A new method of evaluation and ranking of teachers using decision making tree

Authors

1 MA at computer Science, Office of Education (North Khorāsān Province)

2 (PhD), Khārazmi University

3 PhD Candidate at Educational Management in Semnān University (corresponding Author)

Abstract

Evaluation of teachers is considered as one of main educational policies and it is a strong strategy to achieve educational development. «Framework for teaching» is one of evaluation models to achieve this goal (Danielson, 1996(. This model consists of four domains of planning, class environment, teaching method, and accountability, each of which describes the teachers’ characteristics and behaviors. Based on the obtained rank in the four mentioned domains, and according to teachers’ competence, they are classified into 4 groups; the performance levels include preliminary, amateur, professional and advanced. This method is based on four-valued logic. Evaluation of teachers by four values leads to failure in relative justice, unrealistic equality and inequalities. Also, there are complexities of evaluation process and probable human errors in this method. In this study, we will develop a solution based on fuzzy system and decision tree evaluation system. In this method, the inputs of the system are based on fuzzy logic. Outputs of fuzzy will be inputs of the decision tree and finally the teachers’ classification would be done using decision tree. This system could be implemented in the software environment and it makes the evaluation process easier and more precisely (93%) than previous method. Overall, this model could be used as a support system of decision making for precise evaluation of educational activities of teachers, their ranking and salary payment in education system.

 

Keywords

References

جویس، بروس و ویل، مارشال. (1379). الگوهای تدریس (ترجمه محمدرضا برنجی). تهران: انتشارات صحیفه.
شوئر، لوول. (1377). اندازهگیری و ارزشیابی در آموزشوپرورش (ترجمه حمزه گنجی، چاپ ششم). تهران: انتشارات بعثت.
صنیعی آباده، محمد، محمودی، سینا و طاهرپرور، محدثه. (1391). دادهکاوی کاربردی. تهران:انتشارات نیاز دانش.
< فنلر، جرج. (1971). آشنایی با فلسفه آموزش‌وپرورش (ترجمه فریدون بازرگان). انتشارات: دانشگاه تهران.
< ویجی الاکشمی پای، راجاسکاران. (1391). شبکه‌های عصبی، منطق فازی و الگوریتم ژنتیک؛ ترکیب و کاربرد (ترجمه محمود کشاورز). تهران: انتشارات نورپردازان.
Adem, G., & Esra, K. (2007). A fuzzy model for competency-based employee evaluation and selection. Computer and Industrial Engineering, 52, 143-161.
Avalos, B., & Assael, J. (2007). Moving from Resistance to Agreement: The Case of the Chilean Teacher Performance Evaluation. Educational Research, 45, 254-266.
Chih, F., & yen, J., (2009), Earnings management prediction: a pilot study of combining neural networks and decision trees. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 7183-7191.
Clare, L., & Aschbacher, P. R. (2001). Exploring the Technical Quality of Using Assignments and Student Work as Indicators of Classroom Practice. Educational Assessment, 7, 1, 39-59.
Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing Professional Practice: A framework for Teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Danielson, C. (2001).  New Trends in Teacher. Evaluation In: Educational Leadership, 58(5), 12-15
Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher Evaluation: To Enhance Professional Practice. Alexandria. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development & Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service
Drigas, A., Kouremenos, S., Vrettaros, S., & Kouremenos, I.D. (2004). An expert system for job matching of the unemployed. Expert System with Application, 26, 217- 224.
Farasatkhah, M., Bazargan, A., & Tabatabaee, M. (2007). Comparative analysis of higher education quality Assurance systems: Dimensions of similarity and diversity in the global experiences. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 13(2), 1-19 (in Persian).
Greaney, V., & Kellaghan, T. (2008). Assessing National Achievement Levels in Education. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Heneman, H., Milanowski, A., Kimball, S. M., & Odden, A. R. (2006). Standards-Based Teacher Evaluation as a Foundation for Knowledge and Skill-based Pay. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Hwang, Ch. L., & Lai, Y. J. (1994). Fuzzy MODM. New York: berlin Heidelberg.
Kimball, S. M., & Milanowski, A. (2009). Within a Standards-Based Evaluation System. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 1-8.
Lazarevic, S. P. (2001). Personal selection fuzzy models. International Transaction in Operational Research, 8, 89-105.
Mirfakhradin, S.H., Owlia, M.S., & Jamali, R. (2009). Reverse engineering quality management in center learning higher. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 15, 131-157 (in Persian).
Mohaghar, A., Aminnasery, M.R., & Memariani, A. (2005). A new models for evaluation efficiency group five with fuzzy sets. Journal Engineering Tarbiat Modaress, 11, 11-27.
Mangiante, E. M. S. (2011). Teachers Matter: Measures of Teacher Effectiveness in low-Income Minority schools. Educ Asse Eval Acc, 23, 41-63.
Shahrezaei, S.R. (2010). Review evaluation in learning higher iron with presentation a performance. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 16, 41-60 (in Persian).
Strong, M., Gargani, J., & Hacifazlioglu, Ö. (2011). Do We Know a Successful Teacher When we see one? Experiments in the Identification of Effective Teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 62, 367-382.
Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2011). Stimulating Professional Learning Through Teacher Evaluation: An.Impossible Task for the School Leader? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 891-899.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics