Academic literature on the topic 'Lecturers Performance'

Higher Education is an educational institution that plays a role in producing quality human resources. The roles, duties and responsibilities of lecturers are very important in educating the nation's life and national goals. There are many problems that cause the performance of lecturers at universities in Indonesia. Meanwhile, lecturers are required to give good performance. In this case, the researcher is interested in evaluating the performance of lecturers using the promethee method. The promethee method is able to produce decisions based on comparisons between alternatives according to the preference function and the different weights of each criterion. The criteria used in the assessment of lecturer performance are 10 criteria with 7 alternative lecturers. The Promethee method produces recommendations for lecturers with the best performance, namely Lecturer E who has a net flow value of 0.12153. While the lecturer with the lowest performance assessment is Lecturer B with a net flow value of -0.19167. The results of the decisions given by the promethee method can help provide an assessment of the lecturer's performance from the several alternatives given. So as to be able to produce an objective recommendation decision

This research is motivated by the phenomenon related to PAI lecturer performance that is not optimal yet. The government has issued policies to improve the quality of lecturers as an effort to improve the quality of education through the improvement of welfare. However, conditions in the field show that some lecturers who have received the professional allowance have not shown any significant performance improvement. Some lecturers who have very good competence sometimes not followed by high performance, this is reflected from the results of the lecturer's performance.The purpose of this research are: (1) to know the level of competence and performance of lecturers of PAI in Padang city (2) to analyze efforts to improve the performance of PAI lecturers in Padang city (3) to find the level of competence influence on PAI lecturer performance in Padang city.This research is a quantitative type with survey method and correlational approach. The population is PAI lecturers at state universities in the city of Padang totaling 30 people. The sampling technique is total sampling. Data collection techniques used were the dissemination of questionnaires, documentation and literature study. While the data analysis technique used is the normality test Kolmogorof Smirnov method. Test validity using Product Moment Pearson correlation formula. Test reliability using Alpha Cronbach and processing analysis using SPSS version 15.The research findings are: (1) the actual condition of PAI lecturer competence in public universities in Padang city is generally quite good (TCR = 3,93 / 5,00 or = 76,98%) whereas actual condition of teaching performance of lecturer PAI lecturers at state universities in Padang city were in good condition (TCR = 3.81 / 5.00 or = 69.64 %). (2) The efforts to improve the performance of PAI lecturers according to the authors include: Planning the development of lecturer's performance, organizing lecturer performance assessment, conducting lecturer performance assessment with sustainability, supervising the performance of lecturers as well as following up the results of lecturer performance assessment. (3) there is a significant positive correlation between lecturer competence and lecturer performance of 22,3 %, meaning competence contribute to lecturer performance.Suggested to the lecturers of PAI to improve the competence to produce performance as expected. The various parties who have responsibility to improve the performance of lecturers are expected to give attention to the increased competence of PAI lecturers in order to give a significant influence in order to improve the quality of national education.

Lecturer is the importance essence of the educational activities primarily related to teaching and learning activities. Without the role of the lecturer, the teachinglearning process will be disrupted even fail. Therefore, in education management, performance or achievements of lecturer’s work should be improved consideringthe challenges of education nowadays is to produce human resources quality that capable is of competing in the era of globalization. In subsequent developments, many opinions said that the performance of lecturer will be very much influencedby attitude and behavior, which include employ discipline, job satisfaction, and work motivation. The above description encourages the writer to conduct a research whether the employ discipline, job satisfaction dan work motivation really affect the performance of lecturers at Darma Cendika Surabaya CatholicUniversity. The research objects to be retrieved is the population of permanent lecturers of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University. There are 32 lecturers. Analysis technique used is multiple regression. From the research results obtained that the performance of lecturers of Darma Cendika SurabayaCatholic University is influenced by three independent variables namely employ discipline variable (X1), job satisfaction variable(X2), and work motivation variable (X3). The value of the adjusted coefficient of determination of 87.9%, means that 87.9% of performance of lecturers of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University influenced the employ discipline variable (X1), jobsatisfaction variable (X2), and work motivation variable (X3), while the remaining balance of 12.1% influenced by other factors is not examined by the author. These three independent variables, namely employ discipline (X1), job satisfaction (X2), and work motivation (X3) affect the performance of lecturers are partially or simultaneously. As a result, the variable of work motivation(X3) is the most dominant variable, which affects significantly the performance of lecturers of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University. The results showed that the performance of lectures of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University are good and very good. On the variable of employ discipline (X1), it should benoticed that the work given to the lecturers of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University should in accordance with ability. On the job satisfaction variable (X2), which need to be considered is the satisfaction of a job as a lecture of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University. It has elements of satisfied or proud being a lecturer of Darma Cendika Surabaya Catholic University. On workmotivation variable (X3), the physiological needs (physiological), such as food, drink, shelter, rest and wants to get a job that provides adequate wages is the main point. In the variable of lecturer’s performance (Y), what is need to be paid attention is lecturer’s research for each year.

