# data[].attributes.headline
Slides: disponiveis no dia 23 de setemrbo

# data[].attributes.subject
Slides: disponiveis no dia 23 de setemrbo

# data[].attributes.body
Assuma que vai lecionar uma UC em regime misto e aplique a ferramenta EMBED.
Aplique a checklist de avaliação da Universidade de IDAHO a uma UC que tenha lecionado presencialmente.
Use o Guião de Avaliação da Mudança para identificar elementos a ter em conta.

# data[].attributes.body
Explore a ferramenta de auto-avaliação EMBED -visualize o Video de explicação do modelo.
Após leitura do texto "Three ways to make teaching evaluations modere effective", proceda a uma auto-reflexão sobre como transformar a avaliação do funcionamento e da qualidade duma UC para beneficiar a experiência dessa UC (sua e dos seus estudantes).
Explore o banco de perguntas para a avaliação duma UC e reflita se o mesmo pode ser-lhe útil nesta formação.
Anote para si, ao longo dos módulos da formação, que elementos pode recolher para melhor compreender como transformar a sua UC.
Participe nas sessões síncronas previstas.

# data[].attributes.body
Apesar do trabalho principal deste módulo surgir no final da formação, a consolidação dos princípios implica uma reflexão e discussão contínuas sobre a conceção do processo de avaliação. Privilegie o envolvimento dos estudantes neste processo.
Discuta com os colegas, facilitadores, dinamizadores de módulo.

Inspire-se no conceito de "Scholarship of Teaching and Learning"(SoTL) para fazer a sua experiência de avaliação útil para todos os que ensinam e aprendem.

Utilize o forum para colocar questões e discutir respostas.

# data[].attributes.body
"Quem vai ao mar, avia-se em terra"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Módulo Avaliação na transformação de uma UC - apresentação docência+

# data[].attributes.body
"what really shows our stuff as teachers is what we do with that feedback, and how we turn evaluation into a powerful tool for both pedagogical and intellectual enrichment." Annelise Heinz, 2016, Inside higher ed

# data[].attributes.headline
Ferramenta de auto-avaliação da maturidade da minha UC em termos de ensino Blended

# data[].attributes.subject
Ferramenta de auto-avaliação da maturidade da minha UC em termos de ensino Blended

# data[].attributes.body
A ferramenta é explicada no VIDEO correspondente

# data[].attributes.body
Manuel João Costa <mjc@reitoria.uminho.pt> (coordenação)

Sandra Soares <sandra.soares@ua.pt> (coordenação)

Flávia Vieira <flaviav@ie.uminho.pt>

Sílvia Araújo<saraujo@ilch.uminho.pt>
Gabriel G. Hornink <gabrielbio@gmail.com>

# data[].attributes.body
PONTO DE PARTIDA
•O que é para si a avaliação do funcionamento de uma UC?
•Como construir um processo de avaliação do funcionamento de uma UC que possa contribuir para a transformação continua da UC?
•Como aumentar o potencial transformador da avaliação de uma UC?
O Guião de Avaliação da Mudança mostra-lhe o caminho.

# data[].attributes.headline
Focus Groups as a Form of Student Evaluation of Teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Focus Groups as a Form of Student Evaluation of Teaching

# data[].attributes.body
A realização de reuniões regulares e sistematizadas com grupos de estudantes dá contributos essenciais para transformações participadas e ágeis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This paper will fill a gap in the scholarship of teaching and learning on focus groups as a form of student evaluation of teaching. This gap in the literature may be due to focus groups being seen as an unofficial form of evaluation in a system which emphasises Student Evaluations of Teaching (SETs) and the Course Evaluation Instrument (CEI) or equivalent instruments depending on individual institutions. They are also often seen as an adjunct to these more formal types of evaluation, used to gain deeper understandings of student opinions. We argue that focus groups, as a form of evaluation, need to be theorised in their own right. Focus groups provide the opportunity to delve deeper into the reasons why students may be satisfied or dissatisfied with a particular course, as well as placing some measure of accountability upon students to justify their evaluations of teaching and courses. For these reasons, and others that will be explored in this paper, focus groups are a valuable form of evaluation, which need to be theorised and considered more seriously in the literature.

Discover the world's research

19+ million members

135+ million publications

700k+ research projects

Join for free

Focus Groups as a Form of

Student Evaluation of Teaching

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.

