|
|
|
| Policy preferences of teaching evaluation in "double firstclass" construction universities in China from the perspective of policy tools |
| BAO Shuimei, CHEN Jiacheng |
| （Institute of Higher Education, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China） |
|
|
|
| Guide |
|
|
Abstract Based on the theory of policy tools, this study makes a quantitative analysis of 53 teaching evaluation policy documents issued by China′s "double firstclass" construction universities, and examines the use structure of policy tools and the importance of each policy content element under the twodimensional analysis framework of the X dimension as policy tools and the Y dimension as teaching evaluation policy content. The results show that the policy of teaching evaluation in colleges and universities is dominated by command tools, supplemented by exhortation tools, incentive tools, capacitybuilding tools and system reform tools; the content of the policy focuses on the provisions on the evaluation content, the processing and use of evaluation results, evaluation methods and evaluation organization and management, and the provisions on the evaluation purpose and evaluation subject have not been paid attention to; the logic of allocating policy tools according to the characteristics of policy content elements has initially formed. This reflects that the value orientation of China′s "double firstclass" construction of university teaching evaluation policy began to shift from efficiency priority to giving consideration to quality, and the decisionmaking logic gradually moved from teaching management to teaching governance. However, there are also problems such as the ethical implications of teaching evaluation policy being covered, the serious tendency of politicization in the implementation of teaching evaluation policy, and the limited effectiveness of the implementation of teaching evaluation policy. In the future, colleges and universities need to optimize the toplevel design of teaching evaluation policy, improve the recognition and implementation of stakeholders, and establish a meta evaluation mechanism of teaching evaluation policy.
|
|
|
| Fund: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022, Vol. 16 