<p><em>Lecturer’s performance is the actual behavior that displayed by each lecturer as the work achievement which produced based on the role. One way to measure the performance of lecturers through the assessment of student’s perception on the performance of lecturers in conducting lectures. By using Bayesian estimation, parameter test is used to estimate the lecturer's performance appraisal model to see how big the influence of each competence on lecturer's performance. Structural equality matrix: pedagogic competence, professional competence, personality competence, and social competence are represented in the equation </em> . <em>The results showed that the four competencies had a positive influence on lecturer performance, with the greatest influence given by pedagogic competence, followed by professional competence, personality competence, and social competence.</em><em></em></p><p> </p><p>Kinerja dosen merupakan perilaku nyata yang ditampilkan setiap dosen sebagai prestasi kerja yang dihasilkan sesuai dengan peranannya. Salah satu cara untuk mengukur kinerja dosen melalui penilaian persepsional mahasiswa terhadap kinerja dosen dalam melaksanakan perkuliahan. Dengan menggunakan estimasi Bayesian dilakukan pengujian parameter untuk mengestimasi model penilaian kinerja dosen untuk melihat seberapa besar pengaruh masing-masing kompetensi terhadap kinerja dosen. Matriks persamaan struktural: kompetensi pedagogik, kompetensi professional, kompetensi kepribadian, dan kompetensi sosial diwakili persamaan . Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa keempat kompetensi memberikan pengaruh yang positif terhadap kinerja dosen, dengan pengaruh terbesar diberikan oleh kompetensi pedagogik, dilanjutkan dengan kompetensi professional, kompetensi kepribadian, dan kompetensi social.</p>

Abstract Assessing the progress of lectures ensures the involvement of lectures in the exercise of science dissemination by research, education, and community service. That job affects the performance of lecturers at universities throughout the country. The performance of lecturers is evaluated regularly because of the vast number of evaluation attributes. Manual assessment can take time and cannot be carried out. In the evaluation of lecturer’s outcomes, a decision support model is needed to facilitate decision making. This study applies the preference ranking organization method for enrichment assessment (PROMETHEE) as a decision model in Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) and Geometric Analysis for Interactive Aid (GAIA) as a geometric analysis in determining lecturer performance. This analysis resulted in the maximal value of an alternative of 2 with Phi 0.2333, followed by 1 and 3 alternatives. These results suggest that alternative 2 is the best way to assess the performance of lecturers as the main indicator. Alternative 3 is the least recommendable alternative because of its lowest precision on the basis of visualization results.

Lecturers are one of the main actors in universities. Lecturer performance can affect the quality of a college. Because the quality of higher education is strongly influenced by the lecturers, the performance of the lecturers needs to be assessed. Lecturer performance can be assessed by evaluating the lecturer's performance in teaching. Lecturer performance can be evaluated by classifying student assessments of lecturers. Lecturers are assessed based on how the lecturer mastered the material, the lecturer's discipline in teaching, and the presentation of the material. The process of grouping lecturer scores can be done using the K-Means algorithm. K-Means is a popular clustering algorithm that performs well. K-Means requires a parameter that is K or the number of clusters. The importance of the number of clusters so that there is a need for optimization in determining the number of K. In this study, optimization was carried out using the Elbow method so as to produce the ideal number of groups of 4 groups. The results of the clustering evaluation calculated using the SSE were 54.4% which showed that the results were not optimal. The results of the cluster evaluation are not optimal due to the lack of data for the K-Means application.

The objective of this research is to descripe lecturer’s motivation in work which is assessed by teaching and learning process. Lecturer’s motivation consists of intrinsic and extrinsic encouragement. Intrinsic encouragement is more directed at nonfinancial aspects (worship, pleasure). While extrinsic motivation is more directed at financial aspects (position). This research use qualitative approach with the number of respondents as much four lecturers of Management Department of Universitas Islam Indonesia. Sample is selected by purposive sampling. The sample is determined based on criteria determined by researcher. The results of this research indicate that the lecturers have different motivations in carrying out their profession. The motivation of a lecturer is more towards non-financial aspects, a job that is liked, work as a worship, work as a career and work as a pleasure that grows out of compulsion. This research also found evidence that financial will not always provide encouragement for someone. Motivation is very important because it is closely to the performance of the lecturer. Lecturers who have high motivation will exert their thoughts and energy to carry out their duties and responsibilities professionally. In other word, the lecturers’s motivation is able to encourage their performance.Keywords: Motivation, Lecturer, Performance

Lecturers play a very significant role in education. Managing their performance can give good impacts to the quality of teaching processes and outcomes. There are actually many approaches to manage their performance. One of the approaches worth considering is students’ feedback combined with the marketing concept of ‘customer satisfaction’ since students can be considered customers. The concept of student satisfaction is too broad. It ranges from facilities to lecturers. This paper focuses only on managing the lecturer’s performance based on student satisfaction towards what normally a lecturer has done in teaching and learning. The data is collected from the questionnaire provided for the students. The research is expected to map the weakness and strength areas of the lecturer in four classifications: first, what the lecturer should improve because the lecturer’s performance perceived by the students is in the low level and the students’ expectation is in the high level; second, what the lecturer should maintain or keep going because the lecturer’s performance and the students’ expectation at the same time are in the high level; third, what the lecturer should maintain but think about the weighting of it because the lecturer’s performance is in the low level and the students’ expectation is also in the low level; fourth, what the lecturer should reduce the emphasis if possible because the lecturer’s performance is in the high level and the students’ expectation is in the low level. The result shows that with the four classifications the lecturer’s performance can be managed well. Consequently, the lecturer can do the planned evaluation action to improve the performance accordingly in measurable and manageable way.

This study aims to develop lecturer performance appraisal model using web-based Integrated Evaluation Model (IEM). The object of this study is certified lecturers in Indonesia, by applying this model, the certification compensation given by the government is really used to enhance lecturer's performance. It is expected that the results of this study can be an important research that produces effective and efficient software to evaluate the lecturers' performance nationally because it involves a 360degree assessment. We have done some activities to develop the prototype software application of Integrated Evaluation Model (IEM) for assessing the certified lecturer's performance. They are 1) preparing the questionnaire indicator for the 360 degree performance appraisal, 2) conduct the program test on the certified lecturer. In this phase, certified lecturers, superior, and students also conduct assessment on certified lecturers through IEM software, 3) conduct Focus Group Discussion (FGD) to gain evaluation and feedback on the effectiveness of the IEM application program. FGD results provide a valuable contribution to the preparation of IEM program design. And the IEM software produced in this research has accommodated all of the results of FGD activities. IEM complements the prior certified lecturer performance appraisal with 360 degrees performance appraisal.

