An Evaluation Model for Teaching Status and School Characteristics

An Evaluation Model for Teaching Status and School Characteristics
in School and Department Levels
ZHU Donghua, CUI Lingjiang, SUN Yushan
Harbin Institute of Technology in Weihai 264209
[email protected]
Abstract: The school and department is the front-line unit in organizing learning activities and assuring
the quality of teaching. The educational quality and level of a university is directly influenced by the
teaching status and school characteristics in school and department levels, of which the scientific and
objective evaluation has been of extensive concern to all universities. Based on the research of Harbin
Institute of Technology (Weihai), a teaching-research university, a new model and method for the
evaluation of bench marks in teaching status and school characteristics in school and department levels
has been proposed by using the quality target tree and the fuzzy mathematics method.
Keywords: Evaluation model, teaching status, school characteristics, target tree, fuzzy matrix
1. Instruction
The basic ideas in the evaluation of model of teaching status and school characteristics (hereafter
refers to as "Evaluation model") is that we not only try to get a unified standard for teaching
management pattern of the global administration standard, but also encourage different schools and
departments to develop their own characteristics. The purpose is to encourage them to have enthusiasm
and the creativity in teaching management.
Moreover, for ease of self- evaluation and on-sight grading from the experts, the evaluation model
decomposes the whole target into some sub-targets in which complex degree decreases progressively by
using target-tree method. Apart from listing all the weighs and sub marks, simplification of quantitative
analysis of sub target is carried out. In order to raise the objectivity and the feasibility of the evaluation,
for the qualitative analysis part, we develop a computer program in which fuzzy mathematics' principle
and the method are applied.
2. Explanation of Status Indices of the Appraisal
In the evaluation model for teaching status in school and department, there are 11 items for the
second-level targets and 33 items for the sub targets, and total points W1 can be obtained by adding up
the 33 small points (see appendix figure 1).
Considering about the concrete evaluation process, on one hand, the expert experiences may be
easily influenced by subjective factories, and on the other hand, some qualitative analysis project itself
has certain fuzziness. Therefore, the qualitative analysis in the "evaluation model" for the needed subject
has been coded into a computer program, in which the principle and the method of the fuzzy
mathematics has been applied.
1) Figure 2 shows the weight distributions and operation of the second level index
(instructor’s style).
is corresponding to 0.08 in
the total object, weight of sub target
E’22
is 0.05 on the line, and thus,
corresponding to
its weight corresponding to E is the product of the
weights 0.5 and 0.08,which results in 0.04. Similarly,
for sub targets
and
, their weights
corresponding to E8 are listed on their lines resFigure 2. weight distribution and the formula
pectively, and the weights corresponding to E is
816
listed inside the corresponding circles. Sub points can be got by multiplication of the sub point in the
circle of the sub target.
In the figure, the design for sub target
mainly considers the factor of teaching standard.
In the figure, the sub target design mainly carries out the teaching code requirement taken by the
teacher, to make the service progress as well as to complete situations and so on teaching work load to
carry on the evaluation as the inspection factor. Its modeling method is establishment of 5 level
evaluation system, namely
100, x = A
90, x = B

f ( x) = 80, x = C
70, x = D

60, x = E
x1 , x 2 ,....x n ∈ {A, B, C , D, E} (1)
From (1), and the 3 evaluation factors, we can get the evaluation set
U = {u1 , u 2 , u 3 , u 4 , u 5 }
(2)
and the factor set
V = {v1 , v 2 , v 3 }
(3)
In (3), v1 is teaching code, v 2 is the achievement and v3 is the work load.
Weights for the three factors are assigned as weight set
A = {a1 , a 2 , a3 }
(4)
~
Suppose that among n evaluation experts, bi1 of them grade vi as A, bi 2 of them grade vi
as B, bi 3 of them grade vi as C, bi 4 of them grade vi as D, and bi 5 of them grade vi as E,
then we get a fuzzy set
B = {bi1 , bi 2 , bi 3 , bi 4 , bi 5 }
(5)
~
After three factors have been evaluated, 3 fuzzy subsets on the evaluation set U can be abstained.
Next, multiplication of (4) and (5) will get (6) as below
ｏ
 b11 b12 b13 b14 b15 


