Click here to download

"Trasparency" in teaching. An investigation on italian university students' perception
Author/s: Rosa Cera, Alexander Porshnev, Manuela Cantoia 
Year:  2016 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  32 Pg. 281-312 FullText PDF:  282 KB
DOI:  10.3280/RIP2016-003002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 

Transparency in the academic context is a neglected research topic as yet. Transparency is distinct from quality of teaching and concerns the extent to which students perceive learning and evaluation processes, as well as interactions with peers and teachers, as visible. The study was aimed at investigating such issues through a questionnaire which was administered to a sample of 167 undergraduates attending three faculties in two universities. A further purpose was to test weather students’ perceptions are affected by the attended faculty, the age, the level of academic achievement and the economic status of the respondents. Results showed that according to students the assumptions underlying teaching and evaluation procedures are made adequately explicit by teachers, who listen to and encourage learners and allow them to be autonomous. The level of cooperation between peers and between students and teachers is perceived as satisfactory. It appears that students are motivated by intrinsic interests and accept supplementary study charges if they are addressed to meaningful goals, even though also grades are conceived as important and negative feelings about the academic experience were reported. Students’ perception of trasparency is not affected by individual differences.
Keywords: Transparency, academic teaching, student-teacher relationship, cooperative learning, self-regulated learning, motivation

