Author:
Aye Aye Myint Lay Doctoral School of Education, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Aye Aye Myint Lay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4540-2671
Open access

Abstract

Educational research studies show some significant contributions towards improving the quality and productivity of the education sector. With this paper, I would like to do the same by presenting the results of my pilot study on key elements of developing teacher educators' performance appraisal. This study explores a number of issues that can influence appraisal: purposes, setting standards, evaluation instruments, and implementation. The purpose of the study is to reveal what the influencing circumstances in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal are, and how teacher educators perceive the role of staff involvement in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal. In order to fulfil the above goals, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten teacher educators, currently working at two Universities of Education in Myanmar. The interview results revealed that the acceptability of performance criteria is important and academic staff involvement in developing performance appraisal design should be encouraged. Effective leadership, trust, clear and equitable systems can lead to successful appraisal. Finally, the implications are discussed with a focus on designing teacher performance appraisal.

Abstract

Educational research studies show some significant contributions towards improving the quality and productivity of the education sector. With this paper, I would like to do the same by presenting the results of my pilot study on key elements of developing teacher educators' performance appraisal. This study explores a number of issues that can influence appraisal: purposes, setting standards, evaluation instruments, and implementation. The purpose of the study is to reveal what the influencing circumstances in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal are, and how teacher educators perceive the role of staff involvement in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal. In order to fulfil the above goals, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten teacher educators, currently working at two Universities of Education in Myanmar. The interview results revealed that the acceptability of performance criteria is important and academic staff involvement in developing performance appraisal design should be encouraged. Effective leadership, trust, clear and equitable systems can lead to successful appraisal. Finally, the implications are discussed with a focus on designing teacher performance appraisal.

Introduction

Teacher performance appraisal in universities is receiving attention worldwide in terms of improvement and accountability (Hounsell, 2009). Performance appraisal can help teachers identify areas of strength, assess their own ability to nurture the students, track their students' results, review teaching competencies, devise personal development plans, and articulate innovations and other contributions to institution development (Cardno & Piggot-Irvine, 1997; Marshall, 2005). It cannot be denied that performance appraisal is an effective tool that can help the development of a teacher's professional growth and the management of educational institutions (Vidya & Ambrose, 2017). Accordingly, audit and assessment, as well as monitoring systems for teacher educators should be adapted or developed for continuous improvement in their professional quality and effectiveness.

As a way to improve education, producing quality teachers plays a key role in establishing a strong basis in teaching and learning. Moreover, one of the major challenges for quality education across the world is to have appropriate teachers with professional practice (Pushpanadham, 2020), as the characteristics and commitment of the teachers are the most valuable traits that can significantly shape the quality of an education system. However, the teaching sector is being overlooked in many countries due to the shortage of teachers (Gudo, Olel, & Oanda, 2011). In order to upgrade current teaching practices and to stop the cycle of producing under-performing teachers, teacher performance appraisal requires development.

In order to have effective job performance, individual performance can be measured against strategic objectives through performance appraisal with the nature of controlling (Devanna, Fombrun, & Tichy, 1984). In a similar nature, in educational institutions, performance appraisal is conducted with the purpose of promoting teaching quality, increasing teaching skills, and as a method of appraising teachers for promotion. Performance appraisal can be influenced by internal and external circumstances. Internal ones are related to the criteria being used to appraise teacher educator performance. The agreement of the criteria with the overall organizational mission, objectives, and job description has been an important internal issue. Additionally, there are external circumstances impacting the appraisal process such as leadership, innovation, employee participation.

Most of the research studies in the literature focus on the benefits of performance appraisal on personal and organizational aspects as an effective manpower planning tool (Davis, Ellett, & Annunziata, 2002; Mullins, 1996; Schleicher, 2011; Whitford, 2013). However, research conducted on exploring key areas in developing teacher performance appraisal is rare. Therefore, it can be worthwhile to pay attention to this thematic field as the literature on developing performance appraisal is not sufficient enough. Developing performance appraisal for teacher educators is very important in terms of increasing the reliability and validity of this process. In this regard, identifying influencing circumstances in developing performance appraisal systems and performance appraisal standards should be emphasized. This research delved into crucial issues that affect the development of a comprehensive teacher performance appraisal framework. In order to achieve this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten teacher educators in two Universities of Education in Myanmar. Findings revealed that (i) purposes, (ii) setting standards, (iii) evaluation instrument, and (iv) implementation are important for a design process which can help administrators devise an appraisal scheme in a particular educational context.

Theoretical perspectives

The nature of performance appraisal

A large body of literature on performance appraisal in different fields such as commerce and industry, private and public sectors, including education, is available (Arvey & Murphy, 1998). The first documented use of performance appraisal occurred in the U.S. Army in the early 1800s (Cadwell, 1995). Later, performance appraisal emerged as a management tool in many organizations in the early 1950s (Murphy & Cleveland, 1995). Williams (1998) claimed that the concept of performance management became widespread in the 1980s, but later it developed a more holistic approach in such aspects as generating motivation, promoting performance and managing human resources.

According to Muchinsky (2012), performance appraisal is a process used to appraise worker progress, connect goals and outcomes, make hiring decisions, establish training needs, and evaluate organizational processes. A set of meta-competencies including qualities such as accurate self-awareness, feedback-seeking, and openness to a range of ideas and concepts can build individual development (Briscoe & Hall, 1999). Performance appraisal can help to improve employees' job performance by identifying strengths and weaknesses and determine how their strengths can be best utilized for the success of organization and to overcome their weaknesses. In other words, it helps to explore the problems which may create hindrance in employees' progress and cause inefficient work.

Although performance appraisal has several benefits especially from a managerial aspect, Murphy (2020) stated that appraisals not conducted appropriately could lead to disappointment. Porter and Lawler (1968) claimed that individual behavior is determined by a combination of circumstances in the individual and in the environment. They highlight that effort or motivation does not lead directly to performance. It is, in fact, mediated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions. Ultimately, performance leads to satisfaction. The effort-performance-reward-satisfaction cycle should be carefully considered in managing human resources.

