Iura Edition Publ., 2010.

5 ENQA. Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area. Helsinki, ENQA Publ., 2006.

6 ENQA. ESG 2015: Standards and Guidelines for Quality

Assurance in the European Higher Education Area

(ESG). Brussels, ENQA Publ., 2015.

7 EHEA. The European higher education area - Achieving the goals: Communiqué of the conference of European ministers responsible for higher education, Bergen, 1920 May 2005. Available at: http://www.ehea.info/ Uploads/Declarations/Bergen _Communique 1.pdf.

8 PF UKF. Quality control system at the Faculty of Education of Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra. 2013. Available at: https://portal.ukf.sk/kvalita/ index.php?r=rezort/predpisy/download&id= 100

161

- monitoring of bachelor and master thesis defences,

- monitoring of students' fruitfulness in credit indexes,

- monitoring of education fruitfulness by further activities evaluation (competitions, awards, student research, professional and artistic activities, concerts, exhibitions, etc.),

- monitoring of teaching and learning processes and quality of teachers' professional (teaching) competences,

- monitoring of the adequacy of the study programs and the study programs graduates' profiles in relation to matching the labour market needs,

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

- monitoring of students and teachers' opinions on the study programs and the subjects taught within them,

- monitoring of the compulsory optional and optional subjects.

An integral part of this system has been an on-line questionnaire survey through which students express their opinions, experiences and evaluations regarding:

- study programs they are enrolled in,

- subjects/courses they have passed during the concerned academic year,

- the mentioned subject teaching,

- competence of the teachers who taught the mentioned subjects (both competences, as to the subject matter as well as to the pedagogical competence),

- study resources and teaching facilities.

With the goal to improve the fruitfulness of

the monitoring of teaching and learning processes and quality of teachers' professional (teaching) competences, in the academic year 2016/2017 a new innovative element was added to the methods

used before for this purpose and it has been just the above-mentioned teachers' self-assessment. Within a case study carried out at one of the five faculties of the Constantine the Philosopher University, the Faculty of Education, a research question was stated:

RQ: Does introduction of teacher self-assessments influence assessments of teachers done by students?

and a working hypothesis: H: It is expected that after the introduction of the teacher self-assessment of teachers" mastery over the subject matter and their pedagogical competences will be assessed by students at a higher level. was tested.

Methodology of Research

General Background

Quality assurance is a holistic approach covering all the processes in a higher education institution, in order to serve the students and other stakeholders in expected quality standards. To support higher education quality state policymakers in West Europe initiated introduction of a new policy strategy aimed at the higher education institution (HEIs) quality assurance. The new strategy has spread very quickly from the West European also to other countries (Liu, Tan & Meng, 2015). In Slovakia HEIs started systemically to create and introduce into the practice their own quality assurance systems with introduction of the accreditation processes (Haskova, 20139).

The more precise a quality assurance mechanism is the more different phenomena it deals with (Haskova, Pilarik, Veresova, 2013). The range of the different phenomena implies from diversification in the student body, growing

9 Haskova A. Higher education quality assurance in the education at universities, Nitra, UKF Publ., 2013,

national context. A. Haskova (Ed.), Assurance of quality pp. 19-58.

162

and decreasing number of students, through study programs and curriculum design, planned/achieved learning outcomes, creation of the relevant teaching and study environments, supporting services, information systems up to the issues of HEI public funding and public relations building (Hasková, Lachká & Pilárik, 2013; Hasková, Lachká, Pilárik & Rattray, 2014 10; Hasková & Lukácová, 201711). One of the first large (and probably still one of the largest) empirical studies was done at the beginning of this century by Brenan and Shah (2000). In frame of their research possible impacts of the quality assurance systems used in HEIs in 14 countries were observed. The impacts were observed on three levels: micro-level of the personnel (students, academics), mezzo-level of the organisational units (departments, faculties), macro-level of the system units (HEI system, national system of education); in focus on three areas: rewards, adjusting policies and structures, higher education culture changes. On the other hand, the particular components implied in the content of the term of quality assurance have not the same impact on the quality education (Minelli, Rebora & Huisman, 2006). As different research results have shown, the measure of their impact varies. Some of them influence quality of education in a more noticeable and some of them

in a less noticeable way, e.g. a strong impact was proved in case of the organisational learning (or teaching and learning in general) evaluation or academic leadership evaluation, and a weaker one in case of development of study resources evaluation (Huisman, Rebora & Turri, 200712; Shah, 2012). Moreover, there have been recorded also some cases of negative impacts of the quality assurance systems implementation into the HEIs operation. These consequences have regarded, e.g., the impact of the quality assurance mechanism on HEI teachers and HEI administration operation. In particular, this regards the negative feelings under which the teachers get being scrutinised, and some processes inherent in the quality assessment mechanisms (and the HEI common operation, too) which becomes more bureaucratic (Stensaker, 2003; Hayes & Winyard, 2002).

Despite the fact that the emphasis on self-evaluation of teachers is becoming increasingly common in scholarly debates now-a-day in Slovakia in relation to both HEIs and primary and secondary schools, too, it still has not become a rule (Gadusova, Svarbova & Sipkai, 2018 13; Gadusova, Fandelova, Viteckova & Prochazka, 201714). Nevertheless, self-assessment is one of the important components of the self-regulation process that each person carries out more or less

10 Haskova A., Lachka E., Pilarik E., Rattray J. Information and Internal Quality Assurance in European and Slovak Higher Education Institutions. H. Eggins (Ed.). Drivers and Barriers to Achieving Quality in Higher Education, Rotterdam, Sense Publ., 2014, pp. 99107.

11 Haskova A., Lukacova D. Teacher assessment in internal quality assurance systems. Efficiency and responsibillity in education: Proceedings of the 14th international conference ERIE 2017, Praha, PEF Publ., Ceska zemedelska univerzita Publ., 2017, pp. 88-95.

12 Huisman J., Rebora G., Turri M. The effects of quality

assurance in universities: Empirical evidence from three

cases. L. Purser, L. Wilson, & E. Froment (Eds.).

Introducing bologna objectives and tools, Stuttgart, Raabe Publ., 2007, pp. 1-28.

13 Gadusová Z., Svarbová E., Sipkai T. A New Approach to Teacher Assessment: Joys and Sorrows of its Introduction: Case study. MyRes 2018: International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research. Mauritius, SRAKM - Society for Research and Knowledge Management Publ., 2018, pp. 335-355.

14 Gadusová Z., Fandelová E., Vítecková M., Procházka M. Assessment tools and criteria - what to apply to teachers' work. Efficiency and Responsibility in Education 2017: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference ERIE 2017. Prague, Czech University of Life Sciences Publ., 2017, pp. 96-103.

successfully during the whole of their lives. Self-regulation is a guarantee not only for achieving one's goals and needs, but also the level of his/her work performance. Although there is a lot of other aspects (Kondrla & Kralik, 2016; Ambrozy, Kralik & Martin, 2017; Kralik, Lenovsky & Pavlikova, 2018), people who are more successful at work are better able to specify their goals, set clear and realistic goals, use strategies, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation, evaluate their own progress, also complete tasks on time, have a high level of motivation, and demonstrate the acquired skills. The problem of self-regulation is interdisciplinary; it includes the area of theories of personal and social development, educational diagnostics, didactics, assessment as well as educational psychology; it is linked to pedagogical, sociological, psychological and also philosophical aspects. Self-regulation is associated with a number of issues that are part of the specific activities one performs: self-regulation of learning, self-regulation of behaviour, self-monitoring and self-control (Hladik & Vavrova, 2011). Although the firsthand goal of the teachers' self-assessment implementation into the quality assurance processes carried out at the Faculty of Education has been teachers' competence improvement, the final goal has been to achieve better learning results of students (as a result of the teachers' critical self-reflection of their possible weaknesses or failures in some situations).

