• Journal of Science Education
• /
• v.47 no.1
• /
• pp.75-87
• /
• 2023

This study analyzed correlation among peer evaluation, self-evaluation, and instructor evaluation of argumentation writing conducted in the 'Biology logic and essay' class. To this end, 14 pre-service biology teachers wrote argumentation four times, and peer evaluation, self-evaluation, and instructor evaluation were conducted on these results. The peer evaluation for argumentation writing averaged 2.70 points, the self-evaluation average was 2.68 points, and the instructor evaluation average was 2.71. Looking at the average of each sub-evaluation area, scientific knowledge was the highest in peer evaluation, and the composition area was the highest in self-evaluation. In addition, the area of scientific knowledge was the highest in the instructor evaluation. As a result of examining the standard deviation, the standard deviation of self-evaluation was the largest. As a result of analyzing the correlation between evaluation types, there was a high correlation between peer evaluation and instructor evaluation, and there was a moderate correlation between self-evaluation and instructor evaluation. On the other hand, there was no significant correlation between peer evaluation and self-evaluation. As a result of analyzing the correlation by evaluation area, there was no significant correlation between peer evaluation and self-evaluation in all four areas of scientific knowledge, scientific argumentation, composition, and expression. On the other hand, in the analysis between peer evaluation and instructor evaluation, there was a significant correlation in the areas of scientific knowledge, scientific argumentation, and composition. In addition, there was a significant correlation between self-evaluation and instructor evaluation only in the area of expression. The results of this study show that peer evaluation is highly likely to be applied in the 'Subject logic and essay' class. It also suggests that it is necessary to subdivide evaluation criteria according to the type of evaluation in order to use peer evaluation and self-evaluation.

• Archives of design research
• /
• v.9
• /
• pp.801-810
• /
• 1994

Design Problems are often both multidimensional and highly interactive. Very rarely does any part of a designed thing serve only one purpose. The activity of designing is thus a goal-directed activity and normally a goal-directed problem-solving activity. This means, problem solving is finding a way to get from some initial situation to a desired goal. Designers are transforming agents within a society whose goals are to improve the human condition through physical metamorphosis. Many theorist have agreed that designing involves problem solving or decision making. Accordingly evaluation plays an essential role in design activity. The evaluation factors include all attributes that have levels specified by quantitative and qualitative objectives Alternatives in multi-objective decision prOblems generally possess numerous attributes by which they can be described and compared. The evaluation factors include all attributes that have levels specified by quantitative and qualitative objectives. However since qualitative factors are difficult to quantify as numeral estimates, these factors have tended to be ignored without regard for their importance to human content. We adapted the Accumulative Evaluation Model as an evaluation algorithm for IDES. Industrial Design Evaluation System (IDES) consists of 3 major modules ( 1 Design Element, 2.Matrix, 3.Evaluation). It is intended to be an aid for design evaluation. The luther thinks IDES is a new design evaluation approach which could provide effective rating of design values to make value judgements. It is an attempt to provide industrial designers with access to design evaluation. The author's aim is to produce an Object-Oriented Evaluation System which can guide the designers and decision makers under complex design projects. It uses\ulcorner an Object-Oriented Programming for this prototype, Because of managing complexity (Flexibility and Reusability) and improving productivity(Extensibility & Maintainability and Programming by User) in software development process. The author has chose the C++ because it is a hybrid, rather than pure Object-Oriented Language.

• Journal of Korea Society of Digital Industry and Information Management
• /
• v.6 no.3
• /
• pp.191-201
• /
• 2010

The Korean central government has been investing a lot of efforts to promote performance of local governments. For example, the Ministry of Public Administration and Security (MOPAS) supported the local governments to develop and provide with a 'balanced score card' and a 'customer satisfaction innovation. ' Many other central ministries also conducted individual evaluations for local governments in their substantive policy areas. These evaluation systems of 78 appraisals for local governments conducted by the MOPAS and other ministries had made the local governments to work harder. However, most local governments have appealed their 'reform fatigue' caused by the overlapping evaluation systems. In this context, the MOPAS initiated merging the evaluations into a co-evaluation system under the new Government Performance Evaluation Act of 2006. In this process of introduction of new evaluation system, there are two significant movements. Firstly, as Korean Government has strong information technology, MOPAS has developed 'Virtual Policy Studio (VPS)' which evaluates the performance of each local government with on line. In other words, in the co-evaluation system for local government performance most evaluation steps are implemented by computer and Internet. So most stakeholder can access and work on the VPS in real time when they want to. And the other thing is that cooperation among stakeholders has been occurred in the co-evaluation system. Furthurmore the cooperative governance is systemized and sustain for a long time because MOPAS made IT based co-evaluation system. Therefore this paper intends to illustrate the process of introduction of VPS, main process of co-evaluation system based on VPS and analyze collaborative governance of the co-evaluation system.

