Teacher Evaluation and Academic Demand: Bad Practices in Higher Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37711/desafios.2020.11.1.140Keywords:
evaluation, teaching performance, academic requirement, student, universityAbstract
Objective. To characterize the predominant attitude in university students of Huancayo on the evaluation of teaching performance. Methods. Research was descriptive substantive type with a mixed approach. An attitude scale towards teacher’s evaluation was made and validated. It was applied to 382 students from Universidad Continental, Universidad Peruana Los Andes and Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú. In addition, qualitative collection of information, in-depth interviews were conducted with 24 teachers from the three universities. Results. According to the data obtained, the majority of the students consider that teacher evaluation is not valued (79.6%), that it does not have specific objectives (80%), and that they favor "very nice" teachers (54, 3 %). However, they refer that they learn more from a “demanding teacher” than from a “very nice teacher” (56.6%). Teachers, for their part, agree with the evaluation of their performance, but consider that it does not favor the improvement of teaching-learning and they perceive it as an instrument of control and warning on the part of the students. Conclusion. Students and teachers do not value the evaluation of teacher performance because they perceive that it is carried out without specific strategies and purposes.
Downloads
References
Alberto, R. (2006). El desempeño docente y el rendimiento académico en la formación especializada de los estudiantes de matemática y física de las facultades de educación de las universidades de la sierra central del Perú. (Tesis de doctorado). Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Perú.
Arbesú, M. (2006). La práctica de la docencia modular: el caso de la Unidad Xochimilco en la UAM. México D.F.Mexico: Plaza y Valdés.
Baggini, J. (1999). Formación de formadores. Madrid, España: Paraninfo.Díaz, A. (1983). Tarea docente. Una perspectiva grupal y psi-cosocial. México D.F., México: Nueva Imagen.
Flores,J. B. (2008). Exigencia académica en el aula universitaria. Un ensayo sobre rigor y exigencia en universida-des mexicanas. Baja California, México: Hablando Derecho con mis alumnos. Recuperado de https://hablandoderecho.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/exigencia-academica-en-el-aula-universitaria.pdf
García, J. M. y Congosto, E. (2000). Evaluación y Calidad del Profesorado. En T. González (Coord.), Evaluación y Gestión de la Calidad Educativa. Un Enfoque Meto-dológico. (pp.127-157). Málaga, España: Aljibe.
Gibson, J. (1997). Las organizaciones: comportamientos, estructura, procesos. Bogotá, Colombia: McGraw-Hill.
Hernández, R., Fernández, C., y Baptista, P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación. México D.F., México: McGraw-Hill.Horkheimer, M. (1971). Sociedad en transición. Estudios de filosofía social. Barcelona, España: Península.
Muñoz, J.M., Ríos, M.P. y Abalde, E. (2002). Evaluación docente vs. evaluación de la calidad. Relieve, 8(2), 103-134. Recuperado de https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/916/91680204.pdf
Roueche, J. (2005). Practical Magic: On the Front Lines of Teaching Excellence. Washington, Estados Unidos: Community College Press.Santos, M. (1998). La evaluación: un proceso de diálogo, comprensión y mejora. Granada, España: Aljibe.
Taut, S. (2015). Validación de un sistema nacional de evaluación y mejora docente. Diario de evaluación edu-cativa, 4, 163-199.
Tejedor, F. y García, A. (1998). Evaluación institucional en la Universidad. Revista Galega de Pisopedagoxia, 6, 101-146.
Terrones, E. (2009). Las competencias del estudiante universitario. Lima, Perú: Bienvenidos al Blog de Eudoro Terrones Negrete. Recuperado de http://eudoro-terrones.blogspot.pe/2009/03/las-competencias-del-estudiante.html
Velásquez, A. (2009). Evaluación del aprendizaje. Cerro De Pasco, Perú: Universidad Nacional Daniel Alcides Carrión. Recuperado de https://es.slideshare.net/lesterf31/24056519-evaluaciondelaprendizaje
Werther, W. y Keith, D. (1996). Administración de personal y re-cursos humanos. México D.F., México: McGraw-Hill.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Ernesto Gustavo Alderete Güere, Rubén Darío Alania Contreras
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
a. Authors retain copyright to their published works, granting the journal the right of first publication.
b. Authors retain their trademark and patent rights, as well as rights to any process or procedure described in the article.
c. Authors retain the right to share, copy, distribute, perform, and publicly communicate the article published in the journal (e.g., by placing it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), with acknowledgment of its initial publication in the journal.
d. Authors retain the right to republish their work, to use the article or any part thereof (e.g., in a compilation of their work, conference notes, a thesis, or a book), provided they acknowledge the original source of publication (authors of the work, journal, volume, issue, and date).
