62

Mazkur maqolada oliy ta’lim muassasalarida ta’lim xizmatlarini sifatini oshirish, xususan professor-o’qituvchilar faoliyatini takomillashtirishda faoliyatning eng muhim samaradorlik ko’rsatkichlari (KPI) tizimini takomillashtirish yo’nalishlari tahlil qilingan. Shu asosda OTM professoro’qituvchilarining kasbiy faoliyatini talabalarning qoniqishi ko’rsatkichlari asosida baholash texnologiyasi taklif etilgan. Professor-o’qituvchilar kasbiy faoliyatini baholashning latent omillari va ularga oid ko’rsatkichlar ishlab chiqilgan.
 

  • Ўқишлар сони 62
  • Нашр санаси 31-10-2023
  • Мақола тилиO'zbek
  • Саҳифалар сони17
Ўзбек

Mazkur maqolada oliy ta’lim muassasalarida ta’lim xizmatlarini sifatini oshirish, xususan professor-o’qituvchilar faoliyatini takomillashtirishda faoliyatning eng muhim samaradorlik ko’rsatkichlari (KPI) tizimini takomillashtirish yo’nalishlari tahlil qilingan. Shu asosda OTM professoro’qituvchilarining kasbiy faoliyatini talabalarning qoniqishi ko’rsatkichlari asosida baholash texnologiyasi taklif etilgan. Professor-o’qituvchilar kasbiy faoliyatini baholashning latent omillari va ularga oid ko’rsatkichlar ishlab chiqilgan.
 

№ Муаллифнинг исми Лавозими Ташкилот номи
1 Urakov S.R. Direktor Samarqand davlat universiteti Kattaqo'rg'on filiali
№ Ҳавола номи
1 Rahmatov M.A., Zaripov B.Z. Iste’dodli insonlar mamlakatning bebaho boyligidir. Li Kuan Yu hikmatlari. – T.: “Zamin Nashr”, 2019. – 6-bet.
2 Dehghan A., J. Dugger, D. Dobrzykowski, and A. Balazs, “The antecedents of student loyalty in online programs”, Int. J. Educ. Manag., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 15-35, 2014.
3 Hoverstad R., R.Sylvester, and K. E.Voss, “Key Factors Influencing Student Satisfaction Related to Recruitment and Retention”, no. november 2014. pp. 37-41, 2008.
4 Khoo H., Susie and S.T.Gregor, “Service quality and student/customer satisfaction in the private tertiary education sector in Singapore”. Int. J.Educ. Manag., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 430-444, 2017
5 Lesley L., S.Kalafatis “The idiosyncratic behavior of service quality, value, satisfaction, and intention to recommend in higher education: An empirical examination”. Journal of Marketing Management Vol. 27, Nos. 11-12, October, 2011.
6 Masserini L., M.Bini, and M.Pratesi, “Do Quality of Services and Institutional Image Impact Students' Satisfaction and Loyalty in Higher Education?”, Soc. Indie. Res., vol. 146, no. 1-2, pp. 91-115, 2019
7 Chapman V., and A. Doris, “Modelling higher education financing reform for Ireland”. Econ. Educ. Rev., vol. 71, pp. 109-119, 2019.
8 Allam Z., “Demystifying the Aspect of Quality in Higher Education: Insights From Saudi Arabia”. SAGE Open, vol. 10, no. 1, 2020.
9 Iacovidou M., P.Gibbs, and A.Zopiatis, “An exploratory use of the stakeholder approach to defining and measuring quality: The case of a cypriot higher education institution”. Qual. High. Educ, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 147-165, 2009.
10 Dagayeva I. A., Baxotskiy V. V., Strikunova L. I. Diagnostika udovletvorennosti studentov obrazovatelnoy sredoy vuza v selyax povыsheniya yego privlekatelnosti dlya abituriyentov // Vestnik Surgutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2022. № 2 (36). S. 42–50. DOI 10.34822/2312-3419-2022-2-42-50
11 Husenov S., Haydarov R., Xushvaqtov X., Qodirov M., Boboyev N. Professor-o’qituvchilarning dars jarayonidagi faoliyatini baholash. Monografiya. – Samarqand: “FAN BULOG’I” nashriyoti, 2021. – 120 B
Кутилмоқда