QUALITY ASSURANCE:  AN INTEGRATED RESEARCH REPORT
Download
1 / 23

QUALITY ASSURANCE: AN INTEGRATED RESEARCH REPORT - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 157 Views
  • Uploaded on

QUALITY ASSURANCE: AN INTEGRATED RESEARCH REPORT. It is best to learn as we go not as we have learned. QUALITY ASSURANCE. Appraise individual educators Determine strengths and weaknesses Draw up programmes for individual’s personal growth. DAS. WSE. PM. IQMS Integrated Quality

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' QUALITY ASSURANCE: AN INTEGRATED RESEARCH REPORT ' - epifanio-juno


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

QUALITY ASSURANCE: AN INTEGRATED RESEARCH REPORT

It is best to learn as we go not as we have learned


Quality assurance

QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Appraise individual educators Determine strengths

  • and weaknesses

  • Draw up programmes for individual’s personal growth

DAS

WSE

PM

IQMS

Integrated Quality

Management System

  • Evaluate individual

  • educators

  • Purpose: salary/grade

  • progression

  • Reward and incentives

  • Evaluate overall

  • effectiveness of school

  • Determine quality

  • of teaching and learning


Quality assurance1
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Reporton perceptions of educators, principals, parents and districts on quality assurance

DAS and PM only applicable to educators but WSE on all of above.

EDUCATOR AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • 1120 educators from Gauteng were respondents using structured questionnaire to probe perceptions re teacher evaluation.


Quality assurance2
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Analysis of data revealed two factors namely:

  • Design criteria

  • Implementation criteria

    THE DESIGN CRITERIA

    Q1. Teacher performance-is it appraised, evaluated or measured?

  • Whether on appraises, measures or evaluates human performance one has to decide whether it is good, average or poor and hence we will refer to performance evaluation.


Quality assurance3
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Q2. What steps are involved in teacher evaluation?

  • Set performance criteria

  • Observe work performance and collect data

  • Evaluate work performance using process of decision-making and judgment

  • Feedback

    Q3 What is teacher evaluation?

  • See research paper

    Q4 What are the purposes of teacher evaluation?


Quality assurance4
Quality assurance

  • Formativefunction-develop professional teaching skills

  • Summative function-for selection and for grading and promotion

  • Socio-political function-motivation, to improve teaching effectiveness or promote preferred teaching actions

  • Administrative function-exercise of authority


Quality assurance5
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Model shows design and implementation are seen as two separate things –heaven where design occurs and earth where implementation occurs!

    Q5 Where is information needed to judge teacher performance found?

  • Teacher evaluation should occur within a community culture or combined paradigm as each evaluation community has an own evaluation framework. These paradigms are:


Quality assurance6
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Process-product paradigm-processes in teacher mainly responsible for learner achievement-personality, direct teaching behaviours, management techniques, better use of time.

  • Process-product mediation paradigm-learner is personally responsible and insight is result social activities in classroom or cognitive assimilation by learner him-or herself.


Quality assurance7
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Classroom ecological paradigm-it is impossible to measure teacher performance outside the context of the school, family, community and culture as they all influence what is observed. In-depth description of learner’s thoughts, attitudes and feelings are important.

  • Teacher decision-making paradigm-learner achievement is also result of teachers thought processes and reflective thinking plays important role.


Quality assurance8
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Excellent teacher paradigm- learner achievement result of teachers particular knowledge of subject, education and different teaching strategies.

    Q6 What variables are involved in determining teacher performance?

    Above paradigms can be grouped into categories to make them amenable to measurement namely:

  • Preoperational (aspects of personality, teacher’s knowledge of subject and of education, teachers educational framework)

  • Contextual (classroom ecology and learners role)


Quality assurance9
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Process (direct teaching actions, classroom management actions, teacher decision-making, teacher interactive thinking, exceptional teacher actions)

Product (process-product paradigm-levels of learner achievement)

Most teacher evaluation instruments have overload of observable teaching activities and discourage teaching activities aimed at the higher cognitive abilities.


Quality assurance10
QUALITY ASSURANCE

The PM instrument in the IQMS divides teaching into observation of educators in practice (4 performance standards) and aspects that fall outside the classroom ( 8 performance standards).

There is an over-representation of administrative aspects as the role of the learner seems minimal. For further points of criticism see the paper.


Quality assurance11
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Q7 What criteria must be used to judge quality of work performance?

  • Criteria can be subjective or objective. So the diving judges at the Olympic Games may all be experts and have certain diving behaviours described and points allocated (1-10) but they still differ in their judgment of scores allocated. Objective criteria are ones that does not involve another person’s evaluation like a score of 72 on a par 72 golf course-it is the same for everyone.

    Q8 Who must evaluate teacher performance?


Quality assurance12
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Immediate superiors (HOD, Principal).

  • Colleagues

  • Learner’s

  • Him-or herself.

  • Evaluation experts.

    THE IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA

    Q1 How should an evaluation system be advocated?


Quality assurance13
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • People responsible for advocating evaluation system selectively use data that confirms their position. Advocacy must be balanced with enquiry i.e people must be allowed to enquire into expressed view.

  • Senge speaks of “genuine enquiry” which consists of an integration of participative openness (freedom to speak your mind) and reflective openness (willingness to challenge own thinking – I may be wrong and other person correct).


Quality assurance14
QUALITY ASSURANCE

Q2 What should the function of performance measurement be?

  • The real character or being of something lies in its potential use (the hydrogen bomb)

  • Main aim should always be the professional development of teaching effectiveness.

    Q3 What competences does an evaluator need?

  • Good interpersonal relationship skills.

  • Being a positive role model


Quality assurance15
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Credibility as an evaluator

  • Personal integrity

  • Objectivity

  • Patience and flexibility

  • Knowledge and understanding of evaluation as a process.

  • Avoid stereotyping and initial impressions

    Q4 How should the feedback process occur?


Quality assurance16
QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Develop flexible relationship of trust-encourages dialogue.

  • Careful attention to listening skills

  • Give feedback on positive aspects first

  • Questions encourage teacher to speak about own weaknesses.

  • Set combined improvement goals and give training to overcome weaknesses.

  • Give attention to conceptual skills needed for promotion posts


Quality assurance17
QUALITY ASSURANCE

THE PRINCIPAL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

Research done in Gauteng, North-West and Mpumalanga

According to legislation principal is responsible that IQMS is advocated, implemented, documented and moderated in fair and consistent manner together with SMT.

Contextual factors also need to be considered (educator/learner ratio, classroom conditions, level of learner


  • discipline, nutrition of learners, nature of workload, complexity level of subject, personal health).

    THE PARENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • SASA stipulates schools must have an SGB.

  • SGB responsible for Governance whilst principal responsible for “Professional management”. Conflict as roles not clearly defined.

  • Role of SGB emphasized but little recognition to parental involvement by OFSTED. Example of criteria is:


  • SGB should complexity level of subject, personal health). develop systems for monitoring and evaluating the quality of education provided by school. Without training isthis possible?

    THE ROLE OF THE DISTRICTIN QUALITY ASSURANCE

  • Mixed methods research was conducted in Gauteng, Limpopo and Mpumalanga on perceptions of teachers regarding district’s role.

  • Most educators became aware of quality assurance via electronic and paper media and not from district office.

  • Any training workshops compulsory for school staff without funding from district.


  • Facilitators who were district officials were not competent trainers and provided contradictory information.

  • UNIONS and districts were not in agreement with some of the aspects of the IQMS.

  • District officials must be held accountable for performance of schools under their jurisdiction.

  • Competent facilitators and sufficient time for advocacy of the quality assurance are vital.


ad