Lincoln College Review of Instructional Staff - Research Paper Example

Lincoln College Review of Instructional Staff Contents Lincoln College Review of Instructional Staff 1.0 Lincoln Review of Instructional Staff 3 1.0 Abstract 3 2.0 Introduction 5 2.1 Type of Data 5 2.1.1 Quantitative data 5 2.1.2 Qualitative data 6 3.0 Analysis of findings 6 3.1 Description of quantitative data 6 3.1.1 Description of attendance, withdrawals, and performance of students 6 3.1.2 Description of instructor’s ratings 7 3.2 Description of qualitative data 8 4.0 Recommendations 9 4.1 Recommendations for Change 9 4.2 Recommendations for additional collection of data 10 5.0 Conclusion 10 5.0 References 10 1.0 Lincoln Review of Instructional Staff 1.0 Abstract This paper analyzes the data that was collected from various students about their course instructors. The study collected data on three instructors who taught mathematics, basic computer, and English. The first part of the paper describes the difference between qualitative and quantitative data; this section also gives examples of these data in the study. The next part in the essay is the analysis, which describes the data and its meaning. A major finding in this section is that the class attendance of a tutor is directly proportional to the number of students in a course. The last part in the paper is the recommendation of collecting data and other suggestions that will help to improve the performance of tutors. Key words: instructor, course, students, mean grade, section, data, trend, college, English literature, mathematics, and basic computer. 2.0 Introduction Instructional staff members are tutors who help students to understand various courses that different faculties offer to students. These members are in charge of giving students course materials, discussing the course with the learners in class, and giving out exams to check the level of understanding of the learners (Allen, 2011). Lincoln College has employed instructional staff so that they may help students who enrol in these courses. The recent review of the instructors by the students indicates that the instructors of the school are above average. However, the review indicates that the performance of the teachers depend on their level of understanding of the course and the number of students that they teach. This paper will focus on analyzing the data that was collected from the student’s review of their course instructors at the college. 2.1 Type of Data Qualitative data is the one that describes a situation in the form of statements without using statistical figures (Nilson, 2003). Quantitative data, on the other hand, is the one that uses statistical figures to describe a condition (Bartos, 2012). The students who reviewed the instructors used both quantitative and qualitative data. 2.1.1 Quantitative data The review used quantitative data to review the instructors on a scale of 1 to 5; where 1 was the lowest while 5 was the highest. For example, students indicated that instructor A taught 3 sections, while tutor B and C taught 6 and 2 sections in that order. The numbers of sessions that each instructor taught is a statistic hence a quantitative data (Mondschein, 2011). Another example of the quantitative data includes the number of students who enrolled and those who withdrew from the three courses. 2.1.2 Qualitative data The students used qualitative data in the comments section where they gave opinions about the teacher. An example of the qualitative data in the review of the first instructor is the point in which a student argues that the instructor explained the subject finely. Other qualitative data include the point where a student argues that the teacher did not give feedback that would help him improve. 3.0 Analysis of findings 3.1 Description of quantitative data 3.1.1 Description of attendance, withdrawals, and performance of students Table 1 Analysis of instructors’ attendance, withdrawals, and performance of students in each class Item Instructor A Instructor B Instructor C Course Basic mathematics Computer basics English literature Sections taught 3 6 2 Students who enrolled in week 1 45 120 38 Withdrawals 12 6 8 Grade spread A-5 B-9 C-12 D-3 F-4 A-18 B-20 C-14 D-37 F-25 A-27 B-1 C-0 D-0 F-2 Average grade C D A Source (Author, 2014) The analysis indicates that the second instructor who taught computer basics attended 6 sections, which were more than those of the other two. 120 students had enrolled in this instructor’s class and only six withdrew from the course. This instructor may have attended double and triple the sections attended by A and B because the class had more students than those who enrolled in the other two courses. Therefore, the teacher had to be available for more sections to ensure that all students understand the course (In Beaton, & In Gilbert, 2013). The analysis also indicates that there were more withdrawals from basic mathematics than there were from English and computer courses. This may be because mathematics is the toughest course among the three subjects (Lavigne, & Good, 2013). The English literature course, on the other hand had the least number of students compared to mathematics and basic computer courses. The trend that occurs in this section indicates that the number of withdrawals from a subject also increased based on the complexity of the subject (Gottschalk, & Hjortshoj, 2004). The average grade of students for the first instructor was C while for the second and third courses the mean grade was D and A. These performances indicate that there