Instruments and Procedure

As a tool of the self-assessment of teachers in connection to teacher evaluation within the internal quality assurance system introduced at Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra A

Self-Assessment Questionnaire for Teachers was created (Lukâcovâ & Haskovâ, 201715).

The questionnaire structure consisted of 17 questionnaire items (questions) divided into two parts following two different dimensions.

The first part of the questionnaire consisted of 7 items. Purpose of the first questionnaire item was to find out whether the teachers monitor the content of the study program, subjects involved in which they teach, and make proposals of changes to improve the quality of both the concerned study programs and taught subjects. At this item the respondents could select one from the proposed answers (with a possibility to add their notes and comments to it) or put their own answer.

The second item was aimed at finding out whether the teachers monitor the students' learning achievements in the subjects they teach. Teachers gave their responses to this questionnaire item in the same way as in the first one.

Goal of the third questionnaire item was to find out whether the departments, which the teachers belong to, have been involved in some projects dealing in a way with methodology of the subjects they teach.

By means of the fourth item one tried to check whether the teachers use to update content of the subjects they teach and ways of their teaching following their own professional (teaching) experiences, achievements and knowledge. In this item the teachers declared also whether these innovations were incorporated into the Subject Information Forms.

The fifth item followed correlation of the subjects, the teachers teach, with their publication activities (topics of the articles they published within the assessed period).

15 Lukácová D., Hasková A. Methodology of teacher self-assessment and its use in quality management.

International dissemination conference „Bologna

principles and quality assurance at EU and Central Asian HEIs". Astana, S. Seifullin Kazakh Publ., 2017, pp. 30-42.

164

The sixth item was interlocked with the previous one. The teachers were asked in it on the number of subjects to which they prepared new additional teaching or learning resources (materials) resulting from their own publication outputs.

In the seventh questionnaire item the teachers were asked to make a self-reflexive evaluation of the quality of their teaching competences using a seven-point scale where very high was for the best, highest level of the competences and very low expressed an insufficient level of professional (teaching) competences. Respondents could specify their responses giving a specification of their teaching competences strengths and weaknesses.

The second part of the questionnaire was focused on the assessment of students' achievements (grading of students by teachers) and consisted of 10 questionnaire items (questions 8 - 17).

The eighth item was closed and respondents declared in it to which level they are acquainted with the Subject Information Forms, of the subjects they teach, and understand the interconnection of these forms and contents of the subjects with profiles of the relevant study program graduates.

The ninth item tried to find out whether the assessment methods used by the teachers enable them to identify completely the level of student's knowledge and skills in the frame of the learning outputs and goals defined in the Subject Information Forms and study program graduate profiles. The teachers could choose from several predefined offered statements or add their own one.

The tenth questionnaire item verified whether the teachers use assessment and grading methods (ways) stated in the Subject Information Forms.

The goal of the eleventh item was to find out how, in which way the teachers familiarize their students with criteria they use to assess and grade the students (criteria for successful graduation of the relevant subject).

Next four questionnaire items (questions 12 -15) were focused on determination of exam terms and their announcement to students. In particular, the twelfth item enquired for exam terms announcement to students (numbers of terms offered to students, announcing the dates well in advance), the thirteenth item checked whether the teachers provide exam dates in an appropriate time dispersion, the fourteenth item checked whether the teachers respect the terms of other exams, the students have, and the fifteenth item verified whether the teachers respect individual personal requirements and needs of students at determining the exam dates, especially in relation to the students with special upbringing - educational needs.

The sixteenth item asked for forms of exams used by the teachers to assess (grade) students in case of the subjects completed by exams and the seventeenth item asked for forms used by the teachers to assess (grade) students in case of the subjects completed without final exam, only with the continuously stated grade assessment or with the state assessment passed.