C = Ao B = (a1 , a 2 ,a 3 ) o  b21 b22 b23 b24 b25 
~
~
~
 .b b b b b 
 31 32 33 34 35 
= [Vi (ai ∧ bi ),....,Vi (ai ∧ bi 5 )]
(6)
∧
where, “ ” is composite operation, and “ ” means the operation that takes minimum number of
its operant, and the subset resulted is still a fussy set of the evaluation set U. After unitary operation as
below, we get
5
D = C / ∑Vi (ai ∧ bij ) = (b1 , b2 ,...., b5 )
~
~
(7)
j =1
Next, substitute the fuzzy value (b1 , b2 ,...., b5 ) into (8) to get Y
（8）
Y =100d 1+90d 2+80d 3+70d 4+60d 5
~
can be obtained by mapping Y into the corresponding sub points.
Then, points Y for
2) In the sub target
, formula is designed to strictly limit the number of times to swich class
time and pause class. When the percentage of class switch time and class pause is less than 4%, 2 points
will be got, and when the percentage is between 4% and 8%, the formula is used for the computation,
817
and when the percentage is over 8%, negative point is got.
3) The purpose of the sub target in
is to strictly control the teaching accidents, in case the
number of teaching accidents is less than 2, 2 points will be got, and when the times is greater than 2, 1
point will be deducted each time.
3. On Evaluation of School characteristics
Description from qualitative analysis is used in the previous evaluation for school characteristics. The
evaluation item does not contain the quantification target to support the analysis. Most colleges and
universities reflected that this kind of evaluation is often meaningless, and the confidence level is low.
According to the various feedback opinions of recent years, the "evaluation model" extracts the teaching
achievement, the high level teachers, the discipline and the curriculum stand, the academic level, etc.,
from the original indicator system for evaluation, and comprehensively consider the school
characteristics, the discipline construction, the educational reform, the personnel training and so on that
form the social prestige and the domain superiority. The objective of the evaluation is to promote the
objectivity and the commensurability of the evaluation.
1) The school characteristic evaluation model together with an example computation result by
using MATLAB program implementation is shown in Figure 3. In the figure, the quantitative analysis
part includes 6 items, with the total score X is set to 50 points. When sum of the prize equivalents is
smaller than the reference number, the score is decided according to the equivalent and the value carries
on the corresponding scoring (use the same method for the other 5 items in computation of the score).
2) Qualitative analysis part
Five items for inspection factor will be evaluated for qualitative analysis with total score Y being set
as 50 points. Each inspection factor's evaluation includes 5 levels (modeling method is similar to
),
and from this, evaluation set is given, which includes
Factor set
V={school philosophy v1, discipline construction v2, academic research v3, teaching
reform v4, innovation practice v5}
and weight set A = {0 .2 , 0 .25 , 0 . 25 , 0 .2 , 0 . 15 }
~
Figure 3. School model and its example computation
，
In the chart the fuzzy matrix list 6 experts to give different scores to some institutes 5 inspection
factors to account for the proportionality. Carries on the synthesis operation using the MATLAB
programming, makes normalized processing to be possible again to result in the fuzzy appraisal to
divide the value y=83.2 points. Now the score is mapped to its total score, Y =41.6 point. Finally, score
X = 37, quantitative analysis part, is added to the Y=41.6, qualitative analysis part, to get the total score
for this institute, school characteristics total score W2 =78.6 point.
818
4. Comprehensive computation explanation
Put the teaching status score and the “the school characteristic” score into the formula below, total
score for the comprehensive evaluation for the ability of operation of academics of schools and
departments is got.
W =
1
(W1 + W2 )
2
(9)
Considering various school and department are in the transitional stage from the teaching-pattern to
the teaching/research pattern, their teaching status target total score and the school characteristic total
score often differ greatly, although the average method computation is not able to reflect this kind of
disproportional objectively, this computation comparison reflects the reality more closely. If the
hyperbolic method is adopted, the disproportional will be illustrated. But the bigger differential value
will cause falls of the total score range of for the school and department. After weighing the
advantages and disadvantages, we decide that uses the average method to compute the comprehensive
total score for schools and departments.
5. Conclusion
Along with our country’s economic development and technical civilization progresses as well as
higher institutions face acceleration of switching to social independent school advancement, while the
school and society's relation closer, the undergraduate education obtains the considerable development.
Today’s appraisal of education quality is no longer pure reflection in “teaching and study” model, but
has developed into the school pattern, the school idea and the social demand, in social progress many
contradictions. This is the new request proposed to our various universities ever since the 21st century.
"Evaluation model" has been establishing gradually by adapting the new situation, the new request, and
borrowing scientific research methods from management science and the project domain.
We believe that the appraisal of school and department Teaching Status and School Characteristics
in School and Department will develop toward the direction “the evaluation indicators will be fine
multi-aspects; the measure results will be objective and comprehensive”.
：
References
[1] Ministry of education, detailed code for evaluation of teaching for undergraduate level, 2005
[2] Ministry of education, documents no. 1 and no. 2, higher education, 2007
[3] Mingming Ji, Qilian Ji, user's manual for evaluation for evaluation of instructors, publisher of
Institute of Central Nationalities, 1994
[4] Shucheng Fang, Dingwei Fang, Fuzzy mathematics and fuzzy optimization, Scientific publisher,
1997
Authors
Donghua Zhu, director of supervision and evaluation office, Harbin Institute of Technology (Weihai)
Lingjiang Cui, head of teaching administration Department, Harbin Institute of Technology (Weihai)
Yushan Sun: associate dean in teaching, school of software, Harbin Institute of Technology (Weihai)
Appendix figure1
Evaluation model for the matrix of teaching status
819
820