Investigating Iranian EFL Instructor Evaluation Scheme from End-Users’ Perspective: Self-Evaluation vs. Students’ Ratings

Subject Areas : Research in English Language Pedagogy

Fateme Naderian ¹ , Azizeh Chalak ² , Ahmad Ali Foroughi ³ , Hossein Heidari Tabrizi ⁴

1 - English Department, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran
2 - English Department, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran
3 - Educational Sciences Department, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran
4 - English Department, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran

Received: 2017-09-18 Accepted : 2018-01-01 Published : 2018-09-01

Keywords: Teacher Evaluation Scheme, Students’ Ratings, Keywords: Iranian EFL Context, rating scale, Self-Evaluation,

Abstract :

Abstract This study investigated Iranian EFL instructor evaluation scheme from end-users’ perspective: self-evaluation vs. students’ ratings. To do so, in the second semester of 2015-2016, 60 instructors and 1000 students of English Department of Islamic Azad University Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, )IAUIB(, were selected as those from whom the corpus of the study was extracted. The corpus was provided by administrating two rating scales online via the university website on each person’s profile. Then the results of their completed evaluation rating scales were compared. The study was accomplished through a non-experimental descriptive correlational design. The results revealed that almost no relationship was found between Iranian EFL instructors’ self-evaluation and those done by their students at IAUIB. This study could benefit Iranian educationalists, policy makers, and evaluators in making informed pedagogical decisions and conducting more efficient teacher evaluation in English education of Iran.

References:

Ahmadi, M., & Sajjadi, S. (2009). Who should teach English for medical purposes (EMP). Journal of Medical Education, 13(3), 135-140.

Angelo, T. A. (1996). Relating exemplary teaching to student learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(65), 57-64.

Barton, H., & Shana, N. (2010). Principals' perceptions of teacher evaluation practices in an urban school district. California: University of the Pacific.

Bascia, N., & Jacka, N. (2001). Falling in and filling in: ESL teaching careers in changing times. Journal of Educational Change, 2(4), 325-346.

Boggs, G. R. (1999). What the learning paradigm means for faculty. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 51(5), 3-5.

Brandt, C., Mathers, C., Oliva, M., Brown-Sims, M., & Hess, J. (2007). Examining district guidance to schools on teacher evaluation policies in the Midwest Region. Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest. Issues & Answers Report, No. 030. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/midwest/pdf/REL_2007030.pdf

Centra, J. A. (2003). Will teachers receive higher student evaluations by giving higher grades and less course work?. Research in Higher Education, 44(5), 495-518.

Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2010). Teacher credentials and student achievement in high school: A cross-subject analysis with student fixed effects. Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 655-681.

Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. New Jersey: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Delvaux, E., Vanhoof, J., Tuytens, M., Vekeman, E., Devos, G., & Van Petegem, P. (2013). How may teacher evaluation have an impact on professional development? A multilevel analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 1-11.

Dunning, D., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (1989). Ambiguity and self-evaluation: The role of idiosyncratic trait definitions in self-serving assessments of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Sychology, 57(6), 1082-1090.

Ellett, C. D., Loup, K. S., Culross, R. R., McMullen, J. H., & Rugutt, J. K. (1997). Assessing enhancement of learning, personal learning environment, and student efficacy: Alternatives to traditional faculty evaluation in higher education. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11(2), 167-192.

Gao, G. (1998). An initial analysis of the effects of face and concern for other in Chinese interpersonal communication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(4), 467-482.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3^rd ed.). London: Longman.

Harvey, J. N., & Barker, D. G. (1970). Student evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Improving College and University Teaching, 18(4), 275-278.

Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1999). Is there a universal need for positive self-regard?. Psychological Review, 106(4), 766.

Hinchey, P. H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://epicpolicy.org /publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right.

Isoré, M. (2009). Teacher evaluation: Current practices in OECD countries and a literature review. OECD education working papers. OECD Publishing (NJ1). No. 23. Retrieved from http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787//223283631428.

Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2008). Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(1), 101-136.

Kennedy, M. (2005). Inside teaching. U.S.: Harvard University Press.

Kitayama, S., & Markus, H. (1999). The yin and yang of the Japanese self. The coherence of personality, 242-302.

          McKeachie, W. J. (1996). Student ratings of teaching. The professional evaluation of teaching, Retrieved from http:// archives.acls.org/op/33_Professonal_Evaluation_of_Teaching.htm.

Mielke, P., & Frontier, T. (2012). Keeping improvement in mind. Educational Leadership, 70(3), 10-13.

Palmer, B., & Marra, R. M. (2004). College student epistemological perspectives across knowledge domains: A proposed grounded theory. Higher Education, 47(3), 311-335.

Peterson, K. D. (2000). Teacher evaluation: A comprehensive guide to new directions and practices (2^nd ed.) . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2000). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richardson, J. T. (2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback: A review of the literature. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 387-415.

Rigi, A. Ghaderi, M. Salimi, J. (2016). Comparing teachers’ function evaluation by video data with other methods of teaching function evaluation, Research in Curriculum Planning. 13(23), 27-39.

Roessingh, H. (2006). The teacher is the key: Building trust in ESL high school programs.               Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(4), 563-590.

Scriven, D. Micael, C. Barbra, G. & Susan, T. (1987). The evaluation of composition instruction (2^nd ed.). New York: Teacher's College Press.

Shulman, L. S. (1993). Forum: Teaching as community property: Putting an end to pedagogical solitude. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 25(6), 6-7.

Stake, R. (1987). The evaluation of teaching on campus. Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Theall, M., Abrami, P. C., & Mets, L. A. (2001). The student ratings debate: Are they valid? How can we best use them?. New Directions for Institutional Research, 109(1), 1-6.

Tudor, I. (1993). Teacher roles in the learner-centred classroom. ELT journal, 47(1), 22-31.

Webb, L. D., & Norton, M. S. (2003). Human resources administration: Personnel issues and needs in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Wren, S. (2006). Highly-qualified teachers are not necessarily high-quality teachers.  Retrieved from http://www.balancedreading.com/teacherquality.html