. Aziz Kamran; . Mohammed Zibaei; . Kamal Mirkaimi; . Hussein Shahnazi
Volume 2, Issue 5 , December 2012, , Pages 1-7
Abstract
Introduction: Education is basically one of the Universities’ and faculties’ leading missions andduties; its promoted quality will also lead to an elevated educational quality ...
Read More
Introduction: Education is basically one of the Universities’ and faculties’ leading missions andduties; its promoted quality will also lead to an elevated educational quality in the University. Teacherassessment can be mentioned as essential for the success of the quality promotion process. Thisarticle deals with the designing and evaluation of a teaching quality evaluation form for teachers,from the Lorestan University of Medical Science students’ point of view. Methods: A two-stage,cross-sectional study was conducted on 290 Lorestan University of Medical Science students.First, evaluation priorities were extracted using the Delphi technique in the fifth section, includingteaching skills, communication skills, principles of training, and skills assessment. In the secondstage, as the priority and importance of each item was evaluated in the fourth Lickert option,sampling was done in few stages. The study instrument was a questionnaire, which included sixareas. The first part of the questionnaire was made up of the demographic characteristics and thesecond part included five evaluation areas that were obtained from the student. The collected datawere analyzed using statistical software SPSS-16 and chi-square test, Kruskal-Wallis test. Results:In the areas of teaching skills, mastery of the course, individual characteristics, self-confidence,communication skills, intimate relationship with students, educational principles, rules respectingthe beginning and end time of class, skill assessment, and an accurate comprehensive examinationat the end of the semester by the students, were chosen as the most important factors. Therewere significant differences in the majority of expressed comments between the genders andacademic status (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Students can properly diagnose the essential factorsin teachers’ evaluation, but in item prioritizing they may be partly affected by some factors suchas gender, academic status, semester, and academic course.
