Ellis L, P A L T (2013) Assessing learning and teaching strategies of a post-graduate capstone course: Students' perspective. In: Smith, S D and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D D (eds.) Proceedings of 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2013, Reading, UK.
Abstract
Quality enhancement and quality assurance are the means by which higher education institutions are monitoring to ensure the standards are maintained worldwide. The views of students are in integral component in this process: as such extensive studies have been conducted in this regard. The students' perspective, over a three year span (2010 to 2012), on the design and delivery of a post-graduate capstone course that has undergone a recent restructuring is presented in this paper. The research utilised an anonymously e-assessed questionnaire: thirteen (13) closed-ended and two (2) open-ended questions. The instrument was administered a week after the delivery of the course. The results indicate a generally significant positive reception to the learning and teaching strategies employed. However, the negative feedback also indicates the level of dissatisfaction and lack of understanding of the intentions of the course structure. The research can be used to guide others engaged in the development of capstone courses to ensure quality is achieved from the perspective of the key stakeholder - the students.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | quality; education; capstone course; e-assessment; student perception; accreditation |
| Index terms: | monitoring, questionnaire, higher education institution, strategy, quality assurance |
| Subjects: | management, educational institutions, quality assurance, data collection methods, control systems |
| Topics: | Education, Site Management, Quality Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here