Advertisement

The Quality of Teaching - Is There Any Difference Between University Teachers and School Teachers?

  • Elisa Reçi
  • Andreas Bollin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11169)

Abstract

An important aspect of the profession of an educator is the assessment and the improvement of the quality of the underlying teaching process, but does this hold for all types of teachers? By collecting best practices of computer science teachers in school we created a teaching maturity model (called TeaM) and recently demonstrated its benefit. The paper now takes this maturity model as a basis and investigates the question about the differences in teaching at Universities and secondary schools. To do so, we randomly selected computer science lectures at our university, assessed them based on the Team Model and looked at the practices in more detail. In our setting it turned out that not all practices are covered at both types of institutions, and especially practices needing documentation and methodologies are lacking at university teaching.

Keywords

CMMI Teaching maturity model School teachers University teachers 

References

  1. 1.
    Azam, M., Kingdon, G.: assessing the teaching quality in India. In: Azam, M., Kingdon, G.G. (eds.) Assessing Teacher Quality in India, 21 October 2014. SSRN (2014). https://ssrn.com/abstract=2512933.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2512933
  2. 2.
    Bollin, A., Reçi, E., Szabó, C., Szabóová, V., Siebenhofer, R.: Applying a maturity model during a software engineering course - experiences and recommendations. In: 2017 IEEE 30th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T), pp. 9–18 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen, C.Y., Chen, P.C., Chen, P.Y.: Teaching quality in higher education: an introductory review on a process-oriented teaching-quality model. Total Qual. Manage. Bus. Excellence 25(1–2), 36–56 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, W., Mason, S., Staniszewski, C., Upton, A., Valley, M.: Assessing the quality of teachers’ teaching practices. Educ. Assess. Eval. Accountability 24(1), 25–41 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dilshad, R.M.: Assessing Quality of Teacher Education: a student perspective. Pakistan J. Soc. Sci. 30(1), 85–97 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Duarte, D., Martins, P.: A maturity model for higher education institution. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering Doctoral Consortium (CAISE), pp. 25–45 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Forrester, E.C., Buteau, B.L., Shrum, S.: CMMI for Services: Guidelines for Superior Service. Pearson Education (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Helmke, A., et al.: Studienbrief Unterrichtsdiagnostik. Projekt EMU (Evidenzbasierte Methoden der Unterrichtsdiagnostik) der Kultusministerkonferenz. Universität Koblenz-Landau, Landau (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ling, T.C., Jusoh, Y.Y., Abdullah, R., Alwi, N.H.: A review study: applying capability maturity model in curriculum design process for higher education. J. Adv. Sci. Arts 3(1), 46–55 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lutteroth, C., Luxton-Reilly, A., Dobbie, G., Hamer, J.: A maturity model for computing education. In: Proceedings of the 9th Australasian Conference on Computing Education, vol. 66, pp. 107–114. Australian Computer Society, Inc. (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marshall, S., Mitchell, G.: Applying SPICE to e-learning: an e-learning maturity model? In: Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Computing Education, vol, 30, pp. 185–191. Australian Computer Society, Inc. (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mehrens, W.A.: Assessment of Teaching: Purposes, Practices, and Implications for the Profession, chap. Assessing the Quality of Teacher Assessment Tests, pp. 77–136. Digital Commons University of Nebraska - Lincoln (1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Montgomery, B.: Developing a Technology Integration Capability Maturity Model for K-12 Schools. Ph.D. thesis, Concordia University (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    National Education Association: The National Education Association’s Framework for Transforming Education Systems to Support Effective Teaching and Improve Student Learning. http://www.nea.org/home/41858.htm. Accessed 06 Aug 2018
  15. 15.
    Neuhauser, C.: A maturity model: does it provide a path for online course design. J. Interact. Online Learn. 3(1), 1–17 (2004)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    OECD: TALIS Techn. Rep. Teaching and Learning International Survey. http://www.oecd.org/education/talis. Accessed 06 Aug 2018
  17. 17.
    Petrie, M.: A model for assessment and incremental improvement of engineering and technology education in the americas. In: Proceedings of Second LACCEI International Latin American and Caribbean Conference for Engineering and Technology (LACCEI2004) (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reçi, E., Bollin, A.: Department of Informatics-Didactics, Universität Klagenfurt. http://iid.aau.at/bin/view/Main/Projects. Accessed 01 June 2018
  19. 19.
    Reçi, E., Bollin, A.: Managing the quality of teaching in computer science education. In: Proceedings of the 6th Computer Science Education Research Conference, CSERC 2017, pp. 38–47 (2017)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Standards für die Lehrerbildung: Bildungswissenschaften. Beschluss der Kultusministerkonferenz (2004) (in German)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Snook, I., O’Neill, J., Birks, K.S., Church, J., Rawlins, P.: The Assessment of Teacher Quality: An Investigation into Current Issues in Evaluating and Rewarding Teachers. Education Policy Response Group, Institute of Education, Massey University (2013). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2326315
  22. 22.
    Solar, M., Sabattin, J., Parada, V.: A maturity model for assessing the use of ICT in school education. J. Ed. Tech. & Soc. 16(1), 206 (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    White, B.A., Longenecker, H.E., Leidig, P.M., Yarbrough, D.: Applicability of CMMI to the IS curriculum: a panel discussion. In: Information Systems Education Conference (ISECON 2003), pp. 1–5 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alpen-Adria-Universität KlagenfurtKlagenfurtAustria

Personalised recommendations