Software design method and device for solving teacher selection problem

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of software development, and particularly provides a software design method and device for solving a teacher selection problem, the software design method and device are constructed based on a Web technology, a B / S architecture is adopted, a system is divided into a user layer, a business logic layer and a data layer, the user layer provides an interactive interface for users of different roles, the business logic layer processes various business processes and logics, and the data layer is used for providing data for the users of different roles. And the data layer stores various data required by system operation. Compared with the prior art, efficient organization, accurate auditing, scientific review and standard management of teacher selection activities can be achieved, the selection efficiency and fairness are improved, and the requirements of different levels of education management departments and participants are met.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of software development, and specifically provides a software design method and device for solving the problem of teacher selection. Background Art

[0002] At present, the teacher selection process often has many problems. Traditional teacher selection methods rely heavily on manual operations, which are cumbersome and inefficient. In terms of material review, manual review is prone to subjective biases and is slow to process large amounts of materials, making it difficult to ensure the accuracy and fairness of the review. At the same time, selection activities in different regions and at different levels lack a unified and standardized management platform, resulting in poor information flow and inconsistent standards, which affects the quality and fairness of teacher selection. In addition, in the review process, the organization and implementation of expert reviews are also relatively difficult. The lack of effective review rule setting and supervision mechanisms makes it difficult to ensure the scientific nature of the review results. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The present invention aims to address the above-mentioned deficiencies in the prior art and provides a highly practical software design method for solving the teacher selection problem.

[0004] A further technical task of the present invention is to provide a software design device that is rationally designed, safe and applicable to solve the teacher selection problem.

[0005] The technical solution adopted by the present invention to solve its technical problem is:

[0006] A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem is built based on Web technology and adopts B / S architecture. The system is divided into user layer, business logic layer and data layer. The user layer provides an interactive interface for users of different roles, the business logic layer handles various business processes and logics, and the data layer stores various types of data required for system operation.

[0007] Further, the following steps are included:

[0008] S1. User role and permission management;

[0009] S2. Selection management;

[0010] S3. Selection registration and material submission;

[0011] S4, multi-level selection and review;

[0012] S5, dynamic review;

[0013] S6. Expert voting and result determination.

[0014] Furthermore, in step S1, provincial administrators, state and city administrators, county and district administrators, school administrators, teachers, and experts are set up, and the provincial administrators are responsible for creating and managing provincial selection activities;

[0015] The aforementioned state and city administrators, county and district administrators, and school-level administrators are responsible for the management and review of selection activities at their respective levels;

[0016] The teachers register, submit and modify materials;

[0017] The experts are responsible for reviewing the submitted materials.

[0018] Furthermore, in step S2, the provincial administrator creates basic information for the activity and retrieves relevant teacher basic information from the teacher basic information archive system for verification, limiting registration to qualified teachers;

[0019] When setting the selection scope, the number of people participating in the selection from each regional organization is restricted to make the number of people participating in the selection from each region more fair and reasonable. At the same time, the review process is customized, including selecting reviews at all levels and setting push rules after the review is passed. Reviewers at each level can conduct evaluation and scoring without interfering with each other.

[0020] Furthermore, in step S3, the teacher obtains basic information of the teacher through the teacher basic information system and submits the registration. The system provides pre-verification. If the system verification rules are not met, the submission cannot be made. If the rules are met, the user uploads relevant material files according to the system requirements, and the system verifies the format and size of the material files.

[0021] Furthermore, in step S4, administrators at all levels review the submitted materials according to the set review process, enter review opinions and review results, and pass or fail. If it is found that the materials do not meet the requirements during the review process, the materials will be returned to the teacher for resubmission.

[0022] Furthermore, in step S5, the provincial administrator sets the review rules and review team. The review team is set up according to the academic stage and subject, and the review work is automatically assigned and manually assigned. After the expert logs into the system, he reviews the materials of the participating teachers according to the review rules, fills in the review opinions and gives the review results. The review opinions should not be less than the set minimum number of words. The system automatically summarizes the review progress of all experts and determines the final review results according to the review rules.

[0023] Furthermore, in step S6, after the review is completed, an expert voting phase is conducted, in which the experts vote on the scores given in the previous review step and can choose to pass or fail, and provide their own reasons;

[0024] The group leader sets the final review score based on the final review results and voting results, binds the materials to the recognition results based on the review results, publicizes the recognized data, archives it after the publicity is passed, and feeds the selection data back to the teacher basic information system to generate corresponding selection records for teachers, or archives it to data systems such as the Master Teacher Studio to realize the final function of the selection.