On one hand, regarding the concept of human resource management (HRM), Storey (1989) described the difference between hard and soft versions of HRM. The hard approach to HRM emphasizes the quantitative, calculative and business-strategic aspects of managing people in a rational way. Soft HRM stresses nurturing the hearts and minds of employees through communications and support in order to develop high-commitment, high-trust organizations. Storey (1989) claimed that the soft approach involves treating employees as valued assets, a source of competitive advantage through their commitment, adaptability, high-quality skills and performance. Oldroyd (2005) indicated the psychological and social side of managing educational organizations and staff. It concerns the management and nurture of self (awareness and management of one's inner thoughts and beliefs, motivation and associated behavior); others (interpersonal relationships and communication); teams (development of collaborative synergy and creative problem-solving capacity); organizational culture and learning (Faragó, 2011, p. 209).

Nowadays, several appraisal methods have become popular along with more recent developments including the reduced hierarchical nature of many organizations. This kind of changes in organizations have affected the nature of work itself and significantly, the objectives of performance appraisal, communication and teamwork skills, stress and conflict reduction, handling of emotion and conscientiousness, leadership become crucial issues in managing human beings. Moreover, Fletcher (2008) pointed out that the national culture is likely to have a major influence on the way appraisals are conducted. Therefore, the findings from a piece of performance appraisal research cannot be generalized across all national and organizational cultures due to the peculiarities of each context and the different levels of social and economic development of the nations. Consequently, it is necessary to develop a performance appraisal of each organization that suits its own culture and context.

Performance appraisal in higher education

Recent studies showed that nearly all higher education institutions have at least established a central unit that provides various services regarding the control, assurance, and improvement of teaching quality (Seyfried & Ansmann, 2018). Patterns of organizational actions are shaped by the role of individuals and their personal preferences and interests. In other words, organizational procedures and structures are often reflections of environmental expectations. Hence, cultural scripts and norms play a key role in achieving the high-performance goal of organizations.

Smith (1995) highlighted the importance of organizational commitment, the provision of adequate resources, the effects of the role of department heads, the setting and communication of clear and limited goals, and the consistency of good practice in the operation of appraisal systems. In higher education institutions, intellectual activity plays a dominant role and measuring the efficiency of intellectual output (assessing the performance of faculty members) cannot be ignored. Keczer (2008) claimed that “performance assessment should be targeted not to individuals alone; rather, it should be extended to incorporate units within an organization and also organizations as a whole” (p. 184). In order to ensure that the objectives of the organization are met in a timely manner, assessing the performance of an organization as a whole is extremely important.

It is effectively argued that faculty performance appraisal must be tailored to the specific needs and missions of the institution for it to serve both the organization and individual faculty members (Dilts, Haber, Haber, & Bialik, 1994). There is no single system of performance appraisal that has gained universal acceptance and thus, universities need to tailor their systems to increase the efficiency of the process. There are many questions and topics for continued research and study of faculty evaluation.

Developing teacher educators' performance appraisal

Designing a comprehensive teacher educator appraisal is a difficult process due to few research-based models. Aliasghar, Kiyani, and Shayestehfar (2016) pointed out that identifying areas for improvement of instruction and providing professional learning opportunities to teachers can help in improving quality education. Generally, the purpose of teacher appraisal is seen enforcing personnel decisions rather than aiming at effective teaching. Every country needs to nurture an educational climate in which appraisal is considered fair and transparent to achieve educational objectives (Aliasghar et al., 2016). If an appraisal can be applied efficiently and effectively, societies and schools can identify and learn from top-performing teachers, support discouraged and less successful teachers, and continue to develop all teachers toward their full potential.

An effective teacher appraisal system should have a clear definition of each domain of teaching. It will direct clear and public decisions about what is acceptable performance, techniques and procedures that are capable of assessing all aspects of teaching. If so, evaluators can make fair and consistent judgments based on evidence (Danielson, 2013). Moreover, Darling-Hammond (2012) hinted at a productive appraisal system that needs to evaluate teachers' practice in the context of curriculum goals and students' needs, as well as multi-faceted evidence of teachers' contributions to student learning and to the school as a whole.

Darling-Hammond (2012) proposed five key elements in designing an evaluation model: 1) common standards of teaching for meaningful student learning, 2) performance assessments, based on these standards, guiding state functions such as teacher preparation, licensure, and advanced certification, 3) local evaluation systems aligned to the same standards, for evaluating on-the-job teaching based on multiple measures of teaching practice and student learning, 4) support structures to ensure trained evaluators, mentoring for teachers who need additional assistance, and fair decisions about personnel actions, 5) aligned professional learning opportunities that support the improvement of teachers and teaching quality.

Berkley (2013) provided a framework for establishing new systems of educator evaluation across four major elements: A. Establishing foundations for action. Effective educator evaluation systems are grounded in clear goals, a well-defined vision, sufficient legal authority, a well-developed capacity to gather and use data, strong processes for stakeholder engagement, effective communications strategies, and rigorous professional standards for teachers and leaders. B. Designing evaluation instruments C. Establishing systems for use of the evaluation. D. Ensuring effective implementation and continuous improvement.

As can be seen in all the steps proposed above for developing a teacher appraisal, defining standards for teachers is the center of the developing process. As Yinger and Hendricks-Lee (2000) suggested, teaching standards can enhance the status of the profession by providing consensus on a shared knowledge base for practice that brings a basis for the professionalization of teaching and the provision of quality assurance and accountability to those outside the profession. Standards may be viewed as the engine that pulls along the knowledge base of the profession (Darling-Hammond, 2008).

There has been relatively little research on Myanmar teacher educators, especially from the viewpoint of performance evaluation during one's career with special regard to defining standards for teacher educators. Therefore, this research is an attempt to explore key features in developing a performance appraisal model for teacher educators in Myanmar.

