Relation of selected factors affect
teaching efficiency:
A case study of Suranaree
University of Technology
Somjin Phiakoksong
Visit Weawsungnoen
and
Waraporn Eoaskoon
e-mail : {somjin, visit, waraporn}@sut.ac.th
Outline
• Background
• Research methodology
- Objectives
- Process
- Methods
- Data preparation
- Data analysis
- Results & conclusion
Background
• Suranaree University of Technology (SUT) is the
first public autonomous university.
• SUT has unique identity in teaching and learning
system.
– trimester system.
– sharing educational resources.
• Laboratory
• Classroom building complex: class size
60- 1,500 students
• Center of library and educational media
• Center of computer services
Background (Cont.)
– SUT organizes the system of student assessment
towards satisfaction on teaching
– The results of teaching assessment are reported
confidentially to each teacher and Dean for
improvement
– The meeting as university mission in every
trimester is to overview and discuss the results
of teaching assessment aiming to development
of teaching and related issues
– This study is a section of this report
Objectives
• Study the relation of selected factors
which affect the teaching quality.
–Four Selected Factors :
• Academic position
• Working years
• Work status
• Class sizes
Methods
• Evaluation forms using 4 point
scales
• Data gathering at the end of
each trimester
• Data for analysis collected from
2nd trimester (1,682 records)
Data preparation
Academic position
1%
24%
41%
Prof.
Assoc. Prof.
Assist. Prof.
8%
Instructor
Others
26%
Data preparation
Working years (Full-time only)
37%
38%
<=5 years
6-10 years
> 10 years
25%
Data preparation
Work status
31%
Full-time Instructor
Part-time Instructor
69%
Data preparation
3%
13%
1%
Class sizes
1-60 students
61-150 students
151-300 students
301 students up
83%
Data analysis
Upper scores
Academic
position
Theory
Middle scores
Chi-square
Lower scores
Work years
Practices
Work status
Class sizes
Seminar/
Project
Raw
scores
One way
ANOVA
t-test
Results
• Relation of Academic position and types of teaching :
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
lower
middle
Theory
Chi-square = 53.71,
df = 8, p-value = 0.000*
Other
Instruct.
Assist.Prof.
Assoc.Prof.
Prof.
Other
Instruct.
Assist.Prof.
Assoc.Prof.
Prof.
upper
Practices
Chi-square = 53.71,
df = 8, p-value = 0.000*
Results
• Relation of Academic position and types of teaching :
Theory
Prof.
Assist.Prof.
Instruct.
Assoc.Prof.
Other *
N
10
278
456
101
70
Mean
3.63
3.53
3.51
3.51
3.28
Results
• Relation of Academic position and types of teaching :
Practices
Prof.
Instruct.
Assoc.Prof.
Assist.Prof.
Other*
N
3
171
19
105
333
Mean
4.00
3.57
3.56
3.47
3.33
Results
• Relation of Work status and types of teaching :
60
50
40
30
lower
20
middle
upper
10
0
Full-Time
Part-Time
Theory
Chi-square = 8.634,
df = 2, p-value = 0.013*
Full-Time
Part-Time
Practices
Chi-square = 21.440,
df = 2, p-value = 0.000*
Results
• Relation of Work status and types of teaching :
Theory
Full-time
Part-time
N
766
149
Mean
3.50
3.50
Results
• Relation of Work status and types of teaching :
Practices
Full-time*
Part-time
N
254
377
Mean
3.47
3.40
Results
• Relation of Class sizes and types of teaching :
60
50
40
30
lower
20
middle
upper
10
0
1-60 students
61-150 students
151-300 students
Theory
Chi-square = 56.271,
df = 6, p-value = 0.000*
301 students up
Results
• Relation of Class sizes and types of teaching :
Theory
N
Mean
1-60 students *
634
3.55
61-150 students *
210
18
53
3.42
3.32
3.28
301 students up
151-300 students
Conclusion
Four selected factors affected the teaching quality :
– Academic position and theory and practical sessions
• All Instructor (Prof., Assoc.Prof., Assist.Prof. and Instructor)
got higher scores than other instructor
– Work status and practical session
• Full-time instructors got higher scores than part-time
instructors
– Class size and theory sessions
Class of 1-60 and 61-150 students got higher scores than of
151-300 and 301 students ups
– Number of work years did not affect the teaching
quality.
Questions ?