[0025] A software design device for solving a teacher selection problem, comprising: at least one memory and at least one processor;

[0026] The at least one memory is configured to store a machine-readable program;

[0027] The at least one processor is used to call the machine-readable program to execute a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem.

[0028] Compared with the prior art, the software design method and device for solving the teacher selection problem of the present invention have the following outstanding beneficial effects:

[0029] This invention reduces manual operations by automating the registration, review, and evaluation processes, significantly improving the efficiency of teacher selection and saving time and labor costs. The multi-level review process, clear review rules, and requirements for review opinions reduce subjective bias in the review process and ensure the fairness and accuracy of the material review.

[0030] Scientific review rules, the allocation of expert panels by academic level and subject, and word count requirements for review opinions ensure the scientific and rigorous nature of the review process, making the review results more convincing. A unified software platform enables standardized management of teacher selection activities across different regions and levels, ensuring the flow of information and consistency of standards.

[0031] Encryption technology is used to protect user data, role-based access control ensures that different roles can only access corresponding functions, and the system's fault tolerance mechanism and load balancing technology ensure the security, reliability and high availability of the system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0032] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying any creative work.

[0033] Attachment Figure 1 It is a flow chart of a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem;

[0034] Attachment Figure 2 It is a diagram of the process of creating a teacher selection activity in a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem;

[0035] Attachment Figure 3 It is a software design method for solving the problem of teacher selection, which is a diagram of the process of teachers reviewing and returning materials and internal review at all levels;

[0036] Attachment Figure 4 It is a diagram of the teacher review setting process in a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem;

[0037] Attachment Figure 5 This is a diagram of the voting process in a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0038] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the solutions of the present invention, the present invention will be further described in detail below in conjunction with specific embodiments. Obviously, the embodiments described are only some embodiments of the present invention, rather than all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0039] A best embodiment is given below:

[0040] like Figure 1-5 As shown in the figure, this embodiment shows a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem. It is built based on Web technology and adopts a B / S architecture. It supports mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, and Safari, making it convenient for different users to access the system via the network. The system is divided into a user layer, a business logic layer, and a data layer. The user layer provides an interactive interface for users of different roles, the business logic layer handles various business processes and logic, and the data layer stores various data required for system operation.

[0041] The steps are as follows:

[0042] S1. User role and permission management;

[0043] Different roles are set up, including provincial administrators, state and city administrators, county and district administrators, school-level administrators, teachers, and experts. Provincial administrators are responsible for creating and managing provincial selection activities, including setting basic activity information, selection scope, review process, event administrators at all levels, and publishing activities. State and city, county and district, and school-level administrators are responsible for the management and review of selection activities at their respective levels. Teachers can register, submit, and modify materials. Experts are responsible for reviewing submitted materials.

[0044] The system uses role-based access control (RBAC) technology to ensure that different roles can only access and operate functions within their authority, ensuring the security of the system and the confidentiality of data.

[0045] S2. Selection management;

[0046] Provincial administrators can create basic information for the activity, such as the selection name, year, category, etc., and retrieve relevant teacher basic information from the teacher basic information archive system for verification, and limit registration to qualified teachers.

[0047] When setting the selection scope, you can limit the number of organizations participating in the selection from each region, making the number of participants in each region more fair and reasonable. At the same time, the system supports customized settings for the review process, including selecting each level of review and setting push rules after the review is passed. Reviewers at each level can conduct selection and scoring without interfering with each other. You can also set activity administrators at all levels, selection options, and material items under the selection options, and support the setting of requirements for the format and size of material files.

[0048] S3. Selection registration and material submission;

[0049] Teachers obtain basic teacher information through the Teacher Basic Information System and submit their registration. The system provides pre-verification. If the system verification rules are not met, the application cannot be submitted. If the rules are met, users upload relevant material files according to the system requirements. The system verifies the format and size of the material files.

[0050] Teachers can modify and resubmit the materials based on the review comments to ensure the accuracy of the materials.

[0051] S4, multi-level selection and review;

[0052] Administrators at all levels review the submitted materials according to the established review process, entering their review opