Department of Curriculum & Comparative Education

Permanent URI for this collection

http://etd.aau.edu.et/handle/123456789/55

Browse

Browsing Department of Curriculum & Comparative Education by Subject "Addis Ababa University Comparative Study Teachers’ performance appraisal Zhejiang Normal University"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    A Research on Practice of Teachers’ Performance
    (Addis Ababa University, 2017-05-01) Adinew Ereballo; Cailianyu
    The purpose of this study was to conduct a descriptive comparative analysis on the practice of teachers’ performance appraisal (TPA) between Addis Ababa University (AAU), Ethiopia, and Zhejiang Normal University (ZJNU), China. The use of comparative strategies would allow a description of these educational institutions in their particular settings of the practice of TPA to improve the teaching and learning process between the two universities. Analyzing and comparing the existing practices of teachers’ performance appraisal between the two universities was not a simple task, but it was complex in nature. This is because both universities were founded geographically at a long distance and they have their own working culture and value system. For this study, a qualitative research method was employed by using semi-structured in-depth interviews as primary data sources, and document analysis was also used as a secondary data source. The purposive sampling technique was employed in order to collect the data from the target population. Based on this technique, from each university 1 academic vice president, 1 chairperson of the teachers' union, and 12 teachers were used as a sample. To collect the data, based on research questions and review of related literature, semi-structured interview guided questions were administered, and a person-to-person interview was conducted by using a recorder as well as pen and paper to write field notes. Then, the collected data was critically analyzed by using comparative analysis and thematic analysis methods. The researcher has organized the recorded interview data; listened interviewed data repeatedly, transcribed the recorded interview, obtained the essence, coded the key words, created categories/themes, and finally summarized the findings of the study in order to prepare the research report. The findings of the study with respect to the similarities of both universities reveled that students were evaluating teachers performance regularly on the bases of course delivery, paradoxically the weight would be given for research output than actual teaching for academic rank promotion, the criteria were not flexible and scientific as well as it did not mediate junior and senior teachers. In other word, it seems to be “one suit for all” principle or all teachers (junior and senior teachers as well as teachers from different disciplines) were evaluating with the same criteria/standard/, so that the criteria were not appropriate to measure teachers’ performance effectively. Besides, both universities were using teachers’ iii Performance appraisal (TPA) for personnel decision-making purposes such as promotion and retention as well as rarely used for dismissal which mismatch with the primary purpose of the TPA. Both universities were using students’ evaluation twice in a year, in a semester-based manner to evaluate teachers’ performance regularly, there were lack of provision of periodic feedback, there was carelessness and unwillingness of the students while filling the evaluation format, and subjectivity of students while evaluating teachers by linking their grade point with teachers’ performance. On the other hand, both universities were also differed in many aspects of TPA implementation strategies. For instance, in AAU, students evaluate their teachers’ performance from 5o% both teaching and research effort of the teachers, whereas in ZJNU, students’ evaluation accounts 25% and also in AAU teachers’ performance appraisal /TPA/ lacks regularity/consistency, whereas in ZJNU, it was done regularly every year. Moreover, the AAU did not have an independent and responsible unit and used a manual-based routine approach to process the TPA, whereas ZJNU has independent units and it was used an online system or automation to process teachers’ performance appraisal. With regard to lesson learnt, AAU needs to learn from ZJNU about the provision of reward for those best performers teachers (in the form of cash or salary increment) and punishment for those low performers (in the form of absence of bonus money, reduction of salary) at the end of the teachers’ performance appraisal (TPA) process in every year. And also AAU needs to learn from ZJNU about the reduction of academic status from those who has got low level of performance appraisal on the basis of 3 or 4 years performance result. Ex: Level-2 professor becomes level-3 professor … etc. which was done in all levels of academic ranks. On the other hand, ZJNU needs to learn from AAU about the proportion of students’ evaluation, this accounts 5o% of the overall evaluation of the teachers’ performance appraisal which was greater than that of ZJNU students’ evaluation accounts 25%. This is because, students able to know more than any others about their teachers, if it is properly done; it is a good experience to enhance teachers’ performance. Finally, the researcher would like to recommend that the attention will be given for the provision of periodic feedback, amendment of the performance criteria as well as critical IV followup and control of students’ evaluation in order to reduce carelessness, hurry filling evaluation format and association of their grade point with teachers’ performance appraisal