  1. Alivernini, F., & Lucidi, F. (2011). Relationship between social context, self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement , and intention to drop out of highschool: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(4), 241-252., DOI: 10.1080/00220671003728062
  2. Astin, A.W. (2003). Studying how college affects students: A personal history of the CIRP. About Campus, 8(3), 21-28., DOI: 10.1002/abc.83
  3. Bartels, J., Magun-Jackson, S., & Kemp, A.D. (2009). Volitional regulation and self-regulated learning: An examination of individual differences in approachavoidance achievement motivation. Electronic Journal of Research in Education Psychology, 7(2), 605-626.
  4. Bates, R. (2002). The impact of educational research: Alternative methodologies and conclusions. Research Papers in Education, 17(4), 1-6., DOI: 10.1080/0267152022000031379
  5. Beare, P., Torgerson, C., Marshall, J., Tracz, S., & Chiero, R. (2014). Examination for bias in principal ratings of teachers’ preparation. Teacher Educator, 49, 75-88., DOI: 10.1080/08878730.2013.2957.848005
  6. Bianchini, S. (2014). Feedback effects of teaching quality assessment: Macro and micro evidence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 380-394.
  7. , DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2013.842957.Blair,C.,Calkins,S.,&Koop,L.(2010).Handbookofpersonalityandself-regulation.Chicester:Wiley-Blackwell.DOI:10.1002/9781444318111.fmatter
  8. Boekaerts, M. (1996). Self-regulated learning at the junction of cognition and motivation. European Psychologist, 1(2), 100-112.
  9. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7, 161-187., DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00015-1
  10. Boekaerts, M. (2007). Emotion in education. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
  11. Boehm, F., & Caprio, T. (2014). Fostering Good Governance at School Level in Honduras: The Role of Transparency Bulletin Boards. Peabody Journal of Education, 89, 86-105., DOI: 10.1080/0161956X.2014.862474
  12. Burkhardt, H. (2003). Improving educational research: Toward a more useful, more influential, and better-funded enterprise. Educational Researcher, 32, 3-14., DOI: 10.3102/0013189X032009003
  13. Caprara, G.V., Vecchione, M., Alessandri, G., Gerbino, M., & Barbaranelli, C. (2011). The contribution of personality traits and self-efficacy belief to academic achievement: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 78-96., DOI: 10.1348/2044-8279.002004
  14. Caratelli, M. (2006). La trasparenza tra banche e clienti: fabbisogni informativi ed intervento pubblico. Milano: FrancoAngeli Editore.
  15. Carbone, A., Ross, B., Phelan, L., Lindsay, K., Drew, S., Stoney, S., & Cottman, C. (2015). Course evaluation matters: Improving students learning experiences with a peer-assisted teaching programme. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40, 165-180., DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2014.895894
  16. Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (1991). Applying the seven principles for good practice undergraduate education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  17. Coe, R. (2002). Finding out what works: evidence-based education. Durham: University School of Education.
  18. CREAP, Universita degli Studi di Brescia (2011). Governance e trasparenza nelle aziende di servizi di pubblica utilita. FrancoAngeli: Milano.
  19. Cui, Y., & Li, S. (2014). Principles for analyzing and communicating student ratings of teaching. Chinese Education and Society, 47, 65-69., DOI: 10.2753/CED1061-1932470306
  20. Dalsgaard, C., & Paulsen, M.F. (2009).Transparency in cooperative online education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), 55-68.
  21. Davies, P. (2004). Is evidence-based government possible? The 2004 Jerry Lee Lecture, Campbell Collaboration Colloquium, Washington DC.
  22. De Beni, R., & Moe, A. (2000). Motivazione e apprendimento. Bologna: il Mulino.
  23. Egorov, E.E., Lebedeva, T.E., Bulganina, S.V., & Vasilyeva, L.I. (2015). Some aspects of the implementation of the principle of trasparency in Russian universities: Research, experience, perspectives. International Education Studies, 8(5), 191-204., DOI: 10.5539/ies.v8n5p191.
  24. Favero, T.G. (2011). Active review sessions can advance student learning. Advances in Physiology Education, 35, 247-248., DOI: 10.1152/advan.00040.2011
  25. Freeman, R., & Dobbins, K. (2013). Are we serious about enhancing courses? Using the principles of assessment for learning to enhance course evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38, 142-151., DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2011.611589
  26. Jankowski, N.A., & Provezis, S.J. (2011). Making student learning evidence transparent: The state of the art. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment.
  27. Jaradat, M.H. (2013). The notion of adminstrative transparency among academic leaderships at Jordanian universities. Education, 134, 74-81.
  28. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (2000). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th edition), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  29. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3), 85-118.
  30. Galliani, L. (2014). 700.000 fuori corso: Universita e docenti senza alibi. Giornale Italiano della Ricerca Educativa, 13, 9-11.
  31. Hagenauer, G., & Volet, S.E. (2014). Teacher-student relationship at university: An important yet under-researched field. Oxford Review of Education, 40, 370-388., DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2014.921613
  32. Hammersley, M. (1997). Educational research and teaching: A response to David Hargreaves. British Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 141-162., DOI: 10.1080/0141192970230203
  33. Hammersley, M. (2001). Some questions about evidence-based practice in Education. Paper presented annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, University of Leeds, England.
  34. Hammersley, M. (2007). Methodological paradigms in educational research. London: TLRP.
  35. Hart, H., Healey, K., & Sporte, S.E. (2014). Measuring up. Phi Delta Kappan, 95, 62-66., DOI: 10.1177/003172171409500814
  36. Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Lloydia Cincinnati, 1-17.
  37. Hemsley, B., & Sharp, C. (2003). The use of research to improve professional practice: A systematic review of the literature. Oxford Review of Education, 29(4), 449-70.
  38. Herrmann, K.J. (2013). The impact of cooperative learning on student engagement: Results from an Intervention. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14, 175-187., DOI: 10.1177/146987413498035
