• Korean Medical Education Review
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.174-183
• /
• 2023

Educational evaluation involves data collection and the analysis of various education-related factors to make decisions that improve educational quality. Systematic educational evaluation is essential for enhancing the quality of education. This study reports a case of student-conducted process evaluation of a medical school's student support system and the procedure for devising improvement plans. Sixteen Inje University College of Medicine students participated in the Education Evaluation Committee (IUCM-EEC) to understand the educational improvement process as learners and actively achieve improvement. The Quality Improvement Committee of the Inje University College of Medicine (IUCM-QIC) decided to reform its student support system based on a previous educational evaluation in 2019. The evaluation of the student support system was conducted for 10 months in 2021 by the student subcommittee, under the guidance of the IUCM-EEC. The CIPP (context-input-process-product) evaluation model was used for a systematic evaluation. Accordingly, the subcommittee developed evaluation criteria and indicators, and analyzed relevant data collected from surveys and the previous literature. For further recommendations and revision ideas, the student subcommittee members interviewed faculty members from six other medical schools and also conducted a focus group interview with the dean and vice deans of IUCM. Finally, the student subcommittee submitted a report to the IUCM-QIC. Communication with various stakeholders is essential for a successful evaluation process. In this case, students, as key stakeholders in education, evaluated the student support system. Their active participation helped improve their understanding of the evaluation process.

• Proceedings of the PSK Conference
• /
• 2001.04a
• /
• pp.243.2-243.2
• /
• 2001

• Journal of Engineering Education Research
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.38-50
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to analyze the current evaluation methods on faculty performance at Korean engineering colleges and develop teaching evaluation indicators for faculty performance. We investigated the faculty performance cases in engineering colleges inside and outside of the Korea, the engineering faculty's awareness of evaluation factors for their educational performance, and the appropriate ratios by indicating factors. Also we developed evaluation indicators for educational achievements to improve the current faculty performance system. 227 engineering faculty members answered our survey questionnaire. The result in the case study on faculty performance evaluation is as follows. First, most items of faculty performance evaluation are about quantitative indicators that can easily conduct objective evaluation. Second, evaluation items of faculty performance are mostly focused on instruction in a classroom. Third, the evaluation by students and administrative managers is more dominant than that by professors or their colleagues, document evaluation than on site evaluation, general evaluation than formative evaluation, and static evaluation than dynamic evaluation. Lastly, Some universities tend to substitute outstanding articles for underperforming instruction. The evaluation indicators that we have developed can be implemented by four types of subjects, such as students, professors, their colleagues, and deans. Also, based on the evaluation indicators, faculties can freely select their evaluation domains depending on the their tracks, such as a teaching track, a research track, or an industry-university cooperation track. The mandatory evaluation fields include teaching, student counselling, teaching portfolio evaluation by mentors or colleagues, class management evaluation by deans, and self-evaluation. The other areas are optional and professors can choose their evaluation factors.

• Proceedings of the PSK Conference
• /
• 2001.04a
• /
• pp.243.1-243.1
• /
• 2001

• Korean Journal of Comparative Education
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.163-186
• /
• 2008

This study intends to understand deeply the higher education evaluation accreditation system in Taiwan. Taiwan established newly the Higher Education Evaluation & Accreditation Council in 2005, an independent organization with the exclusive responsibility to execute evaluation. Three kinds of evaluation have been accomplished, including University Program Evaluation which assesses whole university management, Academic Fields Evaluation and Performance Evaluation which compare the superiority and inferiority among universities. The Accreditation system is applied only to Academic Fields Evaluation. For evaluation, each university presents a self-evaluation report, undergoes an visiting evaluation, makes out an evaluation report and lastly is notified of the result. The evaluation is divided into three results : pass, waiting observation and non-pass. According to an announcement in June 2008, the rate of non-pass universities reached the 15.7%. The non-pass universities are supposed to receive the disadvantaged in the admission number limit and take the following evaluation in the following year. Debates still exists concerning the eliminatory nature of the system and the announcement of achievement rankings through evaluation results. Other problems include the improvement of quality of evaluation committee members and the irrational evaluation standards. These problems will be meaningful for the development of the korean higher evaluation system.