Methodology of the Research Hypothesis Verification

To justify the stated hypothesis required a deeper analysis of the previous and current results of the student assessment questionnaire survey and the students learning achievements. This meant:

- to compare the results of the previous questionnaire surveys with the results of the survey which were carried out at the end of the academic year after the introduction of the self-assessments of the teachers with a focus on teachers with

worse assessment scores achieved in the previous surveys, - to compare weighted arithmetic means of students grades in selected subjects (subjects taught just by the teachers with worse assessment scores achieved in the previous surveys) in the previous surveys with the weighted arithmetic means achieved in the academic year after the introduction of the teachers' self-assessments.

Taking into consideration different reasons, it was decided to use results of the last two surveys, i.e. those carried out in the academic years 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 and these compare with the results of the survey carried out in the academic year 2016/2017, i.e. the survey carried out after the implementation of the teacher self-assessment into the internal mechanism of the university's quality management, i.e. the same questionnaire, by which the students assessed quality of education at the Faculty of Education in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 was used also at the academic year 2016/2017.

In 2014/2015 the total number of the questionnaire survey respondents was 72 students, what was 3.2 % of the students enrolled at all study programs carried out at the Faculty of Education. In 2015/2016 the total number of the questionnaire survey respondents was 251

students, what was 12.1 % of the students enrolled at all study programs carried out at the Faculty of Education. Among the students who responded to the questionnaire survey there were also students of the study program Training of vocational education teachers (in 2014/2015 - all of the enrolled students, in 2015/2016 - 43.0 % of the students enrolled in this study program). In the academic year 2016/2017 the number of the responding students was 453, what represented 24.0 % of the enrolled students.

Research Sample

The presented research was carried out at the Faculty of Education with a research sample of 15 teachers teaching in the study program Training of vocational education teachers. On the one hand these teachers undergone the self-assessment process, and on the other hand at the end of the winter term of the academic year 2016/2017 they were assessed by the students.

Research Results and their Discussion

Overview of the analysed research data is presented in Table 1. The number of students participating in the evaluation process of teachers in 2016/2017 was markedly higher (453 students representing almost a quarter of the total number of the students).

Table 1. Summary of the results from the student assessment questionnaire survey carried out in

the particular academic years.

Assessed area 2014/2015 2015/2016 2016/2017

Study program 1.83 1.70 1.72

Subjects included in the study program 1.30 1.24 1.14

Teaching process carried out 1.31 1.30 1.30

Evaluation of students 1.31 1.23 1.09

Teacher competence (professional and pedagogical) 1.50 1.34 1.20

Quality of information/study sources 1.32 1.34 1.18

Material and technical equipment 1.33 1.34 1.19

As the presented data show, the worst evaluated field still have remained the study program (1.72), what is quite logical, because we cannot expect that the factor of the introduced teacher self-assessment could have a real impact on the assessment of the study program (its structure). The most critical views of students were recorded towards arrangement of the subjects into the particular study years and terms, offer of the compulsory optional and optional subjects included in the study program, and the possibility of the preliminary enrolment for the subjects.

As the most interesting results can be pointed out the following facts:

- On the one hand, according to the recorded assessments, quality of the teaching process has remained on the same level (still app. 1.30), what means that the research hypothesis in general was not proved.

- On the other hand, after the introduction of the teacher self-assessment students assessed the concerned teachers competences more positively (1.50 ^ 1.20). This can be connected with the ways the teachers have diagnosed and evaluated the students (see the item evaluation of students 1.31 ^ 1.09 which de facto represents one of the competences of a teacher professional profile (Gadusova, Hockickova, Lomnicky, Predanocyova & Zilova, 201616; Magova et al., 2017).

