Teacher Dimensions in Technical Higher Education – A Student Perspective

Authors

  • Gabriel-Mugurel Dragomir Politehnica University Timisoara
  • Liliana-Lumini?a Todorescu Department of Teaching Training, Politehnica University of Timisoara, Timişoara, Romania
  • Anca Greculescu Lecturer, The Faculty of Engineering in Foreign Languages, Politehnica University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/118

Keywords:

teacher, teacher-student relationship, education, teacher dimensions

Abstract

The current paper is based on a survey conducted on 321 engineering students studying at University Politehnica of Bucharest and University Politehnica of Timişoara. The research aims at outlining the profile of the teacher in technical higher education as depicted by engineering students. The study surveyed students‟ opinions regarding the teacher-student relationship, teacher‟s role as an evaluator, professional expertise, education in general, personality traits, teachers‟ roles and managerial skills. The results of the study highlight the importance of the student-teacher relationship, the teacher‟s roles as evaluator and examiner and his/her professional expertise. Teachers‟ personality traits, managerial skills and roles seem to be less important to students. Moreover, the t test data show significant statistical differences between the real and ideal teacher in technical higher education from a student perspective. Nevertheless, students and society as a whole have different perceptions of teachers. Regarding the dimensions of the teacher in technical higher education, based on the statistics, on a 1 to 5 scale, the results show similarities of the two models. For instance, students rank first intelligence and last elitism and competitiveness as teacher attributes. Furthermore, the present study also demonstrates that universities comply with the system proposed by Marlene and Lee Canter that allows teachers to apply positive support for students.

Author Biographies

Liliana-Lumini?a Todorescu, Department of Teaching Training, Politehnica University of Timisoara, Timişoara, Romania

Lecturer, Department of Teaching Training, Politehnica University of Timisoara, Timişoara, Romania

Anca Greculescu, Lecturer, The Faculty of Engineering in Foreign Languages, Politehnica University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

Lecturer, The Faculty of Engineering in Foreign Languages, Politehnica University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

References

Arnon, S., & Reichel, N. (2007). Who is the ideal teacher? Am I? Similarity and difference in perception of students of education regarding the qualities of a good teacher and of their own qualities as teachers. Teachers and Teaching, 13(5), 441-464. Doi:10.1080/13540600701561653.

Calvo, R., Markauskaite, L., & Trigwell, K. (2010). Factors Affecting Students‟ Experiences and Satisfaction about Teaching Quality in Engineering. Australasian. Journal of Engineering Education, 16(2), 139–148. Doi:10.1080/22054952.2010.11464049.

Cress, C.M. (2008). Creating inclusive learning communities: the role of studentfaculty relationships in mitigating negative campus climate. Learning Inquiry, 2(2), 95–111. doi:10.1007/s11519-008-0028-2.

Dobransky, N. D., & Frymier, A. B. (2004). Developing teacher-student relationships through out of class communication. Communication Quarterly, 52(3), 211–223. doi:10.1080/01463370409370193.

Docan-Morgan, T. (2011). ,,Everything Changed”: Relational Turning Point Events in College Teacher–Student Relationships from Teachers‟ Perspectives.” Communication Education, 60(1), 20–50. doi:10.1080/03634523.2010.497223.

Douna, P., Kyridis A., Zagkos, C., Ziontaki, Z., & Pandis, P. (2015). The Ideal University Teacher according to the Views of Greek Students. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(2). doi:10.5430/ijhe.v4n2p145.

Gavreliuc, A. (2002). O călătorie alături de ,,celălalt”. Timişoara: Editura Universităţii de Vest.

Groves, M., Sellars, C., Smith, J., & Barber, A. (2015). Factors Affecting Student Engagement: A Case Study Examining Two Cohorts of Students Attending a Post-1992 University in The United Kingdom. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(2), 27–37. doi:10.5430/ijhe.v4n2p27.

Haamer, A., Lepp, L., & Reva, E. (2012). The Dynamics of Professional Identity of University Teachers: Reflecting on the Ideal University Teacher. Studies for the Learning Society, 2(2-3), 110-120. doi:10.2478/v10240-012-0010-5.

Hagenauer, G., & Volet, S. (2014). I Don‟t Think I Could, You Know, Just Teach without Any Emotion‟: Exploring the Nature and Origin of University Teachers‟ Emotions. Research Papers in Education, 29(2), 240–262. doi:10.1080/02671522.2012.754929.

Harley, K., Barasa, F., Bertram, C., Mattson, E., & Pillay, S. (2000). The real and the ideal: teacher roles and competences in South African policy and practice. International Journal of Educational Development, 20(4), 287-304. doi:10.1016/S0738-0593(99)00079-6

Karpouza, E., & Emvalotis, A. (2018). Exploring the teacher-student relationship in graduate education: a constructivist grounded theory. Teaching in higher education, 1470-1294. doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1468319.

Komarraju, M., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010). Role of Student–Faculty Interactions in Developing College Students‟ Academic Self-Concept, Motivation, and Achievement. Journal of College Student Development, 51(3), 332–342. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0137.

Kusto, A. R., Afful, S. E., & Mattingly, B. A. (2010). Students‟ Perceptions of and Preferences for Professors. The New School Psychology Bulletin, 8(1), 47-55.

Kyridis, A., Dinas, K., Vlachaiti, V., Ioannitou, E., & Lambropoulou, V. (2002). Undergraduate students describe the ideal university teacher. Contemporary Education, 122, 78-87.

Kyridis, A., Avramidou, M., Zagkos, C., Christodoulou, A., & Pavli-Korre, M. (2014). Who is the ideal teacher? Greek pre-service teachers express their views about the characteristics of the―perfect teacher. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 5(2), 143 – 159. Retrieved from http://www.ugr.es/~jett/index.php.

Jinga, I., & Istrate, E. (1998). Manual de Pedagogie. Bucureşti: All. Leondari, Α., & Kyridis, A. (1999). Who is the good teacher? Let the students describe him. Nea Paedia, 92, 159-181.

Manna, G., & Traicoff, E. M. (1976). Evaluation of an Ideal University Teacher. Improving College and University Teaching, 24(2), 98-101. doi:10.1080/00193089.1976.9927308.

Manyu, L., & Stone, H. N. (2018). A Social Network Analysis of the Impact of a Teacher and Student Community on Academic Motivation in a Science Classroom. Societies, 8(3), 68. doi:10.3390/soc8030068.

Nartgüna, Ş., & Sezghin, Ö. R. (2015). Investigating pedagogical formation students‟ opinions about ideal teacher, teaching profession, curriculum, responsibility, public personnel selection examination (ppse) and employment: A metaphor study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2674 – 2683. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.951.

Nurul, A. O., Sri Ridhwanah, M., Nur, H. A., Chung, A.W., Ivanova, V., Mohd, M. M. N., Ummi, K., Syahirah, S., Masitah, S., & Lawrence, M. (2014). The Ideal Psychology Teacher: Qualitative Analysis of Views from Brunei GCE ALevel Students and Trainee Psychology Teachers. Asian Social Science, 10(12), 184-194. doi:10.5539/ass.v10n12p184.

Rusu, C., Şoitu, L., & Panaite, O. (2011). The ideal teacher. Theoretical and investigative. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 1017 – 1021. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.276.

Schwartz, H. L., & Holloway, E. L. (2012). Partners in Learning: A Grounded Theory Study of Relational Practice between Master‟s Students and Professors. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 20(1), 115–135. doi:10.1080/13611267.2012.655454.

Stan, E. (2006). Managementul clasei. Bucureşti: Aramis.

Sterling, S. (2010). Learning for resilience, or the resilient learner? Towards a necessary reconciliation in a paradigm of sustainable education. Environmental Education Research, 16(5–6), 511–528. doi:10.1080/13504622.2010.505427.

Surdu, E. (1999). Fenomenul educational: teoria educatiei, teoria curriculumului, teoria instruirii, teoria evaluarii. Timişoara: Mirton.

Umbach, P. D., & Warwrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty Do Matter: The Role of College Faculty in Student Learning and Engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 153–184. doi:10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1.

Vianden, J. (2015). What Matters in College to Students: Critical Incidents in the Undergraduate Experience. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 52(3), 287–299. doi:10.1080/19496591.2015.1067226.

Voicu, O., & Ciolan, L. (2008). Opiniile şi percepţiile profesorilor. Raport de cercetare al proiectului ,,Şcoala aşa cum este”. Proiect UNICEF. Centrul Educaţia 2000+.

Watts, J., & Robertson N. (2011). Burnout in University Teaching Staff: A Systematic Literature Review. Educational Research, 53(1), 33–50. doi:10.1080/00131881.2011.552235.

Woods, C. (2010). Employee Wellbeing in the Higher Education Workplace: A Role for Emotion Scholarship. Higher Education, 60(2), 171–185. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9293-y.

Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Beyond Hard Outcomes: „Soft‟ Outcomes and Engagement as Student Success. Teaching In Higher Education, 5(6), 661–673. doi:10.1080/13562517.2010.522084.

Downloads

Published

2019-06-03

How to Cite

Dragomir, G.-M., Todorescu, L.-L., & Greculescu, A. (2019). Teacher Dimensions in Technical Higher Education – A Student Perspective. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 11(2), 72-93. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/118

Publish your work at the Scientific Publishing House LUMEN

It easy with us: publish now your work, novel, research, proceeding at Lumen Scientific Publishing House

Send your manuscript right now