Method

The basic philosophical foundation of my research lies in interpretive social science, which is “concerned primarily with problems of meaning or hermeneutics” (Ragin, 1987, p. 3). Interpretivism includes “accepting and seeking multiple perspectives, being open to change, practicing iterative and emergent data collection techniques, promoting participatory and holistic research, and going beyond the inductive and deductive approach” (Willis, Jost, & Nilakanta, 2007, p. 583). I follow the interpretivist paradigm as this study aims to explore the important issues in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal in the teacher educators' views. To achieve my research purpose, I applied qualitative research, which provides a detailed and in-depth examination of the issue under study (Creswell, 2009). According to Fetterman (1989), interviews are the most important technique used in qualitative research to collect data. Therefore, I conducted semi-structured interviews to gain a comprehensive insight into teacher educators' perceptions about crucial issues in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal.

Research aims and questions

The aim of this study is to focus on developing a teacher performance appraisal framework in Universities of Education in Myanmar. In order to fulfil the above goal and explore the underlying phenomena that lead to effective teacher educators' performance appraisal with a view to increasing the reliability of the process, the following two research questions were formulated:

What are the influencing circumstances in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal in teacher educators' views?

How do teacher educators perceive the role of staff involvement in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal?

The pilot study also served the purpose of preparing and testing my research tool for developing a teacher performance appraisal scheme for teacher educators.

The context

In Myanmar, pre-service teachers and in-service teachers for public high schools are trained through two Universities of Education (UoEs) and the University for the Development of the National Races of the Union (UDNR) (MOE, 2016). Under the Ministry of Education, Universities of Education offer Bachelor of Education, Master of Education, Doctor of Philosophy and Post Graduate Diplomas in Multimedia Arts (PGDMA) degree programs to the country's cohort of prospective teachers. Pre-service teachers have to take a five-year B.Ed. training program offered by these Education Universities. This training has two different entry requirements. In the first admission system, students having high marks in the high school matriculation exam are automatically accepted. The second system is for those who have the requisite qualification in two-year pre-service training at an education college to join B.Ed. courses in UoEs. Under the Ministry of Border Affairs, The University of Development of National Races (UDNR) also provides B.Ed. courses specifically to ethnic minorities (Htang, 2018).

Teacher educators have many duties and responsibilities, such as teaching the subject matter; ensuring that courses have appropriate programs that are designed to meet the needs of the students; creating inclusive, supportive learning environments; developing, selecting and using informal and formal, diagnostic, formative and summative assessment strategies to assess the student to mention a few. They also need competencies on lesson planning, and skills of creating a conducive learning environment.

UoEs are trying to establish partnerships with some international higher education institutions and research organizations to promote the skills, capabilities and creativities of the students (UNESCO, 2020). In order to promote the competences of Myanmar's teacher educators, there has been training for English proficiency, teaching methodology with the help of the British Council and the UK's Department for International Development (DFID) (UNESCO, 2020). Currently, according to Myanmar review report by UNESCO (2020), many senior lecturers from Universities of Education have been training in-service educators from several universities under the Ministry of Education in pedagogy, educational assessment, management and administration courses.

At present, teacher policy related to teacher quality assurance and management in Myanmar is weak in that teacher deployment and promotion are not linked to performance but instead are based on years of experience. Significant reforms in teacher education were started in 2016 with the priority of improving the quality of teachers. Under the National Education Law, a planned teacher education council has not been established but is expected to in the near future (UNESCO, 2020).

Participants

In the current study, I chose the purposive sampling method, which is concerned with selecting individuals according to the likelihood they will provide useful information on the phenomenon of interest (Guba, 1981) to cover diverse participants and unfold common themes in the context of my study. Morse (1994) suggested that qualitative researchers use at least six participants in investigations where the goal is to understand the essence of experience. In order to increase the credibility of my research, I conducted ten semi-structured interviews with teacher educators working at Universities of Education in Myanmar. Table 1 below presents an overview of the participants. Pseudonyms were assigned to each participant in order to ensure their anonymity.

Table 1.

Demographic data of participants

Pseudonym Gender Qualification Current position Years of service
Aung male PhD Head of Department 28
Kyaw male PhD Head of Department 26
Naing male MEd Lecturer 18
Min male MA Assistant Lecturer 8
Toe male MEd Tutor 4
Phyu female PhD Head of Department 24
Myo female MEd Lecturer 16
Tin female Med Lecturer 18
Nu female MSc Assistant Lecturer 9
Hlaing female MEd Tutor 4

Instrument

First, I reviewed the related literature on performance appraisal and several secondary data sources (periodicals, articles, books, and research dedicated to performance appraisal of teacher educators). I read the concepts related to developing performance appraisal of faculty members. Based on the literature, the main concepts concerned with performance management of faculty members were identified. These two approaches provided the concepts for the semi-structured interview questions in my research. Then, an interview guide was designed in order to cover these two aspects. The first section of the research instrument included questions related to biographical information. The second section included questions related to the understanding of performance appraisal and important features in developing performance appraisal, whereas the questions in the last section were aimed to explore interviewees' views on staff involvement in developing performance appraisal. Appendix contains the questions of the instrument.

Procedures and data analysis

The interviews with the ten participants were conducted in August 2020. First, the interviewees were contacted via e-mail to provide information on the purpose of the study, scope, the researcher's background and ethical information concerning anonymity, voluntary participation and confidentiality. Subsequently, online interviews were arranged and conducted. The interviews lasted approximately 20–30 min. The interviewees provided consent for the interviews to be audio-recorded. All the interviews were conducted in Myanmar as Myanmar is the native language of the participants, as well as mine. I realized that it would be challenging for some participants to answer question in English. Therefore, I used Myanmar language in the interviews to reduce any anxiety of the participants and to avoid possible language-related problems (Spradley, 1979).

