dc.creatorVasquez-Rizo, Fredy Eduardo
dc.creatorGabalan Coello, Jesus
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-20T21:54:33Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-22T18:29:20Z
dc.date.available2019-11-20T21:54:33Z
dc.date.available2022-09-22T18:29:20Z
dc.date.created2019-11-20T21:54:33Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier0124-5821
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10614/11560
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.35575/rvucn.n57a3
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3452523
dc.description.abstractEste artículo es una construcción académica que toma como fuente de información las opiniones de los estudiantes, recogidas a través de los cuestionarios de percepción sobre el desarrollo de los cursos, en una universidad colombiana. Su objetivo consiste en identificar cuáles son los aspectos que más influyen en la valoración general del desempeño de un profesor, en términos de las variables universalmente aceptadas por la comunidad científica: cumplimiento, compromiso, dominio, metodología, evaluación y relaciones interpersonales, realizando una agrupación por las áreas disciplinares a las que pertenecen las asignaturas. El método utilizado emplea una regresión logística binaria, identificando en la dicotomía de cada variable aquellos profesores que se encuentran en el estándar de calidad definido a través de la política institucional. Lo anterior, muestra los resultados sobre la incidencia de la satisfacción particular en variables de desempeño profesoral, con respecto a la satisfacción general, vista tanto a nivel disciplinar como a nivel institucional, permitiendo concluir acerca de las tendencias asociadas a la percepción del desempeño profesoral, por parte de los estudiantes, y su relación con los instrumentos de medición
dc.description.abstractThis paper is an academic construction that takes as a source of information the opinions of the students, collected through the questionnaires of perception about the development of the courses in a Colombian university. Its objective is to identify which are the aspects that most influence the overall assessment of a teacher's performance, in terms of the variables universally accepted by the scientific community: compliance, commitment, mastery, methodology, evaluation and interpersonal relationships, making a grouping by the disciplinary areas to which the subjects belong. The method used uses a binary logistic regression, identifying in the dichotomy of each variable those teachers who are in the quality standard defined through the institutional policy. The above shows the results on the incidence of particular satisfaction in teacher performance variables with respect to general satisfaction, seen both at the disciplinary level and at the institutional level, allowing to conclude about the trends associated with the perception of teacher performance on the part of the students and their relationship with the measuring instruments
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherUniversidad Católica del Norte
dc.relation57
dc.relationGabalán-Coello, J., & Vásquez-Rizo, F. E. (2019). Noción de calidad profesoral desde la percepción estudiantil. Revista Virtual Universidad Católica Del Norte, (57), 24–39. doi: https://doi.org/10.35575/rvucn.n57a3
dc.relationRevista Virtual Universidad Católica del Norte
dc.relationAhmed, K., Shahzad, F., Fareed, Z, Zulfiqar, B. & Naveed, T. (September, 2014). Impact of relationship, task & role conflict on teaching performance in educational institutes. International Journal of Management, Accounting & Economics, 1(2), 101-112
dc.relationAlcaraz Salarirche, N. (enero, 2015). Aproximación histórica a la evaluación educativa: de la generación de la medición a la generación ecléctica. Revista Iberoamericana de Evaluación Educativa, 8(1), 11-25
dc.relationAmores Guevara, P., Arias Tapia, S., Sánchez Guerrero, S., Mera Constante, M., Vega Pérez, J., Núñez Hernández, C. & Vargas Ramos, M. (2018). Quantitative and qualitative evaluation in collaborative learning. En: M. E. Auer, D. Guralnick y I. Simonics (Eds.), Teaching and learning in a digital world (pp. 293-300). New York, United States: Springer International Publishing
dc.relationAtkinson, A. (2005). Final report: measurement of government output and productivity for the national accounts. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave McMillan
dc.relationAvalos, B. & Assael, J. (December, 2006). Moving from resistance to agreement: the case of the Chilean teacher performance evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(4-5), 254-266
dc.relationBernard, H. (2011). Comment évaluer, améliorer, valoriser l’enseignement supérieur? Bruxelles, Belgium: De Boeck
dc.relationCiocan, E. & Ionus, O. (December, 2016). Types of evaluation used in extracurricular didactic - Geographic activities. Annals of the University of Craiova, 17, 95-100
dc.relationColby, S., Bradshaw, L. & Joyner, R. (2002). Teacher evaluation: a review of the literature. Recuperado de https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED464915.pdf
dc.relationCossio, M. F. (enero-abril, 2018). A nova gestão pública: alguns impactos nas políticas educacionais e na formação de professors. Educação, 41(1), 66-73
dc.relationCresswell, J. W. & Guetterman, T. C. (2018). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th Ed.). Boston, United States: Pearson
dc.relationEmery, C., Kramer, T. & Tian, R. (March, 2003). Return to academic standards: a critique of student evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(1), 37-46
dc.relationEroshkin, Y., Kameneva, N. A., Kovkov, D. V. & Sukhorukov, A. I. (January, 2017). Conceptual system in the modern information management. Procedia Computer Science, 103, 609-612
