Evaluating The Performance Of Smart (Electronic) School Teachers Using Fuzzy Inference System

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
F. salahi 1
A. daneshvar 2
M. Homayounfar 3
A. Shayan 4
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, Electronic Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Information technology Management, Faculty of Management, Electronic Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Information Technology Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Teachers evaluation as one of the essential educational needs has an important role in improving educational quality and developing smart schools. The lack of implementation of a systematic and scientific evaluation system not only will discourage committed teachers, but also will have consequences such as reduced commitment and leave the organizational work. Therefore, the present study attempts to present a fuzzy inference system (FIS) model to evaluate the performance of teachers working in smart schools of Yazd province. In this regard, after reviewing the literature and identifying the factors affecting performance evaluation in two sections of computer literacy and classroom performance, the fuzzy Delphi technique was used to get experts agreement (20 experts) on the model’s final criteria. The ambiguity and complexity of performance appraisal criteria, especially qualitative criteria, as well as the use of verbal variables for extracting expert opinions, led to the use of fuzzy inference system for analyzing model components. In the case of the under study schools, the output of the system indicates that the status of smart school teachers in the basic courses and content production criteria is at intermediate level, in the Internet and educational supplementary software is at a relatively high level, and in the educational content development and electronic evaluation is at a low level. Based on these findings, teachers performance in smart schools was evaluated as medium level. Finally, some suggestions were proposed to improve the current status of smart schools.