This research is motivated by several problems related to the not-yet optimal implementation of the performance assessment of tri dharma lecturers and work behavior on the ISB Atma Luhur campus. The importance of this research is because the tri dharma lecturer performance appraisal system and work behavior are useful for study program accreditation and university accreditation. The purpose of this study is to make lecturers responsible for the tri dharma and work behavior. The method used in this study is the ANFIS logic method. The results of this study are in the form of a lecturer's report card or a lecturer's performance assessment for one semester issued by SPMI. The variables used are education and teaching 40%, research 20%, dedication 10%, and work behavior 30%. The main result is the report card for each lecturer. The main finding from the lecturers' report cards, a decision can be made for SPMI to reprimand lecturers whose lecturers report cards to fall into the category of "BAD" lecturer performance. The average teaching value obtained is 3,624 plus the research value is 2,920 plus the service value is 2,800 plus work behavior, the value is 2,908. Lecturer performance value = 0.4 teaching plus 0.2 research plus 0.1 community service plus 0.3 work behavior. Equals 1.450 plus 0.584 plus 0.280 plus 0.872 equals 3.186. So the performance value of this lecturer is included in the category of "GOOD" lecturer performance.

Published Article<br>Quality assurance at higher education institutions involves more than a mere establishment of bodies (CHE, HEQ) to oversee the process. Without a selfdriven approach towards quality assurance, institutions will hardly get the cooperation and/or motivation to implement it successfully. Institutions need to establish mechanisms and procedures to self-assess their effectiveness on a continuous basis where the emphasis falls more on accountability at all levels (academic and professional staff, students and management) than on improvement. Quality assurance mechanisms and procedures should be designed to serve a positive purpose in furthering the interest of the university, its staff and its students in their teaching and learning.

The aim of this project was to explore whether voice care and development, prior to qualification, could mitigate potential vocal attrition in newly qualified teachers/lecturers within their first year of teaching. A specific focus of the research was to see if any causative relationship could be seen to exist between vocal change, specifically change in vocal quality, and the exigencies of the teaching role. Vocal quality in this instance is defined as the way in which individual voices demonstrate discrete features of pitch, resonance, degree of breathiness and clarity of the note. The sum of these features is perceived as voice/vocal quality. The study sought to gain a deeper knowledge of the vocal demands of the teaching role with a particular focus on the experiences of newly qualified teachers and lecturers. It was hoped, that information gained as a result of the study, would add to the current canon of knowledge regarding the vocal demands on teachers as a feature of their professional role. As a result of the study a number of important elements were identified, some of which go beyond the original focus of the research but arise from data gathered doing it. A number of recommendations are made which, it is hoped, will inform future working practice and increase vocal health within the teaching profession.

This study focuses on the composition of guidelines for the effective assessment of lecturers - hence the emphasis is on the principle that assessment may be regarded as indispensable for professional development and for making a meaningful contribution towards ensuring quality in the context of the National Qualification framework. To this end a literature study was firstly undertaken regarding the nature of and criteria for effective assessment. The literature indicated that a variety of changes took place in South Africa since 1994, amongst others in the area of education, training and development. There have been numerous debates about this on stages and in political council halls, schools, colleges, technikons, universities, the press and the general workplace. Often the debates also centred on the low levels of competence and performance of workers in South Africa. Sometimes even the abilities, competence and performance levels of graduates and diplomandi have been questioned. In the context of these doubts people started investigating the role played by higher education, and more specifically lecturers, in ensuring that competent human resources leave the higher education environment for the professional world. As a result the purposeful assessment of lecturers has been identified as imperative. Furthermore, certain important factors that may influence the nature of and criteria for assessment, are discussed in this study. These include, amongst others, issues such as the education and training system, outcomes-based education and training, competence, knowledge escalation, the assessment of competence arid performance, the professional development of the lecturer, the concept assessment, the relation between assessment and ensuring quality, Bloom's taxonomy, different assessment instruments, the management of quality and the appointment of lecturers. The assessment of lecturers is viewed from a development-oriented perspective, where the focus is on continuous assessment that may be beneficial for individual, professional and organisational development. It is shown that a variety of qualitative and quantitative assessment instruments may be optimalised during formative as well as summative assessment, with which the training, needs, abilities, skills, competencies, capacity and performance of lecturers may be determined. The assessment of lecturers is regarded as a contributing factor in delivering and ensuring quality. It is also shown that the process should be undertaken in a managerial manner in order to continuously promote quality. Thereupon a discussion of assessment practices follows. In this discussion the focus is on the roles of lecturers in government-supported higher education institutions. The discussion is guided by the context which is determined by the implementation of the principles of the National Qualification Framework. A number of actors are identified who are directly or indirectly involved in the assessment of lecturers' competencies, outputs and performance in the higher education environment. It is also indicated that the implementation of the National Qualification Framework is guided by a number of legislations of which government-supported higher education institutions must give account in the performing of their tasks and functions. From literature it is clear that countries like the United Kingdom, the USA, Australia and New Zealand use assessment practices to ensure quality in the higher education environment. The role of the lecturer in that process is highlighted, and it is indicated that the assessment of the lecturer is indirectly addressed in the process. An empirical study was performed to establish, in the first instance, whether lecturers have been subjected to effective and appropriate training regarding the implementation of the National Qualification Framework. The second objective of the empirical study was to identify the implications of the assessment of lecturers attached to government-subsidised or public higher education institutions for all stakeholders. It is found in this study that a distinction should be made between the competence and performance assessment of lecturers. In addition it is indicated that the competence certification of lecturers must be regarded as imperative in order to facilitate performance-oriented functioning in the higher education environment. It is also found that lecturers must to a large extent cope with the process of giving account of all the new legislations and resulting expectations - sometimes under great pressure and amidst uncertainty and insufficient competence levels because of inadequate training, assessment and feedback. As a result lecturers do not experience the implementation of the National Qualification Framework as effective. In order to accommodate the changed and changing environment of the higher education sector, a conceptual model is composed to serve as a guide for the assessment of lecturers. In this model it is indicated that systems being developed for the assessment of lecturers should make provision for and account for a variety of factors, such as quality, primary and secondary actors, legislation, and the abilities, skills, competencies, capacity and performance levels of lecturers, assessment instruments, proactive, reactive, formative, summative, qualitative and quantitative assessment interventions. The synchronization and purposeful structuring of these factors may make a contribution towards creating a context which is beneficial to the professional development of the lecturer and consequently to performance in the higher education system.<br>Thesis (Ph.D. (Education))--Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education, 2003

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Oregon, 2007.<br>Typescript. Includes vita and abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 189-198). Also available for download via the World Wide Web; free to University of Oregon users.

Le but de cette thèse est de proposer des méthodes pour pouvoir évaluer les performances durant la lecture sur support électronique, afin de pouvoir comparer plusieurs dispositifs d’affichage. Des tests permettant d’effectuer des mesures de performances de manière répétée ont été construits pour chacune des dimensions classiques de la lecture électronique : visibilité (test de caractérisation psychométrique), lisibilité (identification de lettres, décision lexicale, vitesse de lecture de phrases générées automatiquement) et compréhension (mesure de la mémorisation et des inférences pendant la lecture de textes générés automatiquement). Au-delà de ces dimensions classiques, nous avons réalisé deux études pour examiner le lien entre la lecture sur support électronique et la posture des utilisateurs. La première montre qu’une posture pouvant être engendrée par l’utilisation de tablette (inclinaison latérale de tête) n’affecte pas la performance de lecture. La seconde étude posturale montre l’effet de la difficulté d’un texte sur la distance à l’écran pendant l’utilisation d’une liseuse électronique ; les sujets se rapprochent de l’écran lorsque leur niveau d’attention augmente. L’ensemble des tests développés et une mesure de posture ont été regroupés dans une batterie de tests visant à quantifier la performance de lecture associée à un support donné ; l’indicateur résultant étant appelé « Quotient de Lecture Electronique ». Cet indicateur a été calculé pour un écran d’ordinateur, un vidéoprojecteur et une tablette. Les résultats expérimentaux montrent que les tests permettent de comparer les supports, notamment en termes de visibilité et de lisibilité<br>The aim of this thesis is to offer methods of evaluating performance during digital reading, in order to be able to compare different display devices. Tests were developed allowing repeated measurements for classic measures of digital reading: visibility (psychometric characterization), readability (letter identification, lexical decision, reading speed on automatically generated sentences) and comprehension (memorization and inference measurement while reading automatically generated texts). Beyond these classic dimensions, we also conducted two studies in order to examine the link between digital reading and the posture adopted by the device users. The first revealed that a tablet-use-related posture (lateral head tilt) does not affect reading performance. The second postural study demonstrated the effect of text difficulty on eye-screen distance during the use of an e-reader. Subjects approached the screen as their attentional level increased. The constructed tests and a postural measure were aggregated into a battery of tests permitting the evaluation of reading performance associated with a device. The resulting indicator is called the “Digital Reading Quotient”. This indicator has been computed for a computer screen, a projector and a tablet. The experimental results show that these tests can be used in order to compare different devices, especially in terms of visibility and readability

