Advertisement

Frontiers of Education in China

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 267–287 | Cite as

The Assessment of Higher Education Quality from the Perspective of Students through a Case Study Analysis

  • Dongfang Wang
  • Yuting Sun
  • Ting Jiang
Research Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

The assessment of quality in higher education from the perspective of students has three dimensions: students’ assessment of teaching, students’ satisfaction and students’ learning engagement. These differ in conceptions of quality, evaluation methods, evaluation content, evaluation purposes, traits and priorities. The authors conducted three rounds of empirical investigations to study higher education quality assessment from students’ perspective and concluded that students play multiple roles in higher education evaluation and assessment, all of which can be improved by strengthening students’ objectivity and participation, evaluating the added value of a college education oriented to student development and taking the students’ perspective as an important way to contribute to higher education quality enhancement, assurance and control, and make proper use of higher education evaluations and assessments.

Keywords

higher education quality assessment students’ perspective theoretical construction case study 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledegements

The research is sponsored by The 13th Five-Year Plan Project of Tianjin Educational Science, Constructing Higher Education Quality Assessment System from the Perspective of Students (No HEYP5018).

References

  1. Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Bok, D. (2006). Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Elliott, K. M., & Shin, D. (2002). Student satisfaction: An alternative approach to assessing this important concept. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 24(2). 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080022000013518 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Haskell, R. E. (1997). Academic freedom, tenure, and student evaluation of faculty: Galloping polls in the 21st century. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 5(6). 1–32.http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v5n6.1997 Google Scholar
  5. Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change, 33(3). 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380109601795 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Liu, H. Y. (2012). 美国高等教育增值评价模式的兴起与应用 [The rise of value-added assessment mode and application in American higher education].高等教育研究 [Journal of Higher Education], 33(5), 96–101.Google Scholar
  7. Marsh, H. W. (1982). SEEQ: A reliable, valid, and useful instrument for collecting students’ evaluations of university teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 52(1). 77–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1982.tb02505.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Marsh, H., Ginns, P., Morin, A., Nagengast, B., & Martin, A. (2011). Use of student ratings to benchmark universities: Multilevel modeling of responses to the Australian Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ). Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3). 733–748.http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024221 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. National Survey of Student Engagement. (NSSE). (2002).From promise to progress: How college and universities are using student engagement results to improve collegiate quality. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research.Google Scholar
  10. Ross, H., Cen Y. H., & Shi, J. H. (2014). Engaging students in China.In H. Coates & A. C. McCormick (Eds.). Engaging university students: International insights from system-wide studies (pp.93–107). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Seldin, P. (1993). How college evaluate professors: 1983 versus 1993.AAHE Bulletin, (1), 6–8.Google Scholar
  12. Shi, F. H. (2010). 本科教育质量评价改革新视角: 学习投入度 [A new perspective of the reform on undergraduate education quality evaluation: Student engagement].现代教育管 理 [Modern Educational Management], (5), 51–54.Google Scholar
  13. Shi, J. H., Luo, Y., Zhao, L., & Wen, W. (Eds.). (2014).本科教育: 质量与评价 (2009-2011) [Undergraduate education: Quality and evaluation (2009-2011)].北京, 中国: 教育科学出 版社 [Beijing, China: Educational Science Publishing House].Google Scholar
  14. Shi, Q. H., & Guo, J. P. (2012). 我国大学生学情状态与影响机制的实证分析 [An empirical study on college students’ learning situation and influence mechanism in China].教育研究 [Educational Research], (2), 109–121.Google Scholar
  15. Wen, J., & Shi, Q. H. (2013). 大学生学习满意度的要素与结构探析 [A study on the elements and structure of college students’ learning satisfaction].宏观质量研究 [Journal of Macro-Quality Research], (3), 87–94.Google Scholar
  16. Xu, B. (2013). 高校学生投入: 从理论到实践 [Student engagement in the university: From theory to practice].教育研究 [Educational Research], (3), 147–154.Google Scholar
  17. Zhu, J., & Fan, H. H. (2012). 研究型大学学生评教指标体系建构中的若干关注点: 基于复 旦大学问卷调查的分析 [Some concerns of constructing the index system of students’ evaluation of teaching in research universities: Based on a survey questionnaire in Fudan University].中国大学教学 [China University Teaching], (8), 69–72.Google Scholar
  18. Zhang, J., & Liao, X. Y. (2014). 以学生发展为导向, 建立高等教育质量评价与监控体系 [Based on student development, establishing higher education quality evaluation and monitoring system].中国高等教育 [China Higher Education], (1), 32–40.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationTianjin Normal UniversityTianjinChina
  2. 2.Tianjin Sino-German University of Applied SciencesTianjinChina
  3. 3.Hug Chinese Cultural and Educational Co. LtdNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations