Una propuesta interpretativa para la evaluación de la enseñanza en educación superior

Edith J. Cisneros-Cohernour


Texto completo

HTML PDF



Resumen


Este artículo examina las limitaciones del paradigma positivista tradicional utilizado en la evaluación de la enseñanza en educación superior y propone el uso de una perspectiva interpretivista como alternativa para evaluarla. Se utiliza el estudio de caso de un profesor no experimentado, para ilustrar las debilidades del paradigma tradicional e identificar cuestiones críticas que surgen cuando la evaluación se basa en opiniones de los estudiantes, como única fuente para determinar la calidad de la enseñanza.

Palabras clave


Evaluación del docente; estudio de caso; enseñanza superior.

Referencias


Altbach, P. (2004). Globalization and the university: Myths and realities in an unequal world. Tertiary Education and Management I, 1-20. Disponible en: http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/publications/pub_pdf/Globalization.pdf

Braskamp, L. A., Brandeburg, D. y Ory, J. (1984). Evaluating teaching effectiveness. London: Sage.

Braskamp, L. A. y Ory, J.C. (1994). Assessing Faculty Work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brodie, D. A. (1998). Do students report that easy professors are excellent teachers? The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 23 (1), 1-20.

Brodie, D. A. (1999, abril). Has publication bias inflated the reported correlation between student achievement and ratings of instructors? Trabajo presentado en la Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, CA.

Cashin, W. E. (1988). Student ratings of teaching: A summary of the research. IDEA Paper 20, 1-6.

Cashin, W. E. (1995, septiembre). Student ratings of teaching: The research revisited. IDEA Paper 32.

Cave, M., Hanney, S., Kogan, M., y Travett, G. (1988). The use of performance indicators in higher education: A critical analysis of developing practice. London: Kingsley.

Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation: Enhancing teaching and determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Chickering, A. W. y Gamson, Z. F. (1987, marzo). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin 39 (7), 3-7.

Cisneros-Cohernour, E. J. (1997). Trade-offs: The use of student ratings results and its possible impact on instructional improvement. [Informe no publicado]. Illinois, EE. UU: University of Illinois, Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation.

Cisneros-Cohernour, E. J. (2001). The evaluation of teaching in the context of a research university: Different meanings, trade-offs and equity concerns. Tesis doctoral no publicada, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, EE.UU.

Costin, F., Greenough, W. T. y Menges, R. J. (1971). Student ratings of college teaching: reliability, validity, and usefulness. Review of Educational Research, 41 (5), 511-535.

Doyle Jr., K. O. (1982). Evaluating teaching. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

El-Hassan, K.(1995). Student ratings of instruction: Generalizability of findings. Studies in Education, 21, 411-429.

Falk, B. y Dow, K. L. (1971). The assessment of university teaching. London: Society for Research into Higher Education Ltd.

Feldman, K. A. (1986). The perceived instructional effectiveness of college teachers as related to their personality and attitudinal characteristics. Research in Higher Education, 24, 139-170.

Feldman, K. A. (1989). Instructional effectiveness of college teachers as judged by teachers themselves, current and former students, colleagues, administrators, and external (neutral observers). Research in Higher Education, 30, 137-172.

Kinney, D. P. y Smith, S. P. (1992). Age and teaching performance. Journal of Higher Education, 63, 282-302.

Marsh, H. W. (1987). Student evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253-388.

Marsh, H. W. y Bailey, M. (1993). Multidimensional students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 64, 1-18.

McKeachie, W. J. y Linn, Y. G. (1979). A Note on validity of student ratings of teaching. Educational Research Quarterly, 4 (3), 45-47.

Ory, J. y Ryan, K. (2001). How do student ratings measure up to a new validity framework? New Directions in Institutional Research, 109.

Pratt, D. D., Kelly, M. y Wong, W. S. S. (1999). Chinese conceptions of ‘effective teaching’ in Hong Kong: Towards culturally sensitive evaluation of teaching. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18 (4).

Rueda, M. y Landesmann, M. (1999). Hacia una nueva cultura de la evaluación de los académicos. Perfiles Educativos México, 21, 83-84.

Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. En Norman K. Denzin e Yvonna Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, (pp. 118-137). CA: Sage.

Shulman, L. (1986). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57 (1), 1-22.

Stake, R. E. (1998, abril). Representing quality in evaluation. Ponencia presentada en el congreso anual de la American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canadá.

Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. En Norman Denzin e Ivonna Lincoln (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, (3a. ed., pp.443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stake, R. E. y Burke, M. (2000). Evaluating teaching. [Informe de Investigación]. Champaign, Illinois, EE. UU.: Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation [CIRCE].

Stake, R. E. y Cisneros-Cohernour, E. J. (2004). The Quality of Teaching in Higher Education. Lithuanian Journal of Higher Education 1, 94-107. Lituania.

Tagomori, H. T. y Bishop, L. A. (1995). Student evaluations of teaching: Flaws in the instruments. Thought & Action, 11, 63-78.

Wilson, R. (2001, 2 de febrero). It's 10 a.m. do you know where your professors are? Faculty members at Boston U. fume over plan to require them to be in their offices at least 4 days a week. The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Faculty [sección], A10-A12.