In recent years, the lecture performance has emerged as an important format in Contemporary performance practice. Lecture performances incorporate elements of both the academic lecture and of artistic performance. They function simultaneously as meta-lectures and as meta-performances, and as such challenge established ideas about the production of knowledge and meaning in each of the forms to which they refer. The thesis includes detailed case studies of works by Chris Burden, Wagner-Feigl-Forschung, Jerome Bel, Rabih Mroue, Andrea Fraser, Xavier Le Roy, geheimagentur, Joseph Beuys, Hannah Hurtzig and Joshua Sofaer. As a hybrid format, the lecture performance always participates in more than one context. The thesis approaches the lecture performance by analysing its participation in these different contexts: contexts of lecturing – both in the university and outside of established sites of knowledge production – and contexts of performing – which include the contexts of both contemporary artistic performance and of performance history. The scope is then extended to include an analysis of further contexts that the lecture performance both establishes and participates in: contexts of making and watching performance – here, the thesis investigates the relation between artists and spectators established in lecture performances and the processes of recontextualisation that occur between live performance, documentation, and the rearticulation of documentation in a live event; contexts of addressing and instituting – here, the thesis explores how lecture performances negotiate their situation towards different institutional contexts, and how they aim to establish different kinds of publics through various ways of addressing their audiences; and finally, contexts of assembling and disseminating – here, the thesis examines how lecture performances and related forms engage with a discursive context that transcends the frame of the singular event. Finally, all of these contexts are revisited in relation to the lecture performance 'Would Joseph Beuys have used PowerPoint®' which is included on a DVD.

<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG /> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves /> <w:TrackFormatting /> <w:PunctuationKerning /> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas /> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF /> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-ZA</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables /> <w:SnapToGridInCell /> <w:WrapTextWithPunct /> <w:UseAsianBreakRules /> <w:DontGrowAutofit /> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark /> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning /> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents /> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps /> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math" /> <m:brkBin m:val="before" /> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45<br>-" /> <m:smallFrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispDef /> <m:lMargin m:val="0" /> <m:rMargin m:val="0" /> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup" /> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440" /> <m:intLim m:val="subSup" /> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr" /> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true" DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="267"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography" /> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading" /> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"<br>mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0<br>mso-tstyle-colband-size:0<br>mso-style-noshow:yes<br>mso-style-priority:99<br>mso-style-parent:""<br>mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt<br>mso-para-margin-top:0cm<br>mso-para-margin-right:0cm<br>mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt<br>mso-para-margin-left:0cm<br>line-height:115%<br>mso-pagination:widow-orphan<br>font-size:11.0pt<br>font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"<br>mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri<br>mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin<br>mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri<br>mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin<br>mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"<br>mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi<br>mso-fareast-language:EN-US<br>} </style> <![endif]--></p> <p class="MsoNormal">This study supports the need for information literacy training for first year or new incoming Community and Health Science (CHS) students at the University of the Western Cape (UWC) and describes the use of a collaborative framework for integrating information literacy into the undergraduate studentsʹ curriculum and for assessing the results. The Collaborative Information Literacy Model (CILM) provided the guidelines for a more structured and fuller collaboration between the librarian and the lecturer responsible for the first year Physiotherapy students. The collaborative partnership employed strategies to teach information literacy competencies which were significantly more satisfactory with the studentsʹ abilities to successfully complete a research term paper. The process of integration began with developing learning outcomes, an information literacy program, exercises and an assessment instrument for evaluating student performance. Also emphasized is the on-going exchange of expertise between the librarian and the lecturer to enhance library-related components in the design of the program.</p>