To teach people who want to undertake community development projects how to do so through a generic systematic approach so that they can repeat the process with every project they engage in.

View project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
(PDF) Focus Groups as a Form of Student Evaluation of Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PDF | This paper will fill a gap in the scholarship of teaching and learning on focus groups as a form of student evaluation of teaching. This gap in... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

# data[].attributes.body
Neste exemplo, os estudantes participam numa reforma curricular constituindo uma "review team"(contexto: um curso de medicina)

# data[].attributes.headline
Three ways to make teaching evaluations more effective (essay)

# data[].attributes.subject
Three ways to make teaching evaluations more effective (essay)

# data[].attributes.body
Leitura-base para reflexão (5 páginas. Contrasta a prática comum com uma avaliação que permita mudança.

# data[].attributes.body
Uma experiência em que os estudantes foram convidados a desenvolver um processo de avaliação de uma unidade online. Mostra como foi feito e apresenta as perceções dos estudantes sobre o processo

# data[].attributes.body
Video de explicação do modelo EMBED.

# data[].attributes.headline
Guia:Avaliação - equidade,agência transparência 

# data[].attributes.subject
Guia:Avaliação - equidade,agência transparência 

# data[].attributes.body
discutido no módulo da avaliação

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Key Characteristics of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning vs. Scholarly Teaching

# data[].attributes.body
Podemos personalizar a avaliação das nossas UC sem ter de inventar as perguntas! Este banco de perguntas (a usar em qualquer formato de inquérito (questionário/ entrevista) inclui as seguintes categorias: Instructor/GSI-Specific Question Themes
Course-Specific Question Themes
Student Self-Evaluation Questions
Open-Ended Questions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The adoption of end-of-term evaluation question items listed on this page helps to ensure that you will solicit informative feedback - feedback that can be used for teaching improvement and evaluation. When adoption occurs across a department, it allows for robust analysis and reporting that can further inform both course-level pedagogy and program-level curriculum.

The question items contained on this page were developed by faculty focus groups stemming from the Taskforce on Teaching Evaluation in 2009, with additional input and revisions provided from the Academic Senate's Committee on Teaching. These question items are being implemented as part of the electronic Course Evaluations service. Questions items are being made available to all academic departments who might be interested in revising end-of-term evaluations.

If your department wishes to adopt these questions, and/or move to the electronic Course Evaluations service:
Based on faculty feedback, bolded questions reflect the default within each category. However, departments may choose any item(s) that they prefer within a category.
Mandatory Questions

1. The instructor's lectures, facilitation of classes, and/or office hours and help sessions enhanced my learning. ("Learning" may include gaining mastery of course content and new skills, exposure to new methodologies and modes of critical thinking, and extending the ability to express oneself on the topics treated in the course.)

2. The assignments were well designed to help me understand the course material and gain a deeper perspective on the subject.

3. The instructor created an environment in which I could feel included (for example, encouraged multiple voices/perspectives, welcomed questions and critiques, responded to student feedback).