- Similar conclusion as the aforementioned can be stated also in connection with the result of the item quality of information/study sources assessment, as in this case the obtained assessment can be

referred to the assessment of the concerned teacher mastery to present the subject matter in an attractive, interesting way. Therein an impact of the introduced teacher self-assessment on the teacher's professional performance can be reflected. So, although the research hypothesis in general was not proved, some signs of the possible impacts of the introduced self-assessment on the education quality (demonstration of the teachers' mastery over the subject matter and their pedagogical competences) can be observed.

- As a disputable can be perceived the result achieved at the assessment of the item material and technical equipment. Here it is questionable whether the obtained assessment improvement (1.34 ^ 1.19) is a consequence of the modernisation of the teaching facilities and study resources, or whether it is rather again a possible influence of the introduced teacher self-assessment (i.e. whether after the implementation of the teacher self-assessment into the quality assurance mechanism, the teachers started to use more frequently or more attractive teaching aids and didactic technology (Zahorec, 2018).

As to the teacher self-assessment, completed questionnaires were sent at the end of the winter term to the guarantor of the study program who processed and analysed the obtained data and prepared the Final Report, which consequently undergone a review process.

The same process was used also in monitoring the education quality of all study programs carried out at the faculty and similar

16 Gadusova Z., Hockickova B., Lomnicky I., Competences. INTED 2016 Proceedings, Valencia,

Predanocyova E., Zilova R. Evaluation of Teachers' IATED Academy Publ., 2016, pp. 6957-6965.

167

self-assessments reports, as the above presented Final Report to the study program Training of vocational education teachers is, were prepared by the guarantees for each study program.

The highest value information was recorded at those questionnaire items in which the respondents could complete the offered closed responses by their own statements and comments. These responses gave more detailed information on the respondents' opinions and significantly contributed to deeper analyses of the monitored issues and to a higher quality of the prepared Final Report.

Conclusions

The presented effort of Constantine the Philosopher University at quality assurance of all areas of its activities to ensure conditions for its long-term prosperity and competitiveness

acquired also a national recognition. In 2017 the Slovak Office for Standards, Metrology and Testing awarded the University the National Quality Award of the Slovak Republic. The purpose of this award is to motivate and support public and private sector bodies in the continuous improvement and increasing efficiency through the implementation of the EFQM Excellence Model and the CAF Model (http://www.unms.sk/7narodna-cena-sr-za-kvalitu-2017). The National Award is a major activity of the National Quality Program of the Slovak Republic and the most prestigious national quality award for any organization, and at the same time it is the highest possible degree of recognition that can be achieved, thus the awarded institution can differentiate itself from the competitors in the field of quality management.

REFERENCES

1. Ambrozy M., Králik R., Martin J. G. Determinism vs freedom: Some ethics-social implications = Deterninismo vs libertad: Algunas implicaciones etico-sociales. XLinguae, 2017, vol. 10, issue 4, pp. 48-57. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18355/XL.2017.10.04.05

2. Blasko M. Quality in the modern teaching system. 2nd edition. Kosice, TU Publ., 2013. (In Slovak) ISBN 978-80-553-1281-1

3. Brennan J., Shah T. Managing quality in higher education: An international perspective on institutional assessment and change. Buckingham, OECD, SRHE and Open University Press Publ., 2000. ISBN 978-0-335-20673-5

iНе можете найти то, что вам нужно? Попробуйте сервис подбора литературы.

4. Gregory K., Cameron C., Davies A. Self-assessment and goal-setting. Merville BC, Connections Publ., 2000. ISBN 978-1-935543-77-0 URL: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title= %0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20 %20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20Self-assessment%20and%20goal-setting%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%2 0%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20&author=K.%20Gregory&author=C.%20Cameron&author =A.%20Davies&publication_year=2000

5. Hasková A. (Ed.) Assurance of quality education at universities. Nitra, UKF Publ., 2013. (In Slovak) ISBN 978-3-16-148410-0

6. Hasková A., Lachká L., Pilárik E. Information and Internal Quality Assurance in European Higher Education Institutions. Journal of the European Higher Education Area, 2013, vol. 4, pp. 104-122. ISSN 2192-0109