As regards data analysis, an inductive method known as grounded theory (Oktay, 2012; Rostvall & West, 2003; Stebbins, 2001; Strauss, 1987) was used where codes and categories are extracted from the data (Charmaz, 2003) aided by ATLAS.ti 8 software for content analysis. There were two main steps in the process: categorization and reduction during the coding. Firstly, I read the participants' answers several times in order to attain a high level of familiarity with the raw data. Then, the data were segmented and organized according to a coding scheme, and relations were determined according to the categories. During the reduction step, the codes were sorted into themes, as a consequence of which, the following four themes emerged: (i) purposes, (ii) setting standards, (iii) evaluation instrument, and (iv) implementation.

Results

The results of the data analysis are presented here and elaborated upon in the discussion section which follows. Only core themes on crucial issues of developing an effective performance appraisal in Myanmar are presented from the analyzed data.

Purposes

Teacher educators indicated the importance of PA with different purposes including individual and organizational context. Assessing teachers' performance can ensure that teachers fully commit to their duties, and they promote their teaching effectively. Furthermore, performance appraisal has a controlling function in order to give feedback and identify future areas for growth and development, as can be seen in the following extracts:

Naing: PA can be used to control employee behaviors (rewarding desirable behaviors and punishing undesirable behaviors). Moreover, it can provide valuable feedback on the effectiveness of the training programs. The use of performance appraisal results can improve future performance.

Myo answered the interview questions based on her student experience in a foreign country where PA is used with two orientations: evaluation orientation and development orientation. The same idea emerged from the interviews with Aung and Nu.

Myo: Performance appraisal has two main goals: evaluation goals and development goals. While the first one includes giving feedback, valid data for promotion, the second one involves developing commitment, career opportunities and career planning, as well as recognition.

Aung: PA should be systematically designed to identify strengths and weaknesses, to increase teacher educators' motivation (extrinsic and intrinsic), to encourage improvement efforts.

Nu: PA can provide the opportunity of receiving constructive feedback about teaching and ensure professional growth (such as developing competence, knowledge, and skills). It can also detect key barriers to everyday practices.

Kyaw: PA can recognize teachers' development needs.

Performance evaluation has a purpose of helping teachers improve their teaching practice. It may also assist in identifying training needs of teacher education and future areas for development, and finally, it can produce a highly qualified teacher. This idea is reflected in the following quotations:

Min: PA is a kind of vehicle for the improvement of both teaching and learning. It can lead to quality education. Moreover, it can identify training needs of a teacher education program.

Toe: Teacher performance appraisal can provide effective teaching, learning, and assessment practices can help become qualified teacher.

Finally, while discussing the purpose of PA, two teacher educators (Phyu and Tin) reported that PA can encourage collaborative group engagement, support positive organizational change, build strong professional learning community and strengthen individual efficacy beliefs. The need for competence and provision of continuous professional development of teacher educators is linked with the use of PA results.

Setting standards

Another important emerging theme, setting standards plays a vital role in defining ground rules for teacher educators. It is believed that identifying performance standards including staff involvement and leadership are key aspects of designing a performance appraisal framework, as the ideas below confirm:

Kyaw: Staff involvement in setting PA standards and criteria can help professional relationship and also mutual trust in the implementation process. Teacher Educators can point out the relevance, suitability and acceptability of PA.

Toe: In setting standards, it is essential to take account of multiple issues associated with teaching that are conceived in teachers' greater involvement and cooperation. These standards are comprehensive and precise enough to be clearly used for the evaluation process. Staff members should participate in designing the performance appraisal system.

Tin: The involvement of practitioners (including teachers) and collaboration in designing performance standards with the aim of creating comprehensive approach to teacher quality measures is crucial.

Phyu: Considering the ability to achieve standards is vital in the planning stage of PA with the aim of effective implementation. Performance appraisal standards should be designed to align with the Myanmar context. Next, they should be observable and measurable indicators.

Nu: Major areas such as lesson preparation, instruction, professional ethics and professional development should be included in PA standards. In the 21st century, I recognize the fact that the demands on teacher educators are becoming more complex and their responsibilities also become broadened. Some examples are working and planning in teams; research projects, management and shared leadership; partnerships; and participation in professional development activities.

Evaluation instrument

With regard to the evaluation instrument, several aspects were mentioned. Teacher educators indicated that procedure and methods of appraisal should be aligned with the institutional objectives. Various feedback from different sources will increase reliability and achieve mutual goals of appraiser and appraisee:

Aung: Self-appraisal, peer appraisal, evaluation teams, student feedback can explore different perspectives on performance and also make meaningful contributions to PA. Evaluation teams need reliable persons with the aim of promoting trust between appraiser and appraisee.

Toe: Performance appraisal approaches include teachers' perspectives of their own achievements and challenges, assessment of teaching against selected criteria such as professional standards. Formative and summative appraisal can evaluate the effectiveness of teaching and student learning. In other ways, portfolio (including lesson plans and teaching materials, student work, reflection sheets), surveys can meet the need for accuracy and fairness of the PA.

Phyu: Modern methods such as balance score card, confidential report, behavioral observation scale can be used with the aim of enhancing teacher professional development.

Nu: Effective leadership can have an impact on the evaluation process, especially on conducting evaluating procedures including different approaches.

It was found that trust, fair and accurate ratings, effective leadership are key to get motivated to perform at high level in individual capacity and increase organizational performance.

Implementation

Several aspects were mentioned by the participants for the emerging theme of implementation of performance appraisal. Two important aspects in this category are trust and commitment to performing meaningful appraisals.

Kyaw: Recognizing and reward can motivate teacher educators that can affect future performance as everybody wants recognition and reward. As a result, it can increase commitment without neglecting duties.

Myo: A positive and significant relationship between organizational commitment and performance appraisal is crucial for getting the most benefits of performance evaluation. Furthermore, enthusiasm from top management also has an impact on the implementation stage.

Nu: In Performance appraisal systems, evaluators need to take two incompatible roles—judge (evaluator) and helper (developer). Appraisers should maintain good relations with appraisees. Trust is crucial not only in solving the appraiser-appraisee conflict but also avoiding inconsistent, unreliable, and invalid evaluations.

