Creation of rating systems at the university: US experience for Ukraine
Abstract
In general, the US higher education activities are regulated by relevant legislation – the Law on Higher Education from 2008, however, most US colleges and universities have or must have a package of official documents that contain specific information on the process of assessing the lecturers work and, in particular, how often and by whom it is carried out, how assessments are presented, who can use them, how they are used and which of them are added to the lecturer's personal file. As the most important academic functions of most universities include teaching, research, participation in community activities, the academic, teaching and social (support) activities of lecturers are usually assessed.
In American universities, there are several systems for evaluating and ranking lecturers: 1. Subjective assessment of the contribution of lecturers to the tasks facing the department. 2. Evaluation of each component of the lecturer's activities. 3. Weighted assessment of each component of the activity in proportion to the effort expended. 4. The weighted assessment of each component of the activity is proportional to its importance for the tasks of the department. 5. Assessment using a score system. 6. Student questionnaires (most popular one). 7. Method built on the basis of assessments issued by former students (graduates).
The choice of the methodology for assessing lecturers work and the significance of a particular indicator is influenced by the structure of university management, its category and the associated role and place of scientific activity in the institution. Therefore, the methods inherent in a university with a certain management structure are not suitable for institution with a different structure or other area of training. Accordingly, the importance attached to each direction of the lecturer, universities set independently. Approaches to the assessment of the activities of scientific and teaching staff in the United States are due to the internal logic of the American system of higher education, the conditions of employment and staffing growth, the structure of the university itself and the direction of activities to continuously improve the quality of the educational process.
Downloads
References
Vilnyi tlumachnyi slovnyk (2013–2018). Novitnii onlainovyi slovnyk ukrainskoi movy [Free defining dictionary]. URL: http://sum.in.ua/f/rejtyngh [in Ukrainian].
Hryshyna, N.M. (2018). Yevropeiski pidkhody do pobudovy systemy vnutrishnoho zabezpechennia yakosti osvity v universyteti [European approaches to organizing of system of inner provision educational quality in university]. Derzhavne budivnytstvo, 2. URL: http://www.kbuapa.kharkov.ua/e-book/db/2018-2/index.html [in Ukrainian].
Dovidnyk z polityky roboty z personalom ZVO. URL: https://www.american.edu/hr/upload/Staff-Personnel-Policies-Manual.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Zvarych, Iryna. (2014). Otsiniuvannia profesiinoi diialnosti vykladachiv u vyshchykh navchalnykh zakladakh Ukrainy z urakhuvanniam amerykanskoho dosvidu [Teachers professional activity assessment in Ukrainian universities using American experience]. Molod i rynok, 12 (119) [in Ukrainian].
Pro osvitu: Zakon Ukrainy. (2017). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 38–39 [in Ukrainian].
Revenko, T.V. (2018). Sutnist ta osnovni skladovi osvitnoho protsesu u zakladakh vyshchoi osvity Ukrainy [Essence and main components of the educational process in higher education institutions of Ukraine]. Teoriia ta praktyka derzhavnoho upravlinnia, issue 3 (62) [in Ukrainian].
Ratemyprofessors. URL: https://www.ratemyprofessors.com.
Rojstaczer, Stuart. (2001-09-03). College rankings are mostly about money. San Francisco Chronicle. URL: https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/College-rankingsare-mostly-about-money-2883044.php.
Soh, K. (2015). Multicolinearity and indicator redundancy problem in world university rankings: An example using times higher education world university ranking 2013–2014 data. Higher Education Quarterly, 69, 158–174. DOI: 10.1111/hequ.12058. URL: https://repository.nie.edu.sg/handle/10497/18485.
The Higher Education Opportunity Act (Public Law 110-315). URL: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-110publ315/pdf/PLAW-110publ315.pdf.
The Ranking Methodology (n.d.). URL: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/ranking-methodology-2016.
