1 / 25

Enhancing Teaching Quality in Higher Education: A Pilot Study in Health Sciences

Explore quality assurance in teaching using quantitative and qualitative indicators. Analyze data to improve teaching and learning practices while addressing challenges within the health sciences field.

vsellers
Download Presentation

Enhancing Teaching Quality in Higher Education: A Pilot Study in Health Sciences

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quality Promotion and Assurance in Teaching and Learning A Pilot Study in the Faculty of Health Sciences, UKZN Professor Sabiha EssackB. Pharm., M. Pharm., PhDDean and Head of School

  2. Overview • Global Call for Quality Teaching • 2nd Cycle of Quality Audits • QPA of Teaching and Learning in the Health Sciences • Quantitative and Qualitative Indicators/Measures • Data Analysis • OECD Report on Quality Teaching in Higher Education • AACU - High Impact Educational Practices • South African Survey of Student Engagement • Challenges and Solutions for Quality Audits

  3. Global Call for Quality Teaching • 2009 UNESCO Conference on Higher Education: participation and access to be translated into completion and success. • President Obama’s concerned about college attrition - $12 billion plan to restore graduation rates. • 2009 budget speech, Minister Blade Nzimande: • Improve access, success, throughput rates and the quality of the HE education experience • Increase graduates as a percentage of total enrolments to 22% by 2010. • 2011 budget speech , Minister Blade Nzimande: • teaching development grants (R421 million) to improve graduate outputs • funding for foundation programmes (R174 million) to improve the success rates of students from disadvantaged educational backgrounds.

  4. 2nd Cycle of Quality Audits • Identify obstacles to the improvement of teaching and learning based on: • Throughput analysis of student cohorts • Institutional self-evaluation report on the quality management of teaching and learning. • Accreditation panels will interrogate institutional teaching and learning practices in relation to research and community engagement and as aligned with the context, mission and strategic focus of the institution. • 3-tiered methodology: • University-wide throughput analysis • List of disciplines/Schools for detailed focus • Selected modules/courses as the ultimate unit of analysis.

  5. QA of Teaching & Learning in the Health Sciences To investigate the use of: • Pass rates, • Student and peer evaluations of teaching, • Moderator and external examiner reports, • Reports from student support personnel, • Feedback from experiential learning supervisors, and, • Institutional research on teaching and learning to inform quality improvements in teaching and learning on an Individual level while delineating the quality-related roles and responsibilities of the various academic portfolio holders and/or Faculty units with respect to teaching.

  6. Quantitative Indicators/Measures Programme Data Module Data Pass rates per module Average mark per module Mean mark Maximum mark Minimum mark • Graduation rate • Cohort completion rates • Academic exclusions • Drop outs Proxies English language: previous disadvantage Matric points/NSC scores: mainstream/alternative access

  7. Qualitative Indicators/Measures • Student evaluations - questionnaires designed by the Faculty with QPA. • Students additionally highlighted 3 positive aspects/ strengths and/or 3 negative aspects/weaknesses of teachers and/or modules. • Peer evaluations - team approach with an internal academic, an academic external to UKZN and a healthcare professional in public/private practice. • The peer evaluation questionnaire designed by the Faculty with QPA and a consolidated team report submitted.

  8. Confounding Factors The high admissions and stringent selection criteria in Health Sciences programmes allows the recruitment of academically proficient students that show consistent year-on-year performance trends.

  9. Graduation Rate No. of graduates/headcount x 100 Compared with the national benchmark of 22%

  10. StratifiedGraduation Rate No. of graduates/headcount x 100 Compared with the national benchmark of 22%

  11. Cohort Completion Rate Requires interrogation of bottleneck modules over the full course of the degree

  12. StratifiedCohort Completion Rates Requires interrogation of bottleneck modules over the full course of the degree

  13. Exclusions & Drop-outs Academic Exclusions Drop-outs Drop-outs exceed exclusions and are largely finance-related

  14. Pass Rates PHRM 202 – Introduction to Pharmacology 85% pass rate for modules

  15. Average Mark PHRM 202 – Introduction to Pharmacology

  16. Quantitative Data Analysis • Differences in performance trends would most commonly be attributed to changes in teachers, pedagogy or assessment. • Teacher-related changes verified by student and peer evaluations • Curriculum-related changes verified with module and programme portfolios. • Stratified quantitative data identified student cohorts who collectively required teaching and learning interventions. Consolidated quantitative data was found to have limited use in improving individual teaching practice. • Quantitative data could thus be used for benchmarking in relation to internal and national performance and equity benchmarks and targets

  17. Qualitative Data Analysis • Qualitative data from students and peers: • Best highlighted strengths and weaknesses • Assessed standard of content at national professional/peer level • Provided the most useful data to inform changes in teaching practice. • Student evaluations informed teaching practice and relevance of content to the practice settings • Peer evaluation holistically addressed curriculum content (e.g. currency of cases), pedagogy and assessment practice. • The qualitative data engendered and enhanced reflective practice and was found of greatest use for teaching portfolios. Academics tended to concentrate on and address the negative aspects while cursorily acknowledging strengths • Line managers found that qualitative data best allowed the identification of best practice or the need for teaching-related interventions.

