An improvement in instructional quality: can evaluation of teaching effectiveness make a difference?
| Date | 01 September 2005 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880510607936 |
| Published date | 01 September 2005 |
| Pages | 183-201 |
| Author | Moses Waithanji Ngware,Mwangi Ndirangu |
| Subject Matter | Education |
An improvement in instructional
quality: can evaluation of teaching
effectiveness make a difference?
Moses Waithanji Ngware
Department of Educational Administration and Planning,
Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya and
Mwangi Ndirangu
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya
Abstract
Purpose – To report study findings on teaching effectiveness and feedback mechanisms in Kenyan
universities, which can guide management in developing a comprehensive quality control policy.
Design/methodology/approach – The study adopted an exploratory descriptive design. Three
public and two private universities were randomly selected to participate in the study. A random
sampling procedure was also used to select 79 respondents to participate in the research. A
questionnaire administered in all participating universities was the main instrument for data
collection.
Findings – There was no clear university policy on the evaluation of teaching effectiveness, despite
its importance in quality control. Student evaluation of teaching effectiveness (SETE) was found to be
unreliable, although widely used where evaluation existed, without other evaluation support systems.
Feedback from the evaluation, though crucial in professional improvement, was not made available to
the respondents.
Research limitations/implications – Thestudy examined the evaluation of teaching effectiveness
from the lecturers’ perspectives. Further research may provide insights into the contribution of SETE
to teaching effectiveness from the students’ standpoint.
Practical implications – Use of a variety of evaluation tools (e.g. self, peer) rather than relying
solely on SETE is necessary. Comprehensive and usable information may be provided for effective
teaching. Universities should provide clear policy guidelines on quality control for faculties to develop
multiple teaching effectiveness evaluation instruments.
Originality/value – Teaching evaluation is important in order to bring about an improvement in
areas such as student achievement, and use of public funds or educational materials. The findings
provide critical information for management decision making to assist universities to translate the
resources at their disposal into learning outcomes.
Keywords Universities,Teaching, Performance appraisal,Kenya
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In the recent past the expansion of university education in Kenya has not been guided
by a rationalised strategy based on manpower requirements in the various sectors of
the economy, but rather on populist political expediency. The growth has been such
that it is beyond the ability of the economy to absorb university graduates usefully,
while many of the courses on offer are not relevant either to the country or the career
aspirations of the students (Gatheru and Shaw, 1999, p. 65). Even with the spectre of
graduate unemployment, the recurrent expenditure budget for university education
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
Evaluation of
teaching
effectiveness
183
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 13 No. 3, 2005
pp. 183-201
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684880510607936
peaked at 65 per cent of all the funds allocated to the various levels of the educational
system in the year 2001 (Government of Kenya, 2001, p. 33). At the same time, over 50
per cent of the Kenyan government’s development budget for capital development in
1997 was allocated to the university sector. Following the introduction of cost sharing
in 1992, parents have to augment the government’s contribution by meeting part of the
costs of university education. For example, during the 2000/2001 academic year,
parents had to pay between US$3,676 and US$6,835 per year, in a country that has
been negatively affected by economic downturn for a number of years (International
Comparative Higher Education Finance and Accessibility Project, 2002) (ICHEFAP).
Issues of educational quality, rather than mass production, need to move to the
forefront of the educational agenda of policy makers at this level of education.
Considering this huge public and private investment in university education, there is
an urgent need to evaluate how effectively this investment is being utilised by
examining the quality of the educational infrastructure, the cadre of qualified tutors
and other resources in place, and the quality of teaching and learning. This is
necessary in order to determine how universities in Kenya translate these resources at
their disposal into learning outcomes (Unesco, 2003).
Kells (1992) points out that there is scarcity of information on the performance of
universities in most developing countries. In developed countries, especially in the
USA and Western Europe, Kells (1992) argues that performance indicators, such as
student completion rates, employability of their graduates and staff research and
consultancy, are used in determining university effectiveness and the consequent
amount of funding allocated by governments. Performance indicators are important in
determining the functioning of organisations or their constituent units in order to
provide measures of performance against goals. They provide critical feedback for
management decision-making. In some Western universities, departmental committees
have been established to monitor and promote professional standards or academi c
excellence (Zakrajsek, 2002; Nellen, 2001).
Kells (1992) divides performance indicators into:
.institutional management indicators (e.g. workload measures, student enrolment
and financial trends data, teaching/learning); and
.research and service indicators (for instance student assessment of teaching
achievement and aptitude tests, staff publication and citation analysis, peer
reviews of research proposals or finished products).
Evaluation is important in order to bring about an improvement in areas such as
student achievement, use of public funds or educational materials and programmes.
Different evaluation approaches exist depending on who requires the information and
the purpose for which the information is needed. Management-oriented evaluation is
important in order to make decisions on the inputs, processes and outputs.
One of the ways that universities measure their performance is through students’
assessment of teaching by their tutors. Eggins (1987) observed that such appraisal
schemes might be used for professional development through the enhancement of
lecturers’ professional expertise. They may also be used for punitive objectives such as
management control over placement, advancement and dismissal.
University tutors in many institutions the world over are appointed on the basis of
their academic ability, without regard to their capacity to communicate effectively to
QAE
13,3
184
To continue reading
Request your trial