• Korean Medical Education Review
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.131-142
• /
• 2020

A systematic educational program evaluation system for continuous quality improvement in undergraduate medical education is essential. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are two distinct but complementary processes referred to in an evaluation system that emphasizes formative purpose. Monitoring involves regular data collection for tracking process and results, while evaluation requires periodic judgment for improvement. We have recently completed implementing an educational evaluation using the M&E concept in a medical school. The evaluation system consists of two loops, one at the lesson/course level and the other at the phase/graduation level. We conducted evaluation activities in four stages: planning, monitoring, evaluation, and improvement. In the planning phase, we clarified the purpose of evaluation, formulated a plan to engage stakeholders, determined evaluation criteria and indicators, and developed an evaluation plan. Next, during the monitoring phase, we developed evaluation instruments and methods and then collected data. In the evaluation phase, we analyzed results and evaluated the criteria of the two loops. Finally, we reviewed the evaluation results with stakeholders to make improvements. We have recognized several problems including excessive burden, lack of expertise, insufficient consideration of stakeholders' evaluation questions, and inefficient data collection. We need to share the value of evaluation and build a system gradually.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.314-328
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study is to establish a conceptual model of the course evaluations. in University. This paper has examined the course evaluations according to the levels, purposes, objects, and methods of them. And this paper has been classified for a conceptual model of the course evaluation. As the result of this analysis, four dimensions of course evaluation have been found. First, formative and summative evaluation have been found. The purposes of formative evaluation were improving quality of courses and collecting information for improvement of curriculum. The purposes of summative evaluation were offering informations on faculty staffing and improving of learning outcomes. Second, the levels of course evaluation were classified into university-level, professor-level, and student-level. Third, the objects of course evaluation were classified into analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. Forth, the methods of course evaluation were classified into questionnaire, observation, interview, and content analysis. As a result of this analysis, 120 types of course evaluations have been found.

• Journal of Engineering Education Research
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.74-86
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to analyze the perceptions of college officials about the evaluation of university education on the perspective of industry, to make policy proposals for improvement by analyzing the preparing process of the departments that have received the evaluation of the best universities, In order to achieve the purpose of the study, we conducted literature review, survey studies, and in-depth interviews. The survey was conducted by professors related to this system, and finally the results of 51 responses were used for analysis. The contents of the survey were composed of the recognition, appropriateness, the utilization of the results, the proliferation and improvement plan of the evaluation of university education on the perspective of industry. In-depth interviews conducted 1:1 interviews with 5 professors. The evaluation of university education on the perspective of industry is generally perceived to be a bridge between industry and university education, but there is room for improvement in evaluation criteria, operating methods, and promotion strategies to public.

• The Journal of Sustainable Design and Educational Environment Research
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.58-67
• /
• 2013

This study is to analyze the satisfaction and the image evaluation of landscape elements in outdoor space by types of the university campus. The results are as follows. 1) Out of outdoor elements at university campus, planting area, resting area, access road, and water feature are recognized as major landscape elements. Among them, planting area and access roads are evaluated low in terms of satisfaction levels, therefore, improvement on these elements are required. 2) In outdoor space image evaluation, university campus has image such as 'simple', 'clear', and 'safe'. By scale of universities, both 'A' university, which is the biggest in terms of size of campus, and 'B' university, which has a medium sized campus, have a positive image. However, 'C' university, which is the smallest in terms of size of campus, has a passive and negative image. 3) 6 factors are extracted through Factor Analysis for image evaluation. All of the universities show positive image in the categories of 'clarity' and 'familiarity', however, 'B' university and 'C' university show negative image in the category of 'scale'. 4) In Correlation Analysis between landscape elements satisfaction level and image evaluation, it is showed that the group of landscape facility becomes a relation factor of overall image evaluation. As a result, the higher satisfaction level goes, the better image evaluation of overall outdoor space at university campus is.

• Geomechanics and Engineering
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.283-293
• /
• 2019

Evaluating the stability of the excavation face of the cross-river shield tunnel with good accuracy is considered as a nonlinear and multivariable complex issue. Understanding the stability evaluation method of the shield tunnel excavation face is vital to operate and control the shield machine during shield tunneling. Considering the instability mechanism of the excavation face of the cross-river shield and the characteristics of this engineering, seven evaluation indexes of the stability of the excavation face were selected, i.e., the over-span ratio, buried depth of the tunnel, groundwater condition, soil permeability, internal friction angle, soil cohesion and advancing speed. The weight of each evaluation index was obtained by using the analytic hierarchy process and the entropy weight method. The evaluation model of the cross-river shield construction excavation face stability is established based on the idea point method. The feasibility of the evaluation model was verified by the engineering application in a cross-river shield tunnel project in China. Results obtained via the evaluation model are in good agreement with the actual construction situation. The proposed evaluation method is demonstrated as a promising and innovative method for the stability evaluation and safety construction of the cross-river shield tunnel engineerings.