Projects > Research Projects > Towards a Meaningful Evaluation of Scholarly Teaching in NUS

Towards a Meaningful Evaluation of Scholarly Teaching in NUS




This study was about exploring and studying some of the local contextual variables on which teaching evaluation/assessment is founded upon in NUS, examining the effectiveness of student ratings and peer review as important components of teaching assessment, and exploring the possibility of using mentorship and project work to improve teaching quality in NUS. 


Published Works:


bullet A paper titled “Profiling teacher/teaching using descriptors derived from qualitative feedback: formative and summative applications”, was published in Research in Higher Education, February 2009, Volume 50, Issue 1, pp 73-100.
bullet A conference paper titled "Optimizing the use of Student Feedback for Effective Learning" was presented at the International Conference on Learning & Teaching (2010), Singapore, 9 - 11 Jun 2010.


This project is a 3-part study and the different sections are listed below:


Part 1: Scholarship of Teaching at NUS

This aims to find out what constitute scholarly teaching and “scholarship of teaching” in the NUS community to help in the better understanding the important features of the context of teaching and look at faculty development beyond student learning outcomes.


Part 2: Teacher’s Approaches to Teaching and Perception of the Teaching Environment (ATI and PTEI)
This aims to facilitate our understanding on whether there is any relationship between teachers’ beliefs and intentions and student ratings, and this could shed light on the validity of the latter.The approaches to teaching and perceptions of the teaching environment of the highest 20% cohort and the lowest 20% cohort of faculty within each department in NUS are measured using the two quantitative instruments, the Approaches to Teaching Inventory (ATI) and the Perceptions of the Teaching Environment Inventory (PTEI) respectively.


Part 3: Effectiveness of Student Ratings

In this part of the study, CDTL examined the qualitative student feedback of the highest 20% cohort and the lowest 20% cohort of faculty in NUS, the highest and lowest within each department, of which both are chosen based on the students’ quantitative scores for question 8 in the students’ feedback form. The key words which shed light on teacher characteristics and effectiveness of teaching were then picked out from the qualitative feedback and analysed. Based on this analysis, “models” of what NUS students regard as good/poor teacher characteristics and effective/ineffective teaching have been built.