Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
10.55041/IJSREM34411
Volume:
8 |
5 |
May 2024
Pages:
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
This research suggests an smart online feedback system for examining teacher feedback in educational setting. To evaluate faculty performance based on a set of criteria and offer the required academic intervention program rooted in the creation of an all-encompassing faculty development program, the suggested system gathers all the pertinent information from the feedback, which is now an essential component of the educational system. Compared to the current feedback method, which asks students to rate teachers according to predetermined criteria, the suggested smart online feedback system (SOFS) is more adaptable and flexible. SOFS evaluates instructors’ strengths and shortcomings in all areas that matter to pupils. Students, instructors, and the staff in charge of administering and processing the feedback system will all gain from the study’s outcome. Through the anonymous use of an online platform called SOFS, students can evaluate their professors’ performance using a predetermined set of evaluation criteria and questions. Higher-ups at the institute may also utilise this information to assemble faculty groups that are suitable for certain teaching and administrative responsibilities. With the help of a mobile device, the assessor conducts a paperless evaluation of the teacher under the proposed Online Faculty Monitoring and Evaluation System. Because the software evaluation results satisfied the researcher’s goals, they should be developed further. The generated study was very helpful and may be a great help to the institution, according to the general means of the system evaluation. The faculty members’ improved usage was a result of their evaluations.
KEYWORDS
Publication Date
12/31/45432
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
0
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...