AbstractLecturers’ academic positions, university accreditation ratings, and lecturers’ education levels that are not yet optimal indicate that lecturers’ performance is still not optimal. The government’s efforts by providing scholarships, training, and grants are a form of empowering lecturers. In addition, there are research inconsistencies, which assume that knowledge sharing can improve lecturer performance is a concern, so the authors develop psychological empowerment variables as a form of renewal. The study aims to analyze the effect of psychological empowerment on relationship knowledge sharing on lecturer performance. This research method used descriptive verification with scale range analysis and path analysis. The population of this research was all lecturers at the University of Buana Perjuangan Karawang, with a sample of 119 respondents. The results of this study reveal that the Knowledge sharing variable is in the high category, the two psychological empowerment variables are in a good category, and the performance of lecturers is in a good category. While the verification analysis shows that there is a positive and significant influence of the knowledge sharing variable on psychological empowerment. The effect of the psychological empowerment variable on the performance of lecturers shows a positive and significant impact. The influence of the knowledge sharing variable on the performance of lecturers through psychological empowerment shows a positive and significant impact.

AbstractPeer review is endemic to judgement in higher education. It is assumed that when we need to make a judgement on the quality of something—student performance, academic employment, teaching, research and publication—then we may rely on the assessment of peers, whether they be fellow students, lecturers or more senior academics. This chapter will illustrate and challenge this assumption, and assess how ‘fit for purpose’ peer review is in twenty-first century academe. It will focus on different practices of peer review in the contemporary higher education system, it will also question how well they work, how they might be improved and what the alternatives are. The examples to be discussed include refereed journal articles, the assessment of doctoral degrees and the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF).

AbstractThe aim of this paper is to provide an insight into hybrid online teaching and flipped learning during COVID-19 pandemic in Libya in pursuit of improving Libyan university students’ knowledge and skills as an alternative instrument to continue their studies. However, this brought about some challenges, for both lecturers and students, while teaching undergraduate courses using hybrid blended online lecturing in the context of flipped learning in different subjects and university programs. Using questionnaires and focused group data analyses helped the authors to discover the opportunities ahead to promote further development of online teaching and flipped learning in Libya. The result proved the need for information and communication technology (ICT) skills for students and staff members, considering the hybrid blended online teaching and flipped learning experience and involvement. This was achieved according to four indicators: students’ learning experience, students’ academic performance, students’ final achievements and educators’ observations. In conclusion, the study proposes a new online teaching model, called Learn, Believe and Achieve. More studies are still needed to help improving this new teaching methodology in Libya.

Job satisfaction achieved by lecturers can affect all aspects of productivity, from performance to the quality of services provided in the academic community. This study focuses on analyzing the effect of job satisfaction on service quality with the performance of lecturers as mediators. This study uses an explanatory research method involving 140 respondents from lecturers who teach at state universities. Respondents were chosen by the simple random technique to fill in the questionnaire instrument with the same. The data analysis technique used was Structural equation modeling-partial least squares (SEM-PLS) with the help of Smart PLS 3. The results showed that job satisfaction had a significant direct effect on lecturer performance. However, it does not have a significant direct effect on the quality of lecturer services. On the other hand, the performance of lecturers has a significant direct effect on the quality of lecturer services. In addition, the performance of lecturers also acts as a full mediator so that job satisfaction can affect the quality of lecturer services. The structural model formed also fits the empirical data so that this research can be used as a reference to improve the quality of lecturer services in state universities.