• Journal of Engineering Education Research
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.21-29
• /
• 2021

The objective of this research is to devise a BARS evaluation system as a performance evaluation plan for non-face-to-face capstone design and to verify the validity through the expert FGI as the remote education is highlighted as a new normal standard in the post corona epoch. The conclusion of this research is as follows. First, the non-face-to-face capstone design is a competency centered subject that allows you to develop the engineering and majoring knowledge and its function and attitude, and the achievement of program outcome is the objective competency, and the researcher proposes the BARS method evaluation, one of competency evaluation method, as a new performance evaluation plan. Second, for the evaluation of PO achievement of non-face-to-face capstone design, the researcher deduced 20 behavior identification standard(anchor) of BARS evaluation system, and developed the achievement standard per 4 levels. Third, as the evaluation tool of non-face-to-face capstone design, the presentation data(PPT), presentation video, product such as trial product(model), non-face-to-face class participation video, discussion participating video, team activity report, and result report for the evidential data of BARS evaluation were appeared as proper. Finally, the BARS evaluation plan of non-face-to-face capstone design would be efficiently made through the establishment of evaluation plan, the establishment of grading standard of BARS evaluation scale, the determination of evaluation subject and online BARS evaluation site.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.309-333
• /
• 2022

A survey was conducted to analyze the perceptions related to research performance evaluation from 2,618 professors. The survey is to find out the perception about two parts. One is a survey of professors' perceptions about the faculty performance evaluation, which is currently being conducted at each university. The other is that we analyzed the perception of the introduction of qualitative performance evaluation indicators, an alternative to the quantitative performance evaluation. As a result, we confirmed followings. Quantitative research performance evaluation is carried out in most universities. Research performance evaluation is not appropriate for a department or research field. And an extension of the evaluation period is required. Quantitative evaluation have a negative impact on the academic community. Quantitative evaluation needs to be improved. As regard to the introduction of the qualitative evaluation, we confirmed that professors perceived that qualitative evaluation is necessary to evaluate research performance, and they also have negative opinions about introduction of qualitative evaluation.

• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.181-195
• /
• 1999

This study was done to develope a computer program for the evaluation of quality of nurisng care. Because the professional nursing care should be evaluated consistantly, computer program for the measurement of quality of nursing care is necessary for the effective and efficient management of nursing quality. In this study, a computer program for gastrointestinal surgery patients was developed as a module. Visual basic 4.0 was used as a basic program for the development of this program, and Access 7.0 was used for the data base construction of the program. The systems of evaluation criteria were hierarchical. and the titles of the hierarchical criteria were evaluation area-evaluation item-indicator. Each evaluation area contained several items and each evaluation item contained several indicators. The numbers of the evaluation criteria for gastrointestinal surgery patients were 7 evaluation areas, 32 evaluation items. and 71 indicators. Content validity of the evaluation criteria(in this case, 32 evaluation items) was .95. Scoring could be possible with the evaluation items. For the scoring types of this program were two. norm-referenced type(option 1) and criterion-referenced type(option 2), the user can choose the type according to the purpose of the evaluation. With this computer program. accurate and consistant evaluation of the quality of nursing care could be expected. Also. by the rapid feedback to nursing care practice. quality of nursing practice could be improved rapidly. and the systems of the evaluation criteria developed in this study could be used for the development of other moduls for various kinds of patient groups. Because this computer program was developed only for the purpose of research, it is necessary to be refined commercially to be used in real nursing situation.

• The Journal of Society for e-Business Studies
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.67-83
• /
• 2005

Common Criteria(CC) was announced in June, 1999 in order to solve a problem which be happened by applying a different evaluation criteria among nations. Currently, a official version is v2.2 and v3.0 is a draft version. Because an evaluation demand is increased in the inside and outside of the country, an evaluation market growth is expected. Also, It needs methodology and work automation and project management for evaluation. In this paper, we propose A CC based Security Evaluation Management System(CC-SEMS) that is managing evaluation resources(deliverables , evaluation criteria, evaluators) and is useful in evaluation environment efficiently. CC-SEMS is to have integrated project management, workflow management, process management and is composed of deliverables, Evaluation Activity Program(EAP), Management Object(MO), Evaluation Database(EDB), Evaluation Workflow Engine(EWE).

• The Journal of Economics, Marketing and Management
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.57-68
• /
• 2023

Purpose: This study aims to improve the evaluation system for selecting supportive housing applicants, addressing inconsistency, lack of health and care evaluation, and the need for a quantitative evaluation tool. Proposed improvements include a consistent evaluation index and items for each resident type, selecting suitable residents for independent living and community integration. Research design, data and methodology: This study analyzed the supportive housing selection checklist provided by the Seoul Metropolitan Government, the supportive housing ordinance, and the SH Corporation's operation guidelines. Results: Study finds current supportive housing tenant selection system lacks consistency and proposes improvements. The same terms should be used for the same evaluation items, health and care evaluation items should be added for all tenants, and a quantitative evaluation tool should be used. Consistent evaluation index and items should be created for each resident type in the same evaluation area. The aim is to select suitable tenants with potential for independent living and community integration. Conclusions: This study improves the evaluation system for selecting supportive housing applicants by addressing inconsistencies and adding essential evaluation items related to health and care. While the study is significant, future research should focus on developing quantitative evaluation tools for all detailed items.

• Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.589-601
• /
• 2005

Student evaluation of university teaching is a common tool for measuring the educational contribution of a professor and improving the quality of classes. There, however, exist external factors in the beyond of control of a instructor, which affect the result of Student's rating to prevent practical use of evaluation for administrative purpose. This paper investigates the factors that spoil the validity and the reliability of student evaluation and proposes a method to control the effect by the statistical analysis of evaluation data of Jeonju University for two years.

• Proceedings of the PSK Conference
• /
• 2001.10a
• /
• pp.285.1-285.1
• /
• 2001