Mazhar Babaee; Narin rohani; Fateme deyjour
Abstract
The aim of the current research was to evaluate the hidden factors affecting the mentality of university Faculty Members s in the evaluations of students at the end of the semester. The qualitative approach and evaluation research method of the situational assessment type was used to achieve this goal. ...
Read More
The aim of the current research was to evaluate the hidden factors affecting the mentality of university Faculty Members s in the evaluations of students at the end of the semester. The qualitative approach and evaluation research method of the situational assessment type was used to achieve this goal. The field of research included the Faculty Members s of Farhangian University of Kurdistan province in the academic year of 2021-2022, who were selected by a targeted and standardized sampling method. The selection criterion was a willingness to participate in the interview and having evaluation experience in the field of situational evaluation in the field of the research subject. The data collection tool was a semi-structured interview, and 11 people were selected with the criterion of saturation. The findings showed that these factors can be divided into eleven main themes and 83 categories. 1. The effect of classroom and educational content on the evaluation of Faculty Members s (25 categories). 2. Appearance characteristics of students in their final evaluation (4 categories). 3. Students' social class in Faculty Members s' evaluation of them (7 categories). 4. How students interact and deal with each other in Faculty Members s' final evaluation of students (3 categories). 5. The student's past performance in the current evaluation of the Faculty Members s of 6 categories. 6. The difference between the opinions of Faculty Members s and students in the evaluation of Faculty Members s (5 categories). 7. Grading of Faculty Members s based on Faculty Members s' points of view. (8 categories). 8. The effect of students' tone on Faculty Members s' mentality (8 categories). 9. Grading by Faculty Members s only to pass the desired course (5 categories). 10. The influence of students' gender on Faculty Members s' assessment of students (6 categories).
