home

=Assalamualaikum...& Salam Sejahtera..,=

== This is an example : "  influence the use of online systems in teaching & learning system " have been published (see file), for other examples can be found via Google .==

Pn. Rifina Arlin
**1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW**

According to Swanson and Torraco (1995), the lecture was established formally centuries ago as a teaching process that began with a literal reading of important passages from the text by the master, followed by the master’s interpretation of the text. Students were expected to sit, listen and take notes. In writing about the lecture method in medical education, Vella (1992) defines the lecture as the formal presentation of content by the educator (as subject matter expert) for the subsequent learning and recall in examinations by students. Ruyle (1995) describes the lecture simply as an oral presentation of instructional material. Thus, to see the effectiveness of the lecture delivery by the lecturers, few studies had been carried out where they will be looking into different sources of rating. (Berk 2005).

Historically, students rating have dominated as the primary measure of teaching effectiveness for the past five decades (Seldin 1999). In fact, the evaluation of teaching has been in a metaphorical //cul-de-sac// (“dead end”) with student ratings as the universal barometer. Faculty members in higher education may be evaluated with flawed evaluation instruments, conceivably leading to unfair assessment of their teaching performance. It is also said that student evaluations of teacher effectiveness (SETEs) are nothing more than evaluations of the students' perceptions of the teachers' effectiveness. The opinions expressed are subject to a great many variables that may have little or nothing to do with evaluating the teachers' ability to teach. Many variables effect students’ opinion, which include the class type, lecturer rank and reputation, students’ conception on performance, gender, class size, and class level. (T. L. Simmons,1997) Although student evaluations of teaching (SETs) are mandatory in most universities, they are a more contentious teaching evaluation tool than many realize. SETs are positively correlated with student characteristics, like grades or expected grades, student effort and even psychological factors SETs would then be dependent not only on the actual quality of the lectures, but also on student inputs into the course. It is hypothesized student rating of lecture quality is positively related to student input into the course (measured by hours of work outside class, textbook reading and so on, which in turn is often positively related to performance. (Snowball et all, 2006)

Only recently has there been a trend toward augmenting those ratings with other data sources to broaden and deepen the evidence base (Centra 1993; Braskamp & Ory 1994; Knapper & Cranton 2001; Berk 2006; Seldin 2006; Arreola 2007). There are 12 potential sources of evidence of teaching effectiveness which consists of student ratings, peer ratings, self-evaluation, videos, student interviews, alumni ratings, employer ratings, administrator ratings, teaching scholarship, teaching awards, learning outcome measures, and teaching portfolio. (Ronald A.Berk, 2005)

Critical reviews of strategies to evaluate teaching behaviors in the higher education literature suggest a variety of possible raters, including students, self, peers, outside experts, mentors, alumni, employers, and administrators, and 14 different potential sources of evidence (Berk 2005, 2006).Multiple raters should be chosen for their expertise and to minimize several types of rating bias (Berk 2006). Appropriate scales could be developed. for the different raters, but a scale with a common core of behaviors, which multiple raters are able to observe, may be part of the measurement process. The professor (self) should also complete the scale (Berk 2009).

Silberman (1990) suggests five approaches to maximizing students’ understanding and retention during lectures. These can be used to help ensure the effectiveness of the lecture delivery. Firstly is the use an opening summary. At the beginning of the lecture, lecturers need to present major points and conclusions to help students organize their listening. Secondly to present key terms and reduce the major points in the lecture to key words that act as verbal subheadings or memory aids. Thirdly is to offer examples. When possible, the lecturers need to provide real-life illustrations of the ideas in the lecture. Fourthly is the use of analogies. If possible, the lecturer needs to make a comparison between the content of the lecture and knowledge the students already have. Finally are the use visual backups. Lecturers need to use a variety of media to enable students to see as well as hear what is being said. The key to an effective lecture style is to break down the lecture into its component parts and use a variety of approaches within each component. This is especially critical when a group of students will be attending a series of lectures by the same educator. The three main parts of a lecture are the introduction, body and summary. Hence, the study of the effectiveness of the lecturers in delivering the lecture can be done to look into all these criteria (Sullivan 1996).

**REFERENCES** **Journals:**

Ronald A. Berk. 2009. Using the 360o multisource feedback model to evaluate teaching and professionalism. //Journal of Medical Teacher// : 1073-1080

Maree O’ Keefe et al, 2009. The Colleague Developmental Programme: a multidisciplinary programme of peer observation partnerships. //Journal of Medical Teacher:// 1060-1065

R. Hamid et al. 2009. Improvement of Delivery Methods in Teaching Materials Technology. //Journal of// //WSEAS Transactions On Advances In Engineering// Education 3(6): 77- 86

Norhidayah Ali et al. 2009. The Factors Influencing Students’ Performance at Universiti Teknologi MARA Kedah, Malaysia. //Journal of Management Science and Engineering// 3(4)//.// 81 - 90

Basow, S. A. 1995. Student evaluations of college professor: When gender matters. //Journal of Educational Psychology//.87. 656-665.

T.L. Simmons. 1997. Students Evaluation of Teachers: Professional Practice or Punitive Policy? //JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 1// (1) April 1997. 12 - 19

Bartlett J.E. et al. 2001. Organizational Research: Determining Appropriate Sample Size in Survey Research//. Journal of Information Tecnology, Learning and Performance//. 19(1)