7. Hasková A., Pilárik L., Veresová M. Management Structures and HEI Quality Assurance. Technology of education, 2013, vol. 21 (2), pp. 4-10. ISSN 1335-003X

2019, Vol. 9, No. 2 http://en.sciforedu.ru/

ISSN 2658-6762

8. Hayes D., Winyard R. (Eds.). The McDonaldization of higher education. Westport, CT, Bergin &

The%20McDonaldization%20of%20higher%20education&publication_year=2002

9. Hladík J., Vávrová S. Operation mechanisms of student autoregulation evelopment. Praha, Hnutí R. Publ., 2011. (In Czech) ISBN 978-80-86798-17-2

10. Kompoltová S. A teacher's view on his/her rhetorical competences. Pedagogical revue, 2000, vol. 52 (1), pp. 34-42. (In Slovak) ISSN 1335-1982

11. Kondrla P., Králik R. Authentic being and moral conscience. European Journal of Science and Theology, 2016, vol. 12, issue 4, pp. 155-164. ISSN 1842-8517 URL: http://www.ejst.tuiasi.ro/Files/59/15_Kondrla%20&%20Kralik.pdf

12. Králik R., Lenovsky L., Pavlíková M. A few comments on identity and culture of one ethnic minority in central Europe. European Journal of Science and Theology, 2018, vol. 14, issue 6, pp. 63-76. ISSN 1842-8517

13. Liu S., Tan M., Meng Z. Impact of Quality Assurance on Higher Education Institutions: A Literature Review. Higher Education Evaluation and Development, 2015, vol. 9 (2), pp. 17-34. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6197/HEED.2015.0902.02

14. Magová L., Badová P., Boboñová I., Csáky A., Ceretková S., Fandelová E., Zilová R. Assessment of teachers' competences in European and Slovak context. Praha, Verbum Publ., 2016. (In Slovak) ISBN 978-80-87800-28-7

15. Minelli E., Rebora G., Turri M., Huisman J. The impact of research and teaching evaluation at universities: Comparing an Italian and a Dutch case. Quality in Higher Education, 2006, vol. 12(2), pp. 109-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320600916668

16. Ross J. A. The reliability, Validity and Utility of Self-Assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2006, vol. 11 (10), pp. 1-13. URL: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=11&n=10

17. Shah M. Ten years of external quality audit in Australia: Evaluating its effectiveness and success. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2012, vol. 37 (6), pp. 761-772. ISSN 1531-7714

18. Stensaker B. Trance, transparency and transformation: The impact of external quality monitoring on higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 2003, vol. 9 (2), pp. 151-159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320308158

19. Veresová M., Ceresník M. Education results and their implementation into the study programs. Nitra, UKF Publ., 2013. (In Slovak) ISBN 978-80-558-0247-3

20. Veresová M., Zilová R., Vozár L. Education quality at Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra: monitoring and evaluation of ESG implementation. Nitra, UKF Publ., 2012. (In Slovak) ISBN 978-80-558-0175-9

21. Záhorec J. Teacher training curricula design with focus on didactic-technological competences: Pilot research results. Lifelong Learning - Lifelong Education, 2018, vol. 8 (1), pp. 61-85. (In Slovak) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11118/lifele2018080161

Submitted: 02 February 2019 Accepted: 04 March 2019 Published: 30 April 2019

Garvey Publ., 2002. URL: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title:

© ®

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Teacher self-assessment as a part of quality management Текст научной статьи по специальности «Науки об образовании»

Аннотация научной статьи по наукам об образовании, автор научной работы — Hašková Alena, Lukáčová Danka, Noga Henryk

Похожие темы научных работ по наукам об образовании , автор научной работы — Hašková Alena, Lukáčová Danka, Noga Henryk

Самооценка преподавателя как часть менеджмента качества

Текст научной работы на тему «Teacher self-assessment as a part of quality management»