Keywords

Subjects

1. بازرگانی هرندی، عباس. (1392). ارزشیابی آموزشی: مفاهیم، الگوها و فرایندهای عملیاتی. سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاهها (سمت).
2. جلالی، علی اکبر، حسینی، محمد و یوسفی زارع، محمد علی. (1389). نقشه راه مدارس هوشمند. اداره کل آموزش و پرورش تهران.
3. جعفرنژاد، احمد و یوسفی زنوز، رضا. (1387). ارائه مدل فازی رتبه بندی ریسک در پروژه های حفاری شرکت پتروپارس. نشریه مدیریت صنعتی، (1) 1،21-38
4. حمزه رباطی ، مطهره. (1391). ارزیابی عملکرد مدارس هوشمند بر اساس مدل پنج مؤلفه ای وارایه راهکارهایی برای توسعه آنها در استان مازندران. کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی
5. خالقی نژاد، سیدعلی. (1390)، ارزشیابی عملکرد معلمان مقاطع ابتدایی و متوسطه بر اساس مدل چارچوبی برای آموزش. اولین همایش ملی آموزش در ایران 1404، تهران، پژوهشکده سیاستگذاری علم ، فناوری و صنعت
6. دولتی، علی اکبر؛ جمشیدی، لاله و امین بیدختی، علی اکبر. (1394). بهبود فرایند یاددهی- یادگیری مدارس هوشمند از منظر ارزشیابی. مطالعات آموزش و یادگیری، (2) 7،20-1
7. دولتی، علی اکبر؛ جمشیدی، لاله و امین بیدختی، علی اکبر. (1395). ویژگی های بایسته معلمان در بهبود فرایند یاددهی- یادگیری مدارس هوشمند. آموزش و ارزشیابی(علوم تربیتی)، (34) 9، 96-77
8. خالقی نژاد، سیدعلی. (1390)، ارزشیابی عملکرد معلمان مقاطع ابتدایی و متوسطه بر اساس مدل چارچوبی برای آموزش. اولین همایش ملی آموزش در ایران 1404، تهران، پژوهشکده سیاستگذاری علم ، فناوری و صنعت
9. عطاران، محمد. (1383)، جهانی‌شدن، فناوری اطلاعات و تعلیم و تربیت. موسسه توسعه فناوری اطلاعات آموزشی مدارس هوشمند،
10. مجلل، محمد علی؛ آزاده، سینا و نورانی، اختر. (1397). بررسی تأثیر سواد اطلاعاتی معلمان بر یادگیری مبتنی بر وب دانش آموزان ابتدایی شهرستان مراغه. فناوری اطلاعات و ارتباطات در علوم تربیتی، (3) 8، 31-0
1. Albalooshi, F., & Alkhalifa, E. (2003). A 3-Dimensional Framework for Evaluating Multimedia Educational Software. Virtual Education: Cases in Learning & Teaching Technologies, 29, 195-209.
2. Albalooshi, F., & Alkhalifa, E. (2002). Multi-Media as a Cognitive Tool. Innovations in Learning Technology. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 5(4), 49-55.
3. Attaran, M. (2004). Globalization, information technology and education. Institute of Development Educational Information Technology in Smart Schools. (In Persian)
4. Anagnostopoulos, D., Wilson, S., & Charles-Harris, S. (2020). Contesting quality teaching: Teachers’ pragmatic agency and the debate about teacher evaluation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98.
5. Avalos, B., & Assael, J. (2006). Moving from resistance to agreement: The case of the Chilean teacher performance evaluation. International Journal of Educational Research, 45 (4), 254-266.
6. Balahadia, F.F., Fernando, M.C.G., & Juanatas, I.C. (2016).Teacher's performance evaluation tool using opinion mining with sentiment analysis. Conference of Region 10 Symposium, IEEE. Bali, Indonesia.
7. Bazargan Harandi, A. (2009). Educational evaluation- Concepts, templates and operational process. SAMT publication, Tehran. (In Persian)
8. Bradforda, C., & Braaten, M. (2018). Teacher evaluation and the demoralization of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 49-59.
9. Cheng, H.C., & Lin, Y. (2002). Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 142(1), 174-186.
10. Clear, 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.
11. Calabrese, R.L., Sherwood, K., Fast, J., & Womack, C. (2004). Teachers' and Principals' Perceptions of the Summative Evaluation Conference: An Examination of Model I theories in use. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(2), 109-117.
12. Campbell, A. B. (2014). Understanding the Teacher Performance Evaluation Process from the Perspective of Jamaican Public School Teachers. PhD thesis, Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education, University of Toronto.
13. Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. 2nd Edition. Alexandria publication.
14. Davis, D.R., Ellett, C.D., & Annunziata, J. (2002). Teacher Evaluation, Leadership and Learning Organizations. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16(4), 287-301.
15. Dolati, A.A., Jamshidi, L., & Aminbeidokhti, A.A. (2015). Improving the teaching process- learning smart schools from the perspective of evaluation. Teaching and Learning Studies, 7(2), 1-20. (In Persian)
16. Dolati, A.A., Jamshidi, L., & Aminbeidokhti, A.A. (2016). Essential Characteristics of Teachers in Improving Teaching- Learning Process at Smart School. Instruction and Evaluation, 9, 77-96. (In Persian)
17. Elliot, S. (2010). Multimedia in Schools: A study of web-based animation effectiveness. Retirieved from http://center.uoregon.edu.
18. Feng, L., Su, Y., Hsu, C.H., & Yang, C.C. (2013). How the Teacher E-evaluation System Enhances the Professional Development of k-12 Teachers: The Case of Taiwan. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 1357-1367.
19. Goos, M., & Salomons, A. (2017). Measuring teaching quality in higher education: assessing selection bias in course evaluations. Research in Higher Education, 58(4), 341–364.
20. Greaney, V., & Kellaghan, T. (2008). Assessing national achievement levels in education. Available online at: http://lst-iiep.iiep-unesco.org/cgi-bin/wwwi32.exe.
21. Haefele, D.L. (1993). Evaluating teachers: A call for change. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 7(1), 21-31.
22. Hamzeh-Robati, M. (2012). Evaluation of Smart Schools Performance Based on Five-Component Model and Providing Solutions for their Development in Mazandaran Province, M.Sc. thesis, Islamic Azad University. (In Persian)
23. Heneman, H. G., Milanowski, A., Kimball, S.M., & Odden, A. (2006). Standards-based teacher evaluation as a foundation for knowledge-and skill based pay (RB-45). Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Philadelphia.
24. Jalali, A.A., Hosseini, M., & Zare, M.A. (2009). Electronic Schools Road Map. Danesh Afarin Publication, Tehran. (In Persian).
25. Jafarnezhad, A., Zeinabadi, H. R., & Abadikoshki, S. (2016). A new method of teacher evaluation and ranking using the decision tree. Journal of Educational Innovations, 15(60), 29-42. (In Persian).
26. Haleghinejad, S.A. (2011). Evaluation of Primary and Secondary School Teachers Performance Based on the Framework for Education Model. First National Conference on Education in Iran 1404, Tehran, Science, Technology and Industry Policymaking Institute. (In Persian)
27. Kimball, S.M., & Milanowski, A. (2009). Examining Teacher Evaluation Validity and Leadership Decision Making Within a Standards-Based Evaluation System. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(1), 34-70.
28. Mayer, R., (2002). Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
29. Mojallal, M., Asadzadeh, S., & Norani, A. (2018). Investigating the effect of teachers' information literacy on web-based learning Elementary students of Maragheh city. Information and communication technology in educational sciences, 8(3), 169-192. (In Persian).
30. Montazer, G.A., & Jafari, N. (2008). Application of Fuzzy Delphi Method in Designing Tax Policy in Iran. QJER, 8(1), 91-114. (In Persian)
31. Noelle, A., PauflerKelley, M., & KingPing, Zh. (2020). Promoting professional growth in new teacher evaluation systems: Practitioners’ lived experiences in changing policy contexts. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 65.
32. Ortega, S., Baptiste, L., & Beauchemin, A., (2008). A model for 360 degree teacher evaluation in the context of the CSME. Biennial Cross-Campus Conference in Education.
33. Pianta R.C., & Hamre, B.K. (2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109-119.
34. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W.R., & Abrahamson, L.A. (2004). The networked classroom. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 50-54.
35. Strong, M., Gargani, J., & Hacifazlioğlu, O. (2011). Do we know a successful teacher when we see one? Experiments in the identification of effective teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 367-382.
36. Stronge, J.H., & Tucker, P.D. (2003). Handbook on teacher evaluation: Assessing and improving performance. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
37. Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2010). The influence of school leadership on teachers’ perception of teacher evaluation policy. Educational Studies 36(5):521-536.
The Journal of Research in Humanities
Volume 29, Issue 3
September 2022
Pages 115-139