  39. Hulleman, C.S., Durik, A.M., Schweigert, S.B., & Harackiewicz, J.M. (2008). Task value, achievement goals, and interest: An integrative analysis. Journal and Educational Psychology, 100, 398-416., DOI: 10.1037/0022
  40. 0663.100.2.398. Hunt, S.M., & McKenna, S.P. (1986). Measuring health status. London: Croom Helm.
  41. Hussain, A. (2013). Canonical correlational models of students’ perceptions of assessment tasks, motivational orientations, and learning strategies. International Journal of Instruction, 6(1), 21-38.
  42. Kellogg Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good (2002, May). Educating for the public good: Implications for faculty, students, administrators and community. Oxnard, CA: A Report from the National Leadership Dialogue Series and Scott London.
  43. Kim, Y.G. (2007). Region building in Korea through cross-border higher education: The case of Handong Global University. Paper presented at OuECD/IMHE International Conference, Valencia, Spain.
  44. Krzykowski, L.M. (2012). Transparency in higher educational student learning Assessment as seen through accreditation. ProQuest LLC, Ph.D. Dissertation, State University of New York at Albany.
  45. Inozu, J. (2011). The role of non-classroom faculty in student learning outcomes in higher education context. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(3), 292-302.
  46. Joet, G., Usher, E.L., & Bressoux, P. (2011). Sources of self-efficacy: An investigation of elementary school in France. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 649-663., DOI: 10.1037/a0024048
  47. Jungert, T., & Rosander, M. (2010). Self-efficacy and strategies to influence the study environment. Theaching in Higher Education, 15, 647-659., DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2010.522080
  48. Lang, J.M. (2007). Classroom transparency. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(31), pC2.
  49. Lawley, J.J., Moore, J., & Smajic, A. (2014). Effective communication between preservice and cooperating teachers. New Educator, 10, 153-162., DOI: 10.1080/1547688X.2014.898495
  50. Levinas, E. (2010). Totalita e infinito. Saggio sull’esteriorita. Milano: Jaca Book.
  51. Malott, K.M., Hall, K.H., Sheely-Moore, A., Krell, M.M., & Cardaciotto, L. (2014). Evidence-based teaching in higher education: Application to counselor education. Counselor Education and Supervision, 53, 294-305., DOI: 10.1002/J.1556-6978.2014.00064.x
  52. McGinley, J.J., & Jones, B.D. (2014). A brief instructional intervention to increase student motivation on the first day of class. Teaching of Psychology, 41, 158-62., DOI: 10.1177/0098628314530350
  53. Metcalf, J., & Hearther, E. (2014). Distrupting the pipeline: Critical analyses of student pathways through postsecondary STEM Education. New Directions for Institutional Research, 15, 77-93., DOI: 10.1002/ir.20047
  54. Mullin, P.A., Lohr, K.N., Bresnahan, B.W., & McNulty, P. (2000), Applying cognitive design principles to formatting HRQoL instruments. Quality of life Research, 9(1), 18-27.
  55. Nixon, A., Packard, A., Dam, M. (2013). Principals Judge Teachers by Their Teaching. Teacher Educator, 48(1), 58-72., DOI: 10.1080/08878730.2012.740154.
  56. Niero, M. (2008), La personalizzazione nella ricerca quantitativa, Milano: FrancoAngeli Editore. Ogawa, A. (2011). Facilitating self-regulated learning: An exploratory case of teaching a university course on Japanese society. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(2), 166-174.
  57. Pasupathy, R., & Siwatu, K.O. (2014). An investigation of research self-efficacy beliefs and research productivity among faculty members at an emerging research university in the USA. Higher Education Research and Development, 33, 728-41., DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2013.863843
  58. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Research and Innovations, 19, 430-446., DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
  59. Rawlins, B.L. (2009). Give the emperor a mirror: Toward developing a stakeholder measurement of organizational transparency. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21(1), 71-99., DOI: 10.1080/10627260802153421
  60. Rawlins, B.L. (2008). Measuring the relationship between organizational transparency and employee trust. Public Relations Journal, 2(2), 1-21.
  61. Sax, L.J., Bryant, A.N., & Harper, C.E. (2005). The differential effects of studentfaculty interaction on college outcomes for women and men. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6), 642-657.
  62. Schunk, D.H., & Usber, E.L. (2012). Social cognitive theory and motivation. Oxford: University Press., DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399820.013.0002
  63. Shaidi, S., Khodalanahi, M.K., Heidari, M., & Baezat, F. (2004). Cognitive and motivational self-regulation Iranian students: Effects of training on the reduction
  64. of educational problems and anxiety. Psychology and Education: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 41(3-4), 17-25.
  65. Slavin, R.E. (1980). Cooperative learning in teams: State of the art. Educational Psychologist, 15(2), 93-111., DOI: 10.1080/00461528009529219
  66. Slavin, R.E. (1988). Student team learning: An overview and practical guide. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
  67. Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd edition). Boston: Allen and Bacon.
  68. Slavin, R.E. (2001). Student team learning: A practical guide for cooperative learning. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
  69. Spiller, D., & Harris, T. (2013). Learning from evaluations: Probing the reality. Issues in Educational Research, 23(2), 258-268.
  70. Vevere, N., & Kozlinskis, V. (2011). Students' evaluation of teaching quality. USChina Education Review B, 5, 702-708.
  71. Willinsky, J. (2003). Plicymakers’ online use of academic research. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(2), 1-23., DOI: 10.14507/epaa.v11n2.2003
  72. Winkelmes, M.-A. (2013). Transparency in learning and teaching. National Education Association – Higher Education: Advocate, 30(1), 6-9. Winkelmes, M.-A., Copeland, D.E., Jorgensen, E., Sloat, A., Smedley, A., Pizor,
  73. P., Johnson, K., & Jalene, S. (2015). Benefits (some unexpected) of transparently designed assignments. National Teaching and Learning Forum, 24(4), 4-7., DOI: 10.1002/ntlf.30029
  74. Zhu, X.B, Zhang, L.M., & Wu, L.L. (2011). A study on the relationship achievement goal orientation, academic social comparison, and self-efficacy in middle school students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 19(2), 255-258.

Rosa Cera, Alexander Porshnev, Manuela Cantoia, "Trasparency" in teaching. An investigation on italian university students' perception in "RICERCHE DI PSICOLOGIA " 3/2016, pp. 281-312, DOI:10.3280/RIP2016-003002


FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content