International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

Learner centric innovative teaching and evaluation practices: a pathway to sustain quality

Author Affiliations

  • 1Symbiosis Institute of Computer Studies and Research, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Model Colony, Pune, India
  • 2Department of Education (SPPU), Aadarsha Comprehensive College of Education and Research, Pune, India
  • 3Symbiosis Institute of Computer Studies and Research, Symbiosis International (Deemed University), Model Colony, Pune, India

Res. J. Recent Sci., Volume 10, Issue (4), Pages 1-5, October,2 (2021)

Abstract

The recent times has been observing a process of innovation and restructuring in higher education. A change in the teaching-learning practices and evaluation of student outcome is of prime importance for new strategies to be developed. This Research is conducted for finding out innovative teaching practices adopted by the teachers at higher education institutions for attainment of expected learning outcomes and sustain quality of higher education. This study also aims at proposing such innovative practices for inclusion in NAAC framework making it result oriented framework.

References

  1. Walington J.A. (2003)., Mentoring Preservice teachers – Demands of participation in a partnership of mutual benefit., Unicorn Online Refereed Article No 28, Australian College of Educators, Canberra.
  2. DeCarlo, N. J., and Sterett, W. K. (2018)., History of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award., In Quality in higher education. Routledge. pp. 79-94.
  3. Hénard, F., & Roseveare, D. (2012)., Fostering quality teaching in higher education: Policies and practices., An IMHE Guide for Higher Education Institutions, 7-11.
  4. Gandhi, M. M. (2013)., International initiatives in assessment of quality and accreditation in higher education., International Journal of Educational Planning & Administration, 3(2), 121-138.
  5. Hoban, G. F. (2004)., Seeking quality in teacher education design: A four-dimensional approach., Australian Journal of Education, 48(2), 117-133.
  6. Ingvarson, L., Beavis, A., & Kleinhenz, E. (2007)., Factors affecting the impact of teacher education programmes on teacher preparedness: implications for accreditation policy., European Journal of Teacher Education, 30(4), 351-381.
  7. McDowell, L., & Sambell, K. (1999)., The experience of innovative assessment: student perspectives., Assessment matters in higher education: Choosing and using diverse approaches, 71-82.
  8. Prensky, M. (2005)., Engage me or enrage me., Educase Review, 40(5), 61-64.
  9. López-Navas, C. (2014)., Educación superior y TIC: conceptos y tendencias de cambio/Higher education and ITC: concepts and changing trends., Historia y Comunicación Social, 19, 227-239.
  10. Lister, M. (2015)., Gamification: The effect on student motivation and performance at the post-secondary level., Issues and Trends in Educational Technology, 3(2).
  11. Doley, P. (2014)., Role of Assessment in Improving Quality in Higher Education., Pratidhwani The Echo, II(III), 150-158.
  12. Adam, S. (2006)., An introduction to learning outcomes., Introducing Bologna objectives and tools, B 2.3-1
  13. Wolf, K. (2007)., Evaluating and enhancing outcomes assessment quality in higher education programs., Metropolitan Universities, 18(2), 42-56.
  14. Jisha, K. V. (2015)., The role of naac for quality assurance in higher education., Research in Arts & Education, 4(3).
  15. Hecht, J., & Kahrens, M. (2021)., How does national culture affect the teaching style in higher education and what are the implications for the student experience?., Tertiary Education and Management, 1-21.