Catergories

Presentation of Content

1. The instructor (or GSI) clearly presented the skills to be learned

2. The instructor (or GSI) effectively presented the tools (e.g. materials, skills, and techniques) needed

3. The instructor (or GSI) effectively presented concepts and techniques

4. The instructor (or GSI) presented content in an organized manner

Clarity of Expectations or Directions

1. The instructor (or GSI) explained concepts clearly

2. The instructor (or GSI) made the elements of good writing clear

3. The instructor (or GSI) clearly articulated the standards of performance for the course

4. The instructor (or GSI) provided guidance for understanding course exercises

5. The instructor (or GSI) increased my understanding of course material

Helpfulness/Availability

1. The instructor (or GSI) helped me achieve my goals

2. The instructor (or GSI) helped me define the goals and scope of the project

3. The instructor (or GSI) helped me identify resources I needed to carry out the project

4. The instructor (or GSI) was helpful when I had difficulty performing activities

5. The instructor (or GSI) was helpful to me individually (in conferences, email exchanges, etc.)

6. The instructor (or GSI) was readily available during the class

7. The instructor (or GSI) provided help when I had difficulties

8. The instructor (or GSI) was helpful when I had difficulties or questions

Useful/Clear Feedback on Performance

1. The instructor (or GSI) provided clear constructive feedback

2. The instructor (or GSI) provided useful feedback on my writing

3. The instructor (or GSI) provided meaningful feedback on my work

4. The instructor (or GSI) provided meaningful guidance on my progress/work

5. The instructor (or GSI) provided constructive feedback in response to difficulties with the language

6. The instructor (or GSI) gave me constructive feedback

7. The instructor (or GSI) gave me constructive feedback on assignments

8. The instructor (or GSI) clearly articulated the standards of performance

Encouraging of Participation/Discussion

1. The instructor (or GSI) engaged the class in productive discussions

2. The instructor (or GSI) guided the discussion well

3. The instructor (or GSI) encouraged student contributions

4. The instructor (or GSI) provided opportunities for class participation

5. The instructor (or GSI) encouraged critical engagement with the material

6. The instructor (or GSI) encouraged student questions and participation

7. The instructor (or GSI) encouraged participation

Overall Teaching Effectiveness

1. How successful was the instructor (or GSI) in creating an environment that was conducive to learning?

2. How would you rate the overall effectiveness of the instructor's (or GSI's) teaching?

Category 2: Course-Specific Question Themes

Course Content (Organization, Clarity of Expectations/Directions, Balance/Appropriateness)

1. The course (or section) presented skills in a helpful sequence

2. The course (or section) provided an appropriate balance between instruction and practice

3. The course (or section) was appropriate for the stated level of the class

4. The course (or section) was organized in a way that helped me learn

5. The course (or section) provided a mixture of explanation and practice

6. The course (or section) was effectively organized

7. The course (or section) assignments and lectures usefully complemented each other

8. The course (or section) instructions (including, manuals, handouts, etc.) were clear

9. The course (or section) work helped me understand concepts more clearly

10. Instructions for course (or section) materials (including manuals, handouts, etc.) were clear

11. The lab complemented my understanding of the lectures

12. The section helped to complement the lectures

13. Increased or Developed Skills/Knowledge (Thinking, Writing, Application, Knowledge, Communication, Ethics): General/overall learning & content-specific learning are possible sub-categories within this set (see i and ii below). perhaps we need one question from each.

Application & Specific Skill Development

1. The course (or section) developed my ability to interact with diverse groups of people

2. The course (or section) provided guidance on how to become a competent professional

3. The course developed my ability to read and think critically

4. The course (or section) helped me improve my writing

5. The course (or section) developed my ability to provide constructive critiques to others

6. The course (or section) helped me make progress in my acquisition of the language

7. The course (or section) helped me conceptualize and present my ideas in my artistic medium

8. The course (or section) helped me understand ethical issues involved

9. The course (or section) developed my communication/presentation skills

10. The course (or section) developed my abilities and skills for the subject

Theory/Content Knowledge

1. The course (or section) developed my ability to apply theory to practice

2. The course (or section) provided the opportunity to practice the skills required in the course

3. The course (or section) allowed me to synthesize fundamental knowledge and skills

4. The course (or section) gave me a deeper insight into the topic

5. In this course (or section), I learned a great deal

6. The course (or section) improved my problem-solving skills

7. The course (or section) developed my ability to think critically about the subject

Course Overall

How satisfied were you with this course (or section)?

Category 3: Student Self-Evaluation Questions

1. How many class (or section) sessions did you attend?

2. On average, how many hours per week have you spent on this course (or section), including attending classes, doing readings, reviewing notes, writing papers, and any other course-related work?

3. How satisfied were you with your effort in this course (or section)?

Category 4: Open-Ended Questions

1. Please identify what you consider to be the strengths of the course (or section).

2. Please identify area(s) where you think the course (or section) could be improved.

3. Feedback for other students: What advice would you give to another student who is considering taking this course (or section)?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The adoption of end-of-term evaluation question items listed on this page helps to ensure that you will solicit informative feedback - feedback that can be used for teaching improvement and evaluation. When adoption occurs across a department, it allows for robust analysis and reporting that can further inform both course-level pedagogy and program-level curriculum.

# data[].attributes.body
Abra em nova janela e faça o download.

# data[].attributes.headline
Checklist de avaliação duma UC, Univ. de IDAHO

# data[].attributes.subject
Checklist de avaliação duma UC, Univ. de IDAHO

# data[].attributes.body
Aplicável a UCs em qualquer modelo de funcionamento