dc.relationFeldman, K. (December, 1989). The association between student ratings of specific instructional dimensions and student achievement: refining and extending the synthesis of data from multisection validity studies. Research in Higher Education, 30(6), 583-645
dc.relationFlores, M. A. (September, 2012). The implementation of a new policy on teacher appraisal in Portugal: how do teachers experience it at school? Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 24(4), 351-368
dc.relationFuentes Castro, H. J. (junio, 2003). La evaluación de la actividad docente: un análisis a partir de la técnica DEA. Economía Mexicana, 13(1), 137-163
dc.relationGabalán Coello, J. y Vásquez Rizo, F. E. (junio, 2008). Del otro lado de la pizarra: relación estudiante profesor desde perspectivas disciplinares. Revista Educación y Educadores, 11(1), 103-126
dc.relationIztueta, I. L., Garmendia Navarro, I. & Murgiondo, J. E. (junio, 2017). Statistical matching en la práctica – Una aplicación a la evaluación del sistema educativo mediante PISA y TALIS. RIE: Revista de Investigación Educativa, 35(2), 371-388
dc.relationKaplin, W. & Lee, B. (1995). The law of higher education: a comprehensive guide to legal implications of administrative decision making (3rd Ed.). San Francisco, United States: Jossey-Bass
dc.relationKapucu, N. & Koliba, C. (December, 2017). Using competency-based portfolios as a pedagogical tool and assessment strategy in MPA programs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(4), 993-1016
dc.relationKuo, M. Y. & Shiu, J. L. (May, 2016). A dynamic quantitative evaluation of higher education return: Evidence from Taiwan education expansion. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 21(2), 276-300
dc.relationLiao, H. y Hitchcock, J. (June, 2018). Reported credibility techniques in higher education evaluation studies that use qualitative methods: A research synthesis. Evaluation & Program Planning, 68, 157-165
dc.relationLópez Mera, S. F. (enero-marzo, 2012). Estimación del efecto colegio en Colombia: 1980 – 2009 Estudios Gerenciales, 28(122), 49-68
dc.relationMarques Graells, P. (2000). Evaluación contextual. Cuestionarios para la evaluación del profesorado. Recuperado de http://peremarques.pangea.org/contextu.htm
dc.relationMarsh, H. (September, 1982). Validity of students evaluations of college teaching a multirate multimethod analyse. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 264-279
dc.relationMarsh, H. (January, 1987). Students´ evaluation of university teaching: research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(3), 253-288
dc.relationMarsh, H. (January, 2001). Distinguishing between good (useful) and bad workloads on students' evaluations of teaching. American Educational Research, 38(1), 183-212
dc.relationMarsh, H. & Dunkin, M. J. (1997). Students’ evaluation of university teaching. A multidimensional perspective. En: R. Perry & J. Smart (Orgs.), Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 143-233). New York, United States: Agathon
dc.relationOry, J. (2000). Teaching evaluation: past, present and future. En K. Ryan (Org.), Evaluating teaching in higher education: A vision for the future. New directions for teaching and learning (pp. 13-18). Champaign, United States: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
dc.relationOvando, M. & Ramírez, A. (June, 2007). Principals’ instructional leadership within a teacher performance appraisal system: enhancing students’ academic success. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 20(1-2), 85-110
dc.relationPatton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4a. ed.). Thousand Oaks, United States: Sage Publications
dc.relationRichardson, J. (February, 2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the literature. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 387-415
dc.relationShavelson, R. (agosto, 2008). La medición como una manera de expresar la evaluación del estudiante: sus posibilidades y limitaciones. En Foro Nacional de Evaluación del Aprendizaje en la Educación Superior. Bogotá, Colombia
dc.relationSchoemaker, P. J. H. & Tetlock, P. E. (March, 2017). Building a more intelligent enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(3), 28-38
dc.relationStufflebeam, D. & Shinkfield, A. (1985). Systematic evaluation. A self-instructional guide to theory and practice. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Springer Netherlands
dc.relationStufflebeam, D. & Shinkfield, A. (2007). Evaluation theory, models, and applications. San Francisco, United States: John Wiley
dc.relationThelwall, M. (January, 2017). Three practical field normalized alternative indicator formulae for research evaluation. Journal of Informetrics, 11(1), 128-151
dc.relationVan der Lans, R. M. & Maulana, R. (septiembre, 2018). The use of secondary school student ratings of their teacher’s skillfulness for low-stake assessment and high-stake evaluation. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 112-121
dc.relationWaheed, B., Khan, F., Veitch, B. & Hawboldt, K. (April, 2011). Uncertainty-based quantitative assessment of sustainability for higher education institutions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(6-7), 720-732
dc.relationWang, H., Wang, J. & Small, M. (October, 2018). Knowledge transmission model with differing initial transmission and retransmission process. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 507, 478-488
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
dc.rightsDerechos Reservados - Universidad Autónoma de Occidente
dc.sourcereponame:Repositorio Institucional UAO
dc.titleNoción de calidad profesoral desde la percepción estudiantil
dc.typeArtículo de revista


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución