Novel evaluation approach combines eye-tracking and EEG data to enhance teaching quality assessments, indicating the potential for targeted reforms.
Background: The objective evaluation of course teaching quality is not only a guarantee for high-quality university teaching but also a key basis for teaching reform in higher education institutions. Objective: This study explores a novel method to enhance the objectivity and generalizability of teaching quality evaluations and provide more accurate and comprehensive results for teachers and administrators. Unlike traditional post-quantitative evaluations based on student scores, peer reviews, or supervision feedback, and post-qualitative research relying on subjective data, this approach leverages the integration of “Brain Science and Education,” as well as “AI and Education.” Method: Using EEG and eye-tracking data from students, this study focuses on attention as a core variable. It begins with single-factor analysis (EEG or eye movement) and progresses to a multimodal data fusion system to construct an objective evaluation model. Results: After eliminating environmental interference, a strong correlation is found between EEG data, eye movement, and attention. While EEG reflects brain activity, attention judgment often requires self-reports, introducing bias. Eye-tracking offers real-time behavioral indicators but lacks physiological depth. Therefore, integrating EEG and eye movement data compensates for the temporal/ spatial limitations of single-source analysis. Integrating AI and computing technology maximizes the academic and practical value of brain data and supports more effective post-hoc evaluation integration. Conclusion: This approach enables student-centered, personalized course evaluations and targeted teaching reforms, promoting continuous improvement in higher education and the holistic development of students.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: