Dr. S. Machingambi and Mr. A. Bangani

1. 3rd e-learning Conference 2011Technology, Pedagogy, and Education in the 21st Century********************Improving Teaching Effectiveness Through Student Online Feedback: A Pilot Study Project for the School of Engineering at WSU Dr. S. Machingambi and Mr. A. Bangani

2. INTRODUCTION • The justification for the use of students in the evaluation of teaching • An internationally acclaimed practice • Students viewed as clients in HE enterprise • To instil a sense of accountability in lecturers thereby improving teaching culture • Feedback from students can lead to profdevpt through support, training & coaching initiatives

3. Background to the study • The study was accentuated by the ECSA’s accreditation visits at WSU on 16-19 March 2010 • ECSA –a professional body that accredits Engineering qualifications on behalf of HEQC • In response to ECSA’s report, the SoE drew up a corrective action & improvement plan for implementation by the Civil & Elect Eng departments • Student evaluations of teaching were adopted as part of this improvement plan

4. Theoretical framework, Methodology & design • The study is interpinned on the interpretive theoretical framework • Suitable for individual or small groups in naturalistic settings(Denzin & Lincoln, 2005) • It enable the researchers to gain insight into a case of two depts at WSU

5. Theoretical framework, Methodology & design • A qualitative case study design • Design suitable for understanding the nature of a particular phenomenon (Leedy & Omrod, 2001) • Design ideal for tapping student perceptions of lecturers’ teaching competencies in two departments

6. Instrumentation, participants & procedure • The university’s instrument for the evaluation of instruction as contained in the Evaluation ofTeaching Policy was used-Consists of likert-type of questionnaire items on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 (SDA) to 5 (SA) and also open-ended questions-Covers course & instructor aspects 228 students enrolled for 39 courses in Civil & Electrical Engin dept in 2010 participated in the study

9. Good Instructor Comments • THE INSTRUCTOR IS A GOOD PERSON THATS WHAT I CAN SAY. • On this simester my lecturer is very very good than other one before coz i'm understand the subject i know what i have to do. • our instructor is a good facilitator who is always available when we need him.the fact that he loves the subject he is lecturing makes it easy for him to be understood because he explains with clear understanding.he is always in class in his periods,and comes prepared for the lecture. • My lecture is prity good in teaching but his mucking is very poor.For him to improve macking that will be good for me.

10. Good Course Comments • THE SUBJECT IS GOOD AND UNDERSTABLE, THE PRACTICALS ALSO GOOD AND RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT. • the course is very good and i enjoy it because it requires too much of practice • This course is very good, and I think it will help me to find some job 4 or 5 years coming. I like this course because it have more practical than others. It is my favourite course • The course is so exciting and very nice and seemingly it will help us in the near future . It gives us a clear understanding of what we are going to do when we are in the field.

11. Bad Instructor Comments • honestly he isn't no well know is work. sometime he is anable to answer our question in the class. • The instructor does not explain enough. Rushes quick to another chapter with out making sure that we undustand enough. • first,hedoesnt have confidence about his course,he take things for grantent,he set dificulttests.hedidnt care about the failers in class,hedoesnt like tuterwereas he see that the rate of failers is high. • uyadika ...uneshori.......uyaphoxa

12. Bad Course Comments • In this course they do not do practicalsthat are supposed to be done regardless of the sylabus.If they can allow students to do practicals after the • students must get the text book at good time,for example i did not get the textbook in the begining of the,i got it at the end of August so in my first test the is poor perfomance. • THE COURSE was very dificult to me,becouse of he didnt teach well,he gives us dificult topics when it comes to assigment.hedidnt explain well his subject.hedidnt gives us clear notes to understand the course. • The volume of the work is not manageable .His making is not fair .

13. Contradicting Comments Good Bad he is completely not ready for this subject honestly, I suggest the department find us an instructor that is fully qualified for ----course--- never he listen to student and he never bring tests strips on time and he is unable to communicate with students and not soon he is gona be a better lecturer • Mr XXXX is one of the best lecturers I've seen he made me understand he knew his staff very well and I don't even have a suggestion for him he is very excellent please keep up the good work. • he helps us alotwith problems that are happening on site

14. Examples of Bad English • basically good indence,good communication with the student but not giving much as expected regarding how the test are concerned • THE IS TOO MURCH AND IT IS IMPORTANT IN FURTURE PERPOSES THE WAY THAT I SEE THEY SHOULD REDUCE THE SILABUS. • HE IS A GOOD INSTRUCTOR, BUT SEEMS HE ALSO A LAZY MAN. IF YOU A OVER SEE OF THIS INSTRUCTERS ,I WOULD LIKE TO SAY: BE ON THIRE WORKS. THANK U. FORGIVE ABOUT MY POOR ENGLISH.

15. Issues and Recommendations Glaring Issues Recommendations CPD – LTHE module Induction and professionalism Moderation, memoranda and monitoring Language proficiency classes Proper scheduling and support for practical work • Lecturer teaching incompetency • Lecturer attitude • Poor testing and marking • Student attitude • The English language • Lack of practicals and lab resources

16. THANK YOU ???????