Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

Published: 12 August 2020

Impact of Quality Assurance on Quality Teaching among Teachers in Oman Higher Education

Wafa A-Maawali, Munira Al-Siyabi

Rustaq College of Education, Oman

pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf

10.31014/aior.1993.03.03.144

Pages: 334-350

Keywords: Quality Measures, Teaching Quality, Evaluation of Teaching, Professional Development, Student Evaluation Forms, Peer Evaluation

Abstract

The study aims to investigate the internally driven factors that should contribute to quality in the teaching process in order to inform the current measures of teacher performance in higher education. Previous studies reported ambivalent views and reactions towards measures of quality which raised the presumption that quality processes were not teacher-driven but imposing. Hence, a sequential mixed study research was employed that included both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection. The methods are seven interviews with academic faculty from higher education and a questionnaire which was distributed to 154. The findings of this study indicate an average level of teachers’ perceptions towards practices of quality assurance and their impact on quality teaching. This study recommends empowering teachers to take active part in quality teaching protocol and a model of internally driven factors is recommended.

References

  1. Åkerlind, G. S. (2004). A new dimension to understanding university teaching. Teaching in higher education, 9(3), 363-375.

  2. Al Barwani, T., & Osman, M. E. (2010). Academic development and quality in Oman: mapping the terrain. In Leadership and Management of Quality in Higher Education (pp. 147-166). Chandos Publishing.

  3. Ali, H. I. H., & Al Ajmi, A. A. S. (2013). Exploring Non-Instructional Factors in Student Evaluations. Higher Education Studies, 3(5), 81-93.

  4. Al-Hinai, N. S. (2011). Effective college teaching and students’ ratings of teachers: what students think, what faculty believe, and what actual ratings show: implications for policy and practice in quality teaching assurance and control in higher education in Oman (Doctoral dissertation, Durham University).

  5. Anderson, G. (2006). Assuring quality/resisting quality assurance: Academics’ responses to ‘quality’ in some Australian universities. Quality in higher education, 12(2), 161-173.

  6. Archibald, S., Coggshall, J. G., Croft, A., & Goe, L. (2011). High-Quality Professional Development for All Teachers: Effectively Allocating Resources. Research & Policy Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

  7. Biggs, J. (2001) The reflective institution: Assuring and enhancing the quality of teaching and learning. Higher Education41, no. 3: 221-238.

  8. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for Quality Learning at UniversityBuckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, ISBN 0-335-21168-2.

  9. Carroll, M., Razvi, S., Goodliffe, T., & Al‐Habsi, F. (2009). Progress in developing a national quality management system for higher education in Oman. Quality in Higher Education, 15(1), 17-27.

  10. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching. New York: National Commission on Teaching & America's Future, Fourie, M., and Alt, H. 2000. “Challenges to Sustaining and Enhancing the Quality of Teaching and Learning in South African Universities’.” Quality in Higher Education 6 (2): 115–124.

  11. Goos, M. and Salmons, A. 2016. Measuring quality teaching in higher education: assessing selection bias in course evaluations. Research in High Education.  58, 341–364.

  12. Hénard, F. (2010). Learning Our Lesson: Review of Quality Teaching in Higher Education. OECD Publishing [Online 10.1787/9789264079281-en. accessed 18th July 2020].

  13. Hoban, G. (2000). Making practice problematic: Listening to student interviews as a catalyst for teacher reflection. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 28(2), 133-147.

  14. Huson, N. (2015). Oman. Quality Culture in Higher Education A Good-Practice Example. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 20(2).

  15. Huusko, M., and J. Ursin. 2010. Why (Not) Assess? Views from the Academic Departments of Finnish Universities. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35 (7): 859–869.

  16. Imrie, B. (1998) Professional Development is Quality Assurance: Now and Zen, Quality in Higher Education, 4 (3), 215-227.

  17. Jacos, G. and Toit, A. 2006. Contrasting Faculty Quality Views and Practices over a Five‐year Interval. Quality in Higher Education, 12 (3), 303-314.

  18. Jones, J. & Saram, D. D. (2005) Academic staff views of quality systems for teaching and learning: a Hong Kong case study, Quality in Higher Education. 11 (1), 47-58.

  19. Lomas, L. & Nicholls, G. (2005) Enhancing quality teaching through peer review of teaching, Quality in Higher Education, 11 (2), 137-149.

  20. Carroll, M. , Razvi, S., Goodliffe, T., & Al‐Habsi, F. (2009). Progress in Developing a National Quality Management System for Higher Education in Oman, Quality in Higher Education, 15:1, 17-27, DOI: 10.1080/13538320902731328

  21. Mcinnis, C. (2000) Changing Academic Work Roles: The everyday realities challenging quality in teaching, Quality in Higher Education, 6 (2), 143-152.

  22. Mengel, F., Sauermann, J., & Zölitz, U. (2018). Gender bias in teaching evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 17(2), 535-566.

  23. Oman Academic Accreditation Authority. (2020 July 10). Retrieved from: http://www.oaaa.gov.om/ar/Default.aspx

  24. OAAA. (2016) Institutional Standards Assessment Standards Assessment Manual Institutional Standards Institutional Accreditation: Stage 2. Oman Academic Accreditation Authority.

  25. Narayanan, S. S., Umaselvi, M., & Hussein, M. I. (2012). Quality of work life and its impact on behavioural outcomes of teaching faculty: an empirical study in Oman higher education context. Skyline Business Journal, 8(1), 23-29.

  26. Schoenfeld, A. 1998. Toward a Theory of Teaching-in-Context. Issues in Education. 4 (1), 1-94.

  27. Scott, D. E., & Scott, S. (2016). Leadership for quality university teaching: How bottom-up academic insights can inform top-down leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44 (3), 511-531.

  28. Sturm, J., Marckel, J., S., Boyles, J. L., Cantor, D., Fales-Williams, A., Martin, R., & Schenck, H. (2019). Joint Task Force on Teaching Assessment and Evaluation RecommendationsApril 23, 2019.

  29. Tavares, O., Sin, C., Videira, P., & Amaral, A. (2017). Academics’ perceptions of the impact of internal quality assurance on teaching and learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42 (8), 1293-1305.

  30. Oon, P. T., Spencer, B., & Kam, C. C. S. (2017). Psychometric quality of a student evaluation of teaching survey in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42 (5), 788-800.

  31. Zerihun, Z., Beishuizen, J. and Os, W. 2011. Conception and practices in teaching and learning: implications for the evaluation of teaching quality. Quality in Higher Education. 17 (2), 151-161.

About Us

The Asian Institute of Research is an online and open-access platform to publish recent research and articles of scholars worldwide. Founded in 2018 and based in Indonesia, the Institute serves as a platform for academics, educators, scholars, and students from Asia and around the world, to connect with one another. The Institute disseminates research that is proven or predicted to be of significant influence for the general public.

Stay Connected

  • Instagram - Black Circle
  • Facebook - Black Circle
  • LinkedIn - Black Circle

Contact Us

Please send all inquiries to the email:

editorial@asianinstituteofresearch.org

Business Address:

5th Floor, Kavling 507, Fajar Graha Pena Tower, Jl. Urip Sumohardjo No.20, Makassar, Indonesia 90234

Copyright © 2018 The Asian Institute of Research. All rights reserved