To conclude, some teacher educators consider that the most important issue is commitment in the performance appraisal process so that teacher educators are more determined and more proactive in their work.

Discussion

When the interviewees were asked about the purposes of performance appraisal, many interviewees could provide different perspectives such as controlling, managing, motivating, development, accountability, and awareness. The overall agreement amongst participants is that performance appraisal can help produce competent teacher educators who are competent in various aspects of teaching in order to achieve favorable outcomes. This satisfies student teachers, institutes, families, and society alike. This conclusion was consistent with Muchinsky's (2012) argument that performance appraisal is useful for establishing training needs and connecting goals and outcomes that will lead to worker progress. Moreover, performance appraisal should be planned for two main reasons: to facilitate teachers' professional development and to stimulate instructional improvement. One motivation is a way of explaining and confirming existing procedure by giving feedback about classroom practice. A second one is to gain information to some extent in order to bring about innovation and change. Performance appraisal and innovation are therefore closely related concepts. This resonates with OECD review (2013) on international perspectives on evaluation and assessment in education stating that the balance between developmental and accountability functions of the appraisal process is crucial for the overall design.

Regarding the purposes of PA in Myanmar, a more complex view emerged. Most notably, performance appraisal can encourage collaborative group engagement, support positive organizational change, build strong professional learning community and strengthen individual efficacy beliefs. This is also in line with OECD's (2013) approach stating that teacher evaluation contributes to creating a knowledge-rich teaching profession in which teachers develop a research role alongside their teaching role, with teachers engaging more actively with new knowledge, and benefiting from support structures to generate improvement.

When talking about setting standards of performance appraisal, it was found that a fair and reliable performance appraisal needs reference standards to evaluate teachers relatively to various aspects, such as “good” teaching. Teaching competences and responsibilities must be significantly considered in setting standards regarding what teachers should know and be able to do in the teaching profession. The interview results revealed that the acceptability of performance criteria is a main feature in evaluating performance. This finding was consistent with the argument of Yinger and Hendricks-Lee (2000) in that setting teaching standards is important as it is a kind of consensus on a shared knowledge base for practice that can bring quality assurance. Mohammadi (2021) also described the same idea in that selecting criteria is important for comparing the information obtained from the teachers' educational activities with those criteria.

Regarding the evaluation instrument, it is essential to combine different ways to produce a meaningful teacher evaluation model. Many interviewees described that a range of instruments such as self-appraisal, classroom observation and a teacher portfolio can help gather multiple sources of evidence about teacher practice. Various feedback from different sources will increase reliability and achieve mutual goals of appraiser and appraisee. This conclusion based on the study findings is consistent with research by Danielson (2013), which stated that an effective teacher evaluation system needs to be comprised of clear and public decisions about what is acceptable performance, techniques and procedures that are capable of assessing all aspects of teaching to make fair and consistent judgments. Moreover, it is in accord with the statement that teachers have specific needs for feedback, and therefore evaluation procedures need to be designed to meet those needs (OECD, 2009). It cannot be denied that effective leadership, cost-effectiveness, and practical feasibility are important issues in choosing an adequate procedure for a specific objective.

Another important aspect to performance appraisal is implementation and continuous improvement. The findings in this study lead to the conclusion that a development plan is crucial in making an effective use of evaluation results. This is in agreement with Goldring et al. (2009), who stated that a development plan including what teachers could do better in order to improve teaching and learning in their schools is useful and meaningful. It is also consistent with Buhrman's (2015) belief that monitoring assessment results can provide a faculty with a strong position to maintain their role in university governance. Another interesting aspect that emerged was that the implementation stage necessarily takes time and requires a substantial commitment from both educational authorities and the main actors involved in performance appraisal. Considerable time is needed for explanation of appraisal, and consensus building among stakeholders about the standards and indicators providing resources.

As regards the role of academic staff involvement in developing performance appraisal design, the findings indicate that the involvement of teacher educators should be encouraged. This result is consistent with the guidance of OECD (2013), in as much as involving teachers in the development of teacher appraisal is essential to the effectiveness of any appraisal system.

National Education Strategic Plan 2016–21 notes that current systems for teacher recruitment, promotion and deployment are inequitable and inefficient (Ministry of Education, 2016). There are no benchmarks for teacher performance, and promotion is based on years of experience. That is why it is difficult to employ qualified teachers to achieve the educational vision of creating productive human capital to face the challenges of the knowledge age. Stronger teacher policies related to teacher quality assurance and management are essential as effective and efficient evaluative measures or instruments can improve the quality of teacher educators.

International research shows that teacher evaluation can enhance teachers' professional development and reflective practice (Avalos, 2011; DeMonte, 2013; Gulamhussein, 2013). Teacher evaluation as a quality improvement tool is strongly encouraged to ensure motivated and qualified teachers. The provision of evaluative tools, guidelines and research to support teaching quality can upgrade teachers' knowledge and skills (Alfred & Nafukho, 2010). It is also important to support teachers as researchers for innovation, knowledge creation and dissemination. Importantly, it is necessary to develop a national teacher evaluation framework based on research, international experiences and inputs from stakeholders. A well-built evaluation system should help teachers identify strengths and weaknesses, omissions, and errors, and thus able to improve their practice and generate a higher quality teaching practice. With this regard, effective leadership, trust, clear and equitable systems are essential, and these will lead to successful appraisal.

Conclusion

The current qualitative study was designed to explore influencing circumstances in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal with particular attention to purposes and content. The analysis suggests that (i) purposes, (ii) setting standards, (iii) evaluation instruments, and (iv) implementation are salient in designing, supervising and managing assessment procedures. Another important result of the investigation shows that academic staff involvement in developing performance appraisal design is crucial to create a basic performance appraisal framework with specific criteria and indicators.

