Faculty Teaching Competence and Professionalism: An Assessment Based on the Perceptions of 4th Year College of Business Administration Students in Research Subject at Wesleyan University–Philippines

This study assessed the teaching competence and professionalism of faculty members handling the Research subject as perceived by 4th year College of Business Administration students at Wesleyan University–Philippines. The study employed a descriptive–correlational research design with 300 purposively chosen respondents. A validated survey questionnaire served as the main data-gathering tool, while descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation were used for analysis. Results revealed that most respondents were young, female, and single. Faculty were rated as competent in teaching, particularly in classroom management and instructional delivery, though weaknesses were observed in integrating updated research materials, providing clear instructions, and giving constructive feedback. Professionalism was rated positively, with punctuality and preparedness as the strongest attribute, while respectful interaction scored the lowest, especially in listening attentively and showing empathy. Correlation analysis showed that age and sex significantly influenced students’ perceptions in most dimensions of competence and professionalism, while civil status had limited effects.
The findings emphasized that while faculty members are perceived as competent and professional, improvement is needed in fostering inclusivity, enhancing fairness and transparency in evaluation, and strengthening student engagement strategies. The study recommends faculty training, institutional support programs, and continuous quality assurance initiatives to improve teaching competence and professionalism in higher education.

Faculty competence, professionalism, instructional delivery

1. Biggs, J. &. (2021). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Boon, H. (2017). Raising the bar: Ethics education for quality teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(7), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n7.2. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Brookfield, S. (2015). the skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Creswell, J. W. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Danielson, C. (2023). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument (2013 ed.). The Danielson Group. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. George, D. &. (2023). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. González, J. &. (2019). Professional competencies in higher education. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.1.32. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hattie, J. (2019). the new art and science of teaching. Solution Tree Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ko, J. S. (2014). Effective teaching: A review of research and evidence. CfBT Education Trust. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.5110.1920. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Sarmiento, P. J. (2021). Perceptions of teaching effectiveness in Philippine higher education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(3), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.3.8. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Shulman, L. S. (2018). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Tschannen-Moran, M. &. (2017). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944–956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.05.003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Zeichner, K. (2020). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347671. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• IFRS S1 and S2: A Global and Indian Perspective with Implications for Auditors
• A Study on Consumer Attitudes and Buying Behavior towards organic Food Products
• India’s Transfer Pricing Framework: Evolution, Challenges, and Future Directions
• Application of Statistical Methods in Business Administration: A Quantitative Study on Organizational Performance
• Decoding Fintech Adoption: The Role of Trust, Risks and Perceived Benefits