  18. OECD Report on Quality Teaching in HE • OECD review of quality teaching in higher education undertaken in 29 institutions in 20 countries • Evaluation of quality teaching is challenging • Most evaluation instruments relate to input indicators: • Resource allocation for teaching e.g., number of teaching posts or staff:student ratios; • Suitable learning conditions e.g., square meters for the library • Monitoring and evaluation of policies that support quality teaching e.g. number of teachers attending training courses • Dearth of instruments to evaluate the impact of quality teaching, i.e. there is no explicit evaluation criteria linking teaching input to learning outcome.

  19. OECD Report on Quality Teaching in HE (2) • More and more institutions are including more qualitative indicators, some of which are: • Student satisfaction rates regarding the quality of education – includes courses, teacher attitude, understanding of the discipline, quality of the learning environment • Teacher opinion surveys related to the quality of institutional support for improving teaching quality. • Use of qualitative indicators using descriptors based on a rating scale • Triangulation of information sources from open-ended questions to various stakeholders such as students, academics, external partners etc.

  20. AACU: High Impact Educational Practices Learning Outcomes High Impact Practices First year seminars and experiences Common intellectual experiences Learning communities Writing-intensive courses Collaborative assignments and projects Undergraduate research Diversity/global learning Service-learning and/or community-based learning Internships Capstone Course and projects University education should foster deep learning and practical skills for economic, societal, civic & personal success in the 21st century: • Development of intellectual abilities and competencies • Global and inter-cultural learning • Technological sophistication • Collaborative problem-solving • Ethical and social responsibilities • Transferable skills • Real-world applications • Personal growth and self-efficacy

  21. South African Survey of Student Engagement • What students do - the time and energy they devote to educationally purposive activities • What institutions do - the extent to which they employ effective educational practices to induce students to do the right things • The survey conducted amongst staff and student ascertained : • Level of academic challenge • Active and collaborative learning • Student-staff interaction • Enriching educational experiences/adjunct learning opportunities • Supportive campus environment • The results: • Were stratified by first year and senior students • Areas of agreement and discrepancy between staff and students were highlighted • Staff time spent on teaching-related activities and participation in teaching development/improvement activities was described.

  22. Challenges for the 2ndCycle of Quality Audits • The impact of teaching and/or student engagement with learning is critical to student retention and throughput but is yet to be effectively measured. • Striking the correct balance between quantitative and qualitative teaching quality indicators/ measures • Identifying suitable qualitative indicators/ measures for quality teaching • Ensuring that such indicators (quantitative/ qualitative) address both teaching inputs as well as teaching impact/learning outcomes.

  23. References • Henard, F. Learning our Lesson Review of Quality Teaching in Higher Education. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2012. • Kuh, G.D. High Impact Educational Practices What Are They, Who Has Access To Them And Why Do They Matter. Washington: Association of American College and Universities; 2008. • http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ED/ED/pdf/WCHE_2009/FINAL%20 COMMUNIQUE%20WCHE%202009.pdf • http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20090911233703416 • http://www.dhet.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zhQIjhq1jSc%3d&tabid=36&mid=1071 • http://www.che.ac.za/documents/d000208/SASSE_2010.pdf

  24. Acknowledgements Nursing: • Professor Petra Brysiewicz • Ms Charlotte Engelbrecht Optometry: • Dr Rekha Hansraj • Ms Diane Wallace Pharmacy: • Professor Fatima Suleman • Dr Johannes Bodenstein • Dr Frasia Oosthuizen

  25. Small Group Activity • What data and information do you use to demonstrate that you are providing quality academic programmes? • Does your institution measure the quality of teaching? Why? Why not? If so, how do you do it? • Does your institution undertake peer evaluation of teaching? Why? Why not? • Does your institution undertake student evaluations of teaching and module content? How do you use the findings to improve teaching and enhance student learning? • Does your institution interrogate student access, retention, success and throughput rates? What is this data telling you? How do you use it to improve educational quality and improve student success?

More Related