Identifying the challenges related to student learning evaluation in Iranian higher education system

Document Type : Original Article



The main purpose of this research is to identify the challenges related to student learning evaluation in Iranian higher education system. The research population in qualitative section was 12 faculty members from Bu Ali- Sina University who were selected based on criteria oriented purposeful sampling. In quantitative section, 7309 graduate students were research population that sampling was done based on ratio randomly categorizing method. Semi structure interview was used for data gathering from faculty members and data was analyzed based on categorizing method and for students a researcher made questioner was used and data analyzed by factor analysis and one way variance analysis. Findings of this research showed six factors such as: unfamiliarity of faculty with evaluation goals, structural hindrances, lack of grounds for implementing formative evaluation, lack of attention to negative effects of learning evaluation method, lack of attention to acquiring higher skills and neglecting some of learning domains by evaluation methods. Six identified factors are indicating 41/36 percent of total variance. As a result, evaluation as part of learning process is faced with many challenges in Iranian higher education system.    


-     شریفیان، فریدون، نصر، احمدرضا و عابدی، لطفعلی (1388). شاخص‌های ارزشیابی از عملکرد تحصیلی و میزان کاربست آن توسط اعضای هیأت علمی، نشریه اندیشه‌های نوین تربیتی، 5 (1) صص 33-9.
-     فتح‌آبادی، جلیل (1385). بررسی تأثیر روش‌های متفاوت سنجش بر رویکردهای مطالعه و راهبردهای آماده شدن برای امتحانات در دانشجویان با پیشرفت تحصیلی بالا و پائین. رساله دکتری، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی.
-     Barrenechea, I. (2010). Six critics for standard evaluation. Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 18 (8), 98-110.
-     Bloxham. S, Boyd. P (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: a practical guide. New York: Open University Press.
-     Bostton. C (2009). The concept of formative assessment. practical assessment, research & evaluation, 8 (9). Retrieved 2 June, 2010 from: ,n"http: //PAREONLINE. Net/geetvn. Asptvn. Aspvs8, n.
-     Boud. D (2007). Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds), Rethinking assessment for higher education: Learning for the longer term. London: Routledge.
-     Dikli, S. (2006). An Overview of Automated Scoring of Essays. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5 (1), 17-30.
-     Eisner, W. E. (1994). The Educational Imagination: On the Designand Evaluation of School Programs. 3rd edition. Macmillan publishing co. chp.
-     Gfoster, C. (2004). Using commen formative assessment as a source of professinonal development in american school. Teaching and teacher education. 25 (5), 674-680.
-     Hickman, C. J., Bielema, C & Gunderson, M. (2006). Challenges in Design, Development, and Delivery of Online Assessment and Evaluation. In M. Hricko., S. L. Howell. On Line Assessment and Measurement: Foundation and Challenges. Hershey: Information Science Publishing.
-     Joughin, G (2009). Assessment, Learning and Judgement in Higher Education: A Critical Review. In Gordon Joughin (editor) Assessment, Learning and Judgement in Higher Education. Spirnger.
-     Keppell, M., Kitoi, E. A., Wing, A. M. W. (2006). Authentic Online Assessment: Three Case Studies in Teacher Education. In S. Howell., M. Hricko. On line Assessment and Measurement: Case Studies from Higher Education, k-12 and Corporate. London: Information Science Publishing.
-     Levine. A, . Sun C. J. (2003). Barriers Within the Academy. Journal of the internet and higher education. (4). 34- 45.
-     Mc Loughlin, C. (2003). Broading Assessment Strategies with Information Technology. In: S, Naidu. Learning and Teaching with Technology. London: Kogan Page.
-     McMillan. J. H., Venable. J. C & Varier. D (2013). Studies of the Effect of Formative Assessment on Student Achievement: So Much More is Needed. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18 (2), 1-15. Available online: http: //pareonline. net/getvn. asp?v=18&n=2.
-     Rotberg, I. (2006). Assessment Around The World, Educational Leadership, 18 (3), 26-41.
-     Suen, H. (2006). Psychometric paradox of very high-stakes assessment and solutions, Korean Educational Development Institute.
-     Suskie. L (2009). Using Assessment Results to Inform Teaching Practice and Promote Lasting Learning. In Gordon Joughin (editor) Assessment, Learning and Judgment in Higher Education. Spirnger.
-     Tarant, S. (2008). The evaluation of a collaborative teaching team in higher education. Journal of accounting education. 16 (3-4), 120-135.
-     Trumpower, D. L., Sharara, H., & Goldsmith, T. E. (2010). Specificity of Structural Assessment of Knowledge. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 8 (5). Retrieved [12 March 2013] from http: //www. jtla. org.
-     Young, V. & Kim D. (2010). Using assessments for instructional improvement: A review of the literature. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18 (19), 1-40. Retrieved on 3 March 2013 from http: //epaa. asu. edu/ojs/article/view/809.