It also emerged in the findings how leadership, delegation of authority, staff involvement and trust can help design a comprehensive framework for teacher educators' performance appraisal. This aligns with many international studies, specifically stating that involving teachers in the development of teacher appraisal is essential to the effectiveness of any appraisal system (OECD, 2013). Apart from answering the research questions, another purpose of this pilot study was to prepare and test my interview questions for a larger scale study, which was also fulfilled, as the instrument proved to be suitable for eliciting rich data pertinent to the focus of my investigation.

One of the limitations of this study is that it cannot offer a complete picture that captures the complexity of the general need to develop PA for teacher educators in the Myanmar context. Nevertheless, the results have offered some preliminary insights into crucial issues in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal and can help us better understand how PA for teacher educators can be developed aligned with the institutional objectives of teacher education institutions in Myanmar. Based on the results of the study, further research should be conducted to gain deeper insight into teacher educators' performance appraisal in Myanmar in order to be able to develop a handbook of a Teacher Performance Appraisal System with a view to improving teacher educators' performance.

Funding

The research is funded by the Stipendium Hungaricum scholarship programme.

Acknowledgement

I would first like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Keczer Gabriella, whose advice and feedback were invaluable in revising this article. I would like to acknowledge the participants from Myanmar for their willing involvement and cooperation with precious experiences.

References

  • Alfred, M. V. , & Nafukho, F. M. (2010). International and comparative adult and continuing education. In C. E. Kasworm , A. D. Rose , & J. M. Ross-Gordon (Eds.), Handbook of adult and continuing education (pp. 93-102). Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Aliasghar, A. , Kiyani, G. , & Shayestehfar, P. (2016). Teacher educators’ evaluation model. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 210220. http://doi.org/10.12691/education-4-2-10.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Arvey, R. D. , & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 141168.

  • Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 1020. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Berkley (2013). Maintain a roadmap for new systems of evaluation. Andrews University Press.

  • Briscoe, J. P. , & Hall, D. T. (1999). Grooming and picking leaders using competency frameworks: Do they work? An alternative approach and new guidelines for practice. Elsevier Science, 28(2), 3752.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Buhrman, W. D. (2015). The crucial role of assessment in faculty governance. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 19(1), 8089.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cadwell, C. M. (1995). Powerful performance appraisals: That grow your employees, your profits, and your business. Book-mart Press.

  • Cardno, C. E. , & Piggot-Irvine, E. (1997). Effective performance appraisal integrating accountability and development in staff appraisal. Longman.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded theory. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 81110). Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.

  • Danielson, C. (2013). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument. The Danielson Group.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Reshaping teaching policy, preparation, and practice: Influences of the national board for professional teaching standards. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Creating a comprehensive system for evaluating and supporting effective teaching. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Davis, D. R. , Ellett, C. D. , & Annunziata, J. (2002). Teacher evaluation, leadership and learning organizations. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16(4), 287301.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • DeMonte, J. (2013). High-quality professional development for teachers: Supporting teacher training to improve student learning. Center for American Progress.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Devanna, M. A. , Fombrun, C. J. , & Tichy, N. M. (1984). The human resource management audit. In C. J. Fombrun , N. M. Tichy , & M. A. Devanna (Eds.), Strategic human resource management (pp. 235248). Wiley.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dilts, D. A. , Haber, L. J. , Haber, L. J. , & Bialik, D. (1994). Assessing what professors do: An introduction to academic performance appraisal in higher education (No. 61). Greenwood Publishing Group.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Faragó, L. (2011). School-level HRM and student achievement. In T. Baráth , & M. Szabó (Eds.), Does leadership matter? Implications for leadership development and the school as a learning organization (pp. 204219). HUNSEM, University of Szeged.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fetterman, D. M. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Sage.

  • Fletcher, C. (2008). Appraisal, Feedback and development: Managing performance review at work. Routledge.

  • Goldring, E. , Cravens, X. C. , Murphy, J. , Porter, A. C. , Elliott, S. N. , & Carson, B. (2009). The evaluation of principals: What and how do states and urban districts assess leadership? Elementary School Journal, 110(1), 1939.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology, 29(2), 7591.

  • Gudo, C. O. , Olel, M. A. , & Oanda, I. O. (2011). University expansion in Kenya and issues of quality education: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(20), 203214.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gulamhussein, A. (2013). Teaching the teachers: Effective professional development in the era of high stakes accountability. National School Board Association, Center for Public Education.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hounsell, D. (2009). Evaluating courses and teaching. In H. Fry , S. Ketteridge , & S. Marshall (Eds.), A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice (pp. 198211). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Htang, L. K. (2018). Measurement of teacher sense of efficacy: A study with Myanmar in-service teachers. Journal of Education and Practice, 9(35), 3948.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Keczer, G. (2008). Performance assessment in higher education. Gazdálkodás, 51(19), 183191.

  • Marshall, K. (2005). It’s time to rethink teacher supervision and evaluation. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 727735.

  • Ministry of Education (MOE) (2016). National education strategic plan 2016–21. The Government of Republic of the Union of Myanmar.

  • Mohammadi, M. (2021). Dimensions of teacher performance evaluation by students in higher education. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(2), 1825.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Morse, J. M. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin , & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 220235). Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Muchinsky, P. M. (2012). Psychology applied to work (10th ed.). Hypergraphic Press.

  • Mullins, L. J. (1996). Management and organizational behavior. Pitman Publishing.

  • Murphy, K. R. (2020). Performance evaluation will not die, but it should. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 1331. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12259.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, K. R. , & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational and goal-oriented perspectives. Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • OECD (2009). Teacher evaluation. A conceptual framework and examples of country practices. OECD Publishing.

  • OECD (2013). Synergies for better learning: An international perspective on evaluation and assessment. OECD Publishing.

  • Oktay, J. S. (2012). Grounded theory. Oxford University Press.

  • Oldroyd, D. (2005). Human resources for learning. In M. Coleman , & P. Earley (Eds.), Leadership and management in education (pp. 187207). Oxford University Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Porter, L. W. , & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. R. D. Irwin.

