We have invited the students to make two personal options, one primordial and a secondary one, from a series of 10 potential qualities that they would grant, in their opinion, to the ideal teacher.
a) To be clear in explanations.
b) To answer to all the questions, even these are not quite intelligent.
c) To be aware of the discipline and to be experienced.
d) To help me to finish the studies.
e) To help me understanding.
f) To give many examples.
g) To be fine and friendly.
h) To be rigorous and correct in notation.
i) To make me find the things I ignored.
j) To have a good reputation and to be high regarded by all.
Generally speaking, the students have classified 3 expectations in the following order:
1) To be clear in explanations (a)
2) To help me understanding (e)
3) To be aware of the discipline and to be experienced (c)
Comparative results versus the criterions classified in hierarchic order, in accordance with the general mean.
|
UCL |
UCv |
IST |
HEI |
1 a) To be clear in explanations (56%) |
+ |
- |
= |
+ |
2 e) To help me understanding (40%) |
- |
= |
+ |
- |
3 c) To be aware of the discipline and to be experienced (27%) |
- |
+ |
= |
= |
4 g) To be fine and friendly (17%) |
- |
+ |
= |
= |
5 d) To help me to finish the studies (14%) |
= |
= |
= |
+ |
6 f) To give many examples (12%) |
+ |
- |
= |
= |
7-8 i) To make me find the things I ignored (10%) |
- |
+ |
= |
= |
7-8 b) To answer to all the questions, even these are not quite intelligent (10%) |
- |
= |
= |
+ |
9 h) To be rigorous and correct in notation (7%) |
+ |
= |
= |
= |
10 j) To have a good reputation and to be high regarded by all (2%) |
- |
+ |
= |
= |
Let's observe that, except the firsts three classified criterions, we note a quite different and heterogeneous repartition of the students' expectations in what concern the ideal teacher. This proves an important diversity of specificity, beyond the main concerns.
These general tendencies express the synthetic particularities of each country. In evaluation we will take into account these average tendencies from each country, but we still intend to examine, by the way of the personal interviews, the tendencies expressed by the students upon the different expectations' profiles highlighted in each country. |
For each teacher in charge with the course, laboratory or seminar, the students were invited to give their level of concurrence to 8 affirmations, on a scale with 7 levels.
He has a very good pedagogy, he help us understanding
He is very competent and knows well the discipline
He is very fine and friendly
He is very exigent and stiff
He is always available for the students
He is very innovator and he always find new examples
He stimulates the students' interest for the discipline
He encourage the students' reasoning and critical spirit
The students could answer based on their experience, or, for the students that didn't know yet the teacher, based on what they heard about him (his reputation). It will be interesting to compare the expressed impressions about the teachers in charge, with the comments that we'll have during the questioning after the course.
The objective here is not to evaluate the teacher himself, but to be able to make a correlation between the possible differences in evaluation of the multimedia tools, expressed within the same institution, and the subjective perceptions promoted to the students by the teacher in charge, on one hand before the course and on the other hand, after the course.
Let's note that, in parallel with this quantitative inquiring of the students, the evaluator has met the most teachers implied, during personal interviews.