Previous research has long focussed on EMI lecturers’ English usage as an aspect which might affect lecture comprehension. Fewer studies have directly questioned EMI students about how their lecturers’ language competence affects their experiences in the classroom, and while many studies have focused on postgraduate students, less has been said about undergraduates. We aim to provide further insight into students’ views of EMI lecturer discourse by comparing the experiences of undergraduate and postgraduate students, both local and international, at an Italian university. Data for this study were collected from an online semi-structured survey of 128 students. Findings indicated that it is students’ past experience of English-taught courses as well as their familiarity with non-native English accented speech that influences students’ opinion of EMI lecturers’ language performance and their assessment of intelligibility in the classroom. The findings will serve to highlight difficulties and critical points for further development and pedagogical application.

Education research has repeatedly shown that active learning in physics is pedagogically more efficient than traditional lecture courses. Widespread application of the active learning is slowed down by the lack of data on the performance of the active learning in widely varying circumstances of different educational systems. We measured the level of understanding of basic physics concepts using Force Concept inventory for students who enrol at different universities in Latvia in calculus-based and non-calculus-based groups and compared the student performance to the pre-test results elsewhere in the world. We measured the growth of concept inventory test results and studied the dependence of the growth on the teaching approach used by university lecturers. About 450 undergraduate students from 12 groups of science and engineering courses taught by 8 lecturers were involved in the study at three universities in Latvia. The Force Concept Inventory multiple-choice test was translated to Latvian and used for pre-/post-tests. The pre-test results showed that the maximum of the distribution of correct answers for non-calculus groups is around 20%, which is the value obtained by the random guessing of test answers, whereas the pre-test results of calculus-based groups was about 50% of correct answers. The test score after taking post-test confirmed that the growth of students’ tests results is closely related to the teaching approach chosen by lecturer, showing that in order to provide physics graduates with a good conceptual understanding of physics, student centred teaching approach was crucial. The use of concept inventories in undergraduate physics education to measure the progress of learning appears to be particularly important in the current situation with a small number of students in physics and a critically small number of future physics teachers, when efficiency of teaching is of crucial importance. Keywords: STEM education quality, conceptual understanding, student-centred approach

This article relies on a large-scale field experiment in Mexico to measure the effects of two ability-grouping models (tracking and heterogeneous/bimodal groups) on student learning outcomes during middle school. Both strategies yielded an average learning gain of 0.08 of a standard deviation. We find larger and more persistent effects among initially high-achieving students and no significant effects among low achievers. Students in top tracking enjoyed multiple advantages, particularly a concentration of high-performing peers and a very homogeneous classroom, that facilitated the teacher's work and increased students' effort levels. Bimodal classes fostered greater effort levels among top students, while teachers induced less competition and allocated more time to practice and feedback activities, to the detriment of lecture time. Our results support the allocation of students to homogeneous classes to maximize performance gains among top students without hurting low achievers. Fostering inclusive learning among weaker students would require complementary investments under both models.

This document contains the proceedings of the training workshop on operations research (OR) for program managers and researchers held January 15-21, 1996, in Mindoro, Philippines. The workshop was co-sponsored by the Family Planning Service of the Department of Health and the Family Planning Operations Research and Training Program of the Population Council, Manila. Representatives from the health and population offices of ten local government units (LGUs) worked with a select group of researchers to evolve a list of relevant topics for operations research (OR) and develop a concept paper on a chosen OR topic. The LGUs represented in the workshop were selected from a group of local governments participating in the LGU Performance Program of the Department of Health. A series of lectures and paper presentations on three major modules comprised the training workshop. Workshop sessions provided program managers and researchers the opportunity to put all these new learnings into practice by working together on their concept papers. The training workshop was capped by the individual LGU presentations of concept papers to a review panel which provided its critique and comments.