  • Pushpanadham, K. (2020). Teacher education in global era: Retrospect and prospect. In Teacher education in the global era (pp. 311). Springer.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press.

  • Rostvall, A. , & West, T. (2003). Analysis of interaction and learning in instrumental teaching. Music Education Research, 5(3), 213226.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schleicher, A. (2011). Building a high-quality teaching profession. OECD Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1787/9789264113046-en.

  • Seyfried, M. , & Ansmann, M. (2018). Unfreezing higher education institutions? Understanding the introduction of quality management in teaching and learning in Germany. High Education, 75, 10611076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0185-2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, D. (1995). Job satisfaction, productivity, and organizational commitment. The result of leadership. Journal of Nursing Administration, 25(9), 1726.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Holt Rinehart and Winston.

  • Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences. Sage.

  • Storey, J. (1989). New perspectives on human resource management. Routledge.

  • Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n1.4.

  • UNESCO (2020). Strengthening pre-service teacher education in Myanmar review report, 2020. https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/strengthening-pre-service-teacher-education-myanmar-stem-project-%E2%80%93-mid-term-evaluation.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vidya, R. , & Ambrose, S. (2017). Comprehensive 360-degree appraisal: Management educational institutions. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 14(1), 8797.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitford, M. (2013). Performance appraisal in primary schools: Managing the integration of accountability and development. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Unitec Institute of Technology.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Williams, R. S. (1998). Performance management: Perspectives on employee performance. International Thomson Business Press.

  • Willis, J. W. , Jost, M. , & Nilakanta, R. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Sage.

  • Yinger, R. J. , & Hendricks-Lee, M. S. (2000). The language of standards and teacher education reform. Educational Policy, 14(1), 94106.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Appendix

Interview Questions

  1. When did you start working in your organization?

  2. Which year did you start working in your position?

  3. How would you describe good performance in your job?

  4. How could it be evaluated?

  5. What do you think the purposes of teacher educators' performance appraisal are?

  6. Do you think that there should be a performance appraisal system for teacher educators in Myanmar? Why?

  7. What are the important issues in developing performance appraisal for teacher educators in Myanmar Universities of Education?

  8. How can the reliability of evaluating the performance of teacher educators be increased?

  9. To what extent does the involvement of staff in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal impact the comprehensive performance appraisal design?

  10. In what way does academic staff involvement in developing teacher educators' performance appraisal affect the appraisal design?

  • Alfred, M. V. , & Nafukho, F. M. (2010). International and comparative adult and continuing education. In C. E. Kasworm , A. D. Rose , & J. M. Ross-Gordon (Eds.), Handbook of adult and continuing education (pp. 93-102). Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Aliasghar, A. , Kiyani, G. , & Shayestehfar, P. (2016). Teacher educators’ evaluation model. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 210220. http://doi.org/10.12691/education-4-2-10.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Arvey, R. D. , & Murphy, K. R. (1998). Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 141168.

  • Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 1020. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Berkley (2013). Maintain a roadmap for new systems of evaluation. Andrews University Press.

  • Briscoe, J. P. , & Hall, D. T. (1999). Grooming and picking leaders using competency frameworks: Do they work? An alternative approach and new guidelines for practice. Elsevier Science, 28(2), 3752.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Buhrman, W. D. (2015). The crucial role of assessment in faculty governance. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 19(1), 8089.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cadwell, C. M. (1995). Powerful performance appraisals: That grow your employees, your profits, and your business. Book-mart Press.

  • Cardno, C. E. , & Piggot-Irvine, E. (1997). Effective performance appraisal integrating accountability and development in staff appraisal. Longman.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded theory. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 81110). Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.

  • Danielson, C. (2013). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument. The Danielson Group.

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Reshaping teaching policy, preparation, and practice: Influences of the national board for professional teaching standards. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Creating a comprehensive system for evaluating and supporting effective teaching. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Davis, D. R. , Ellett, C. D. , & Annunziata, J. (2002). Teacher evaluation, leadership and learning organizations. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16(4), 287301.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • DeMonte, J. (2013). High-quality professional development for teachers: Supporting teacher training to improve student learning. Center for American Progress.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Devanna, M. A. , Fombrun, C. J. , & Tichy, N. M. (1984). The human resource management audit. In C. J. Fombrun , N. M. Tichy , & M. A. Devanna (Eds.), Strategic human resource management (pp. 235248). Wiley.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dilts, D. A. , Haber, L. J. , Haber, L. J. , & Bialik, D. (1994). Assessing what professors do: An introduction to academic performance appraisal in higher education (No. 61). Greenwood Publishing Group.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Faragó, L. (2011). School-level HRM and student achievement. In T. Baráth , & M. Szabó (Eds.), Does leadership matter? Implications for leadership development and the school as a learning organization (pp. 204219). HUNSEM, University of Szeged.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fetterman, D. M. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step. Sage.

  • Fletcher, C. (2008). Appraisal, Feedback and development: Managing performance review at work. Routledge.

  • Goldring, E. , Cravens, X. C. , Murphy, J. , Porter, A. C. , Elliott, S. N. , & Carson, B. (2009). The evaluation of principals: What and how do states and urban districts assess leadership? Elementary School Journal, 110(1), 1939.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology, 29(2), 7591.

  • Gudo, C. O. , Olel, M. A. , & Oanda, I. O. (2011). University expansion in Kenya and issues of quality education: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(20), 203214.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gulamhussein, A. (2013). Teaching the teachers: Effective professional development in the era of high stakes accountability. National School Board Association, Center for Public Education.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hounsell, D. (2009). Evaluating courses and teaching. In H. Fry , S. Ketteridge , & S. Marshall (Eds.), A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice (pp. 198211). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Htang, L. K. (2018). Measurement of teacher sense of efficacy: A study with Myanmar in-service teachers. Journal of Education and Practice, 9(35), 3948.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Keczer, G. (2008). Performance assessment in higher education. Gazdálkodás, 51(19), 183191.

  • Marshall, K. (2005). It’s time to rethink teacher supervision and evaluation. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 727735.

