Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/1095714.1095774acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiteConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Earning positive evaluations from IT students: effective techniques

Published: 20 October 2005 Publication History

Abstract

Achieving positive student evaluations may be more difficult in technology subjects than in some other disciplines. Research shows that the favorableness of student comments varies by discipline, with faculty in the arts and humanities receiving consistently higher ratings than faculty in science areas. Nevertheless the IT curriculum lends itself toward using technology in ways that promote positive interactions with students and overall satisfaction. Technology can be harnessed to foster innovative approaches to grading; implement testing methods that promote learning; increase the entertainment factor through active learning; and enhance the responsiveness of all students. Some specific methods include: generating a test bank from student input, demonstrating software using voice-over webcams, utilizing a cross-word puzzle format for concept learning, posing questions in a treasure-hunt format, and dramatizing ethical issues through scripts for student-actors. Capitalizing on students' enthusiasm for hands-on laboratory activities of all types and avoiding the conventional lecture format enables the IT instructor to effectively deliver course material in a manner that students find appealing.

References

[1]
Arreola, R. (2000). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system. 2d ed. MA: Anker, 2000, xviii.
[2]
Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T. and Maeroff, G. I. Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
[3]
Cashin, W. Students do rate different academic fields differently. In Theall, M. and Franklin, J. (Eds), Student ratings of instruction: issues for improving practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
[4]
Abrami, P.C., Leventhal, L., & Perry, R. P. "Educational seduction", Review of Educational Research, 32, (1982), 446--464.
[5]
Williams, W. M. and Ceci, S. J. How'm I doing?" Problems with student ratings of instructors and courses. Change: the magazine of higher learning, 29, (1997), 12--23.
[6]
Greenwald, A. G., and Gillmore, G. M. Grading leniency is a removable contaminant of student ratings. American psychologist, 11, (1997), 1209--17.
[7]
Johnson, V. An A is an A is an A. New York Times Sunday Supplement Education Outlook, 14. (April 14, 2002).
[8]
McDonald, D. and Johnson, R. Grade distribution and its impact on CIS faculty evaluations: 1992-2002. Information Systems Education Journal. 1, 42, (December 2003), 3--13.
[9]
Trout, P. Flunking the test: the dismal record of student evaluations. The Touchstone, 5, (Sept/Oct 2000). Available http://www.bus.lsu.edu/accounting/faculty/lcrumbley/flunk.html.
[10]
Klassen, K. and Smith, W. Web log analysis: a study of instructor evaluations done online. Journal of Information Technology Education, 3, (2004), 291--312.
[11]
Teven, J. and McCroskey, J. The relationship of perceived student caring with student learning and teacher evaluation. Report No. C509498. Washington, DC: Dept. of Health, Education & Welfare, National Institute of Education (EDRS Document Reproduction Service No. ED407690), 1996, 3, 5.
[12]
Neilforoshan, M. An integrative approach to the accommodation of various learning styles. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 17, 3, (February 2001), 67--72.
[13]
Stair, R. and Reynolds, G. Principles of information systems. 7th ed. Boston, MA: Thomson Course Technology, 2006.
[14]
Cooper, R. Database normalization basics (web cast). Retrieved from http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/webcasts/seminar/shared/asp/view.asp?url=/servicedesks/webcasts/en/wc060600/manifest.xml
[15]
Rosbottom, J. Hybrid learning - a safe route into web-based open distance learning for the computer science teacher. In Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33, 3 (September 2001), 89--92.
[16]
Vogel D. Wagner C. and Ma L.C.K. Student-Directed Learning: Hong Kong Experiences, 32nd Hawaii International Conference in Systems Sciences (HICSS-32), IEEE Press, 1999. Retrieved from http://www.is.cityu.edu.hk/Research/WorkingPapers/paper/9806.pdf

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)Evaluation of Student Skills in Unix Base Scripting CourseProceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on E-Education, E-Business and E-Technology10.1145/3355166.3355169(23-27)Online publication date: 2-Aug-2019
  • (2007)Code campAdvanced Technology for Learning10.5555/1722184.17221924:1(43-52)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2007
  • (2007)CODE CAMP: A SETTING FOR COLLABORATIVE LEARNING OF PROGRAMMINGAdvanced Technology for Learning10.2316/Journal.208.2007.1.208-09064:1Online publication date: 2007

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
SIGITE '05: Proceedings of the 6th conference on Information technology education
October 2005
402 pages
ISBN:1595932526
DOI:10.1145/1095714
  • General Chair:
  • Rob Friedman
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 20 October 2005

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. information systems education
  2. information technology education
  3. student evaluation
  4. teaching effectiveness
  5. teaching techniques

Qualifiers

  • Article

Conference

SIGITE05
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 176 of 429 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)3
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 23 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2019)Evaluation of Student Skills in Unix Base Scripting CourseProceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on E-Education, E-Business and E-Technology10.1145/3355166.3355169(23-27)Online publication date: 2-Aug-2019
  • (2007)Code campAdvanced Technology for Learning10.5555/1722184.17221924:1(43-52)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2007
  • (2007)CODE CAMP: A SETTING FOR COLLABORATIVE LEARNING OF PROGRAMMINGAdvanced Technology for Learning10.2316/Journal.208.2007.1.208-09064:1Online publication date: 2007

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media