is a trend where the average grade of students went down as the number of learners who enrolled in a class increased (Keys, & Zeff, 2000). There is also a trend that indicates that as the number of learners in a course decrease, the instructors reduced the number of sections that they attended class during the term. 3.1.2 Description of instructor’s ratings Table 2 Analysis of instructor’s ratings on a scale of 1 to 5 Item Instructor A Instructor B Instructor C Knowledge of material 4.3 2.9 4.7 Helping students understand course 3.1 2.8 3.5 Teacher would be recommended 3.0 1.8 3.8 Useful course materials 2.8 3.0 1.8 Sufficient time for assignments 3.5 1.8 3.5 Source: (Author, 2014) The English instructor was rated the best in terms of giving sufficient time for assignments, understanding the course, helping students understand the material, and being recommended to others. This has a direct relationship with the average mean grade of the class, which was A. The basic computer tutor, on the other hand, was rated the worst in all cases except in giving out useful course material. This means that this tutor has the lowest teaching skills, and it explains the reason why the class had a mean grade of D (Greenspan, 2013). The maths instructor, on the other hand, was average and this is why the class had an average mean grade of C. 3.2 Description of qualitative data The qualitative data indicates that students have a positive attitude towards instructors who help them understand the course (Lavigne, & Good, 2013). These students also perform well in their exams; for example, students who reviewed the third instructor who taught English argued that the tutor helped them understand the course. However, they argued that the materials were not always helpful and the instructor did not give feedback about assignments. All the students except one who reviewed the basic computer instructor gave negative comments. The students argued that the course materials were more reliable than the teacher, and that the teacher’s comments were more irritating than useful. This explains why this class had the poorest mean grade of D. However, since the teacher’s rating was above average, it means that there is need for further research rather than making a decision on data collected from only 41% (47/114*100) of the class (Bartos, 2012). The students also gave both positive and negative reviews of the mathematics teacher; some argued that he was the best while others argued that the teacher was not so helpful. 4.0 Recommendations 4.1 Recommendations for Change Lincoln College should consider employing more tutors to reduce the number of learners that each instructor has to teach in a certain course. This is because the analysis indicates that the mean grade lowers as the number of students in a class increase (Allen, 2011). The college should also train the teachers regularly so that they may familiarize with the course better than before; this will then ensure that the tutors help the students in understanding the course resourcefully (In Beaton, & In Gilbert, 2013). 4.2 Recommendations for additional collection of data Lincoln College should improve the method of data collection by encouraging all the students who undertake various courses to evaluate their teachers. This will enable the college to have a clearer picture of the weaknesses of each course instructor (Bartos, 2012). The school may do this by making it a requirement for all students to evaluate their teachers. 5.0 Conclusion Lincoln College recently carried out a research to review three instructors who teach mathematics, basic computer, and English literature. The review indicates that the instructors are above average, but no one among them is efficient. The analysis of the data from the study indicates that students withdraw from a subject depending on its complexity. The analysis also indicates that the teacher’s rate of class attendance depends on the number of students in class. The results of the study also indicate that students perform well in class when the instructor helps them to understand the subject. This research may not be reliable because it is based on data that was given by less than 50% of the students in each class. Therefore, further research needs to be carried out for each instructor by asking all students to participate in the review of the instructors. Lincoln College may also introduce training sessions for the instructors to help them enhance their teaching skills. 5.0 References Allen, F. (2011). Education. London: Whitechapel Gallery. Bartos, J. (2012). Do schools prepare students for a global economy?. Detroit: Green haven Press. Gottschalk, K. K., & Hjortshoj, K. (2004). The elements of teaching writing: A resource for instructors in all disciplines. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins. Greenspan, S. (2013). Elements of discipline: Nine principles for teachers and parents. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. In Beaton, F., & In Gilbert, A. (2013). Developing effective part-time teachers in higher education: New approaches to professional development. London: Taylor and Francis. Keys, T., & Zeff, A. R. (2000). How to be a successful technical trainer: Core skills for instructor certification. New York: McGraw Hill. Lavigne, A. L., & Good, T. L. (2013). Evaluating Teachers and Students. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis. Mondschein, K. (2011). Education. New York: Ferguson Pub. Nilson, L. B. (2003). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company. Read More