  • Ministry of Education (MOE) (2016). National education strategic plan 2016–21. The Government of Republic of the Union of Myanmar.

  • Mohammadi, M. (2021). Dimensions of teacher performance evaluation by students in higher education. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(2), 1825.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Morse, J. M. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin , & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 220235). Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Muchinsky, P. M. (2012). Psychology applied to work (10th ed.). Hypergraphic Press.

  • Mullins, L. J. (1996). Management and organizational behavior. Pitman Publishing.

  • Murphy, K. R. (2020). Performance evaluation will not die, but it should. Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 1331. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12259.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, K. R. , & Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational and goal-oriented perspectives. Sage.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • OECD (2009). Teacher evaluation. A conceptual framework and examples of country practices. OECD Publishing.

  • OECD (2013). Synergies for better learning: An international perspective on evaluation and assessment. OECD Publishing.

  • Oktay, J. S. (2012). Grounded theory. Oxford University Press.

  • Oldroyd, D. (2005). Human resources for learning. In M. Coleman , & P. Earley (Eds.), Leadership and management in education (pp. 187207). Oxford University Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Porter, L. W. , & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and performance. R. D. Irwin.

  • Pushpanadham, K. (2020). Teacher education in global era: Retrospect and prospect. In Teacher education in the global era (pp. 311). Springer.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press.

  • Rostvall, A. , & West, T. (2003). Analysis of interaction and learning in instrumental teaching. Music Education Research, 5(3), 213226.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schleicher, A. (2011). Building a high-quality teaching profession. OECD Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1787/9789264113046-en.

  • Seyfried, M. , & Ansmann, M. (2018). Unfreezing higher education institutions? Understanding the introduction of quality management in teaching and learning in Germany. High Education, 75, 10611076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0185-2.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, D. (1995). Job satisfaction, productivity, and organizational commitment. The result of leadership. Journal of Nursing Administration, 25(9), 1726.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Holt Rinehart and Winston.

  • Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences. Sage.

  • Storey, J. (1989). New perspectives on human resource management. Routledge.

  • Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n1.4.

  • UNESCO (2020). Strengthening pre-service teacher education in Myanmar review report, 2020. https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/strengthening-pre-service-teacher-education-myanmar-stem-project-%E2%80%93-mid-term-evaluation.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vidya, R. , & Ambrose, S. (2017). Comprehensive 360-degree appraisal: Management educational institutions. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 14(1), 8797.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitford, M. (2013). Performance appraisal in primary schools: Managing the integration of accountability and development. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Unitec Institute of Technology.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Williams, R. S. (1998). Performance management: Perspectives on employee performance. International Thomson Business Press.

  • Willis, J. W. , Jost, M. , & Nilakanta, R. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Sage.

  • Yinger, R. J. , & Hendricks-Lee, M. S. (2000). The language of standards and teacher education reform. Educational Policy, 14(1), 94106.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Collapse
  • Expand
  • Top

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE

 

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Helga DORNER

Associate Editors 

  • Csíkos, Csaba (Eötvös Lorand University, Hungary)
  • Csizér, Kata (Eötvös Lorand University, Hungary)
  • Dorner, Helga (Central European University, Hungary)

 

Editorial Board

  • Basseches, Michael (Suffolk University, USA)
  • Billett, Stephen (Griffith University, Australia)
  • Cakmakci, Gültekin (Hacettepe University, Turkey)
  • Damsa, Crina (University of Oslo,Norway)
  • Dörnyei, Zoltán (Nottingham University, UK)
  • Endedijk, Maaike (University of Twente, The Netherlands)
  • Fejes, Andreas (Linköping University, Sweden)
  • Guimaraes, Paula (University of Lisbon, Portugal)
  • Halász, Gábor (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Hansman, Catherine A. (Cleveland State University, USA)
  • Kroeber, Edith (Stuttgart University, Germany)
  • Kumar, Swapna (University of Florida, USA)
  • MacDonald, Ronald (University of Prince Edward Island, Canada)
  • Marsick, Victoria J. (Columbia University, USA)
  • Martensson, Katarina (Lund University, Sweden)
  • Matei, Liviu (Central European University, Hungary)
  • Matyja, Malgorzata (Wroclaw University of Economics, Poland)
  • Mercer, Sarah (University of Graz, Austria)
  • Nichols, Gill (University of Surrey, UK)
  • Nokkala, Terhi (University of Jyvaskyla, Finland)
  • Ostrouch-Kaminska (Uniwersytet Warminsko-Mazurski, Poland)
  • Pusztai, Gabriella (University of Debrecen, Hungary)
  • Ramesal, Ana (Barcelona University, Spain)
  • Reischmann, Jost (Bamberg University, Germany)
  • Rösken-Winter, Bettina (Humboldt, Germany)
  • Ryan, Stephen (Waseda University, Japan)
  • Török, Erika (Pallasz Athéné University, Hungary)
  • Wach-Kakolewicz, Anna (Poznan University of Economics and Business, Poland)
  • Watkins, Karen E. (University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia)

 

 

 

Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation
Editorial Office
Eötvös Loránd University
Faculty of Education and Psychology
Institute of Research on Adult Education and Knowledge Management
Address: 1075 Budapest, Kazinczy u. 23-27. HUNGARY

E-mail: jalki@ppk.elte.hu

2020  
CrossRef Documents 0
CrossRef
Cites
8
CrossRef H-index 4
Days from submission to acceptance 130
Days from acceptance to publication 222

 

2019  
WoS
Cites
4
CrossRef
Documents
14

 

Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation
Publication Model Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge none
Subscription Information Gold Open Access

Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
2016
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
2
Founder Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem
Founder's
Address
H-1053 Budapest, Hungary Egyetem tér 1-3.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2631-1348 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Feb 2022 0 0 0
Mar 2022 0 0 0
Apr 2022 0 0 0
May 2022 0 0 0
Jun 2022 0 0 0
Jul 2022 0 105 44
Aug 2022 0 30 19