期刊文献+

中山大学药学院形成性评教体系的建立 被引量:1

The Establishment of the Formative Teaching Evaluation System at Pharmacy School of Sun Yat-sen University
下载PDF
导出
摘要 学生评教应是提升教学质量的一个重要手段,却因评教指标体系不合理、结果反馈迟滞、学生态度消极等问题而无法发挥其功能。为解决这些问题,中山大学药学院进行形成性评教体系改革,制定全新的形成性评教指标体系,开发手机端评教系统,建立即时反馈机制。实施形成性评教3年后,从学生和教师反馈、学生学业成绩等多方面对形成性评教体系进行评价,发现其在促进师生沟通、提高教师教学质量方面效果显著。此评教体系因诊断性强、反馈及时、操作方便等突出优点,可在国内高校中推广应用。 Student evaluation of teaching should be an important means to improve teaching quality,but it is often unable to perform its function due to the unreasonable evaluation index system,delayed result feedback,and negative attitudes of students.In order to solve these problems,the School of Pharmacy of Sun Yat-sen University has reformed the formative teaching evaluation system,formulated a new formative teaching evaluation index system,developed a mobile phone evaluation system,and established an instant feedback mechanism.Three years after the implementation of formative teaching evaluation,the formative teaching evaluation system has been evaluated in terms of student and teacher feedback,student academic performance and other aspects,and found that it has significant effects in promoting teacher-student communication and improving teacher teaching quality.This teaching evaluation system can be popularized and applied in domestic universities due to its outstanding advantages such as strong diagnostics,timely feedback,and convenient operation.
作者 袁月梅 王凤灵 Yuan Yuemei;Wang Fengling(School of Pharmaceutical Sciences,Sun Yat-sen University,Guangzhou 510006,China)
机构地区 中山大学药学院
出处 《药学教育》 2020年第5期74-78,共5页 Pharmaceutical Education
基金 广东省本科高校高等教育教学改革项目资助,粤教高函[2018]1号。
关键词 形成性评教 指标体系 教学质量 behavioral evaluation teaching index system teaching quality
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献31

  • 1陈国海.高校学生评教指标体系的效度和信度分析——以广东外语外贸大学学生评教表为例[J].高等教育研究学报,2005,28(2):54-56. 被引量:23
  • 2王笃美.学生评教的有效性稳定性分析[J].江苏高教,1996(2):23-26. 被引量:43
  • 3柯惠新 等.调查研究中的统计分析法[M].北京:北京广播学院出版社,1996.361,363,371,360,484.
  • 4Genesee F & Upshur J A. Classroom-based evaluation in second language education[M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1996.
  • 5Hamp-Lyons L & Condon W. Assessing the portfolio: Principles for practice, theory & research[M].Mount Waverly: Hampton Press, Inc , 2000.
  • 6Hein G & Price S. Active assessment for active science[M]. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1994.
  • 7National Council oF Teachers oF Mathematics. Assessment standards For school mathematics [M]. Reston,VA: NCTM, 1995.
  • 8National Research Council. Classroom assessment and the National Science Education Standards [M].Committee on Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards. J M Atkin, P Black, J Coffey (eds.). Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.Washington, DC: National Academy press, 2001.
  • 9Rassi j A. Rational for formative assessment component in new audiology certification standards. 1999.Retrieved March 30, 2003, from http://professional, asha. org/academic/Rassi Formative Assess. cfm.
  • 10Sadler, D. R. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems[J]. Instructional Science, 1989,18(2): 119--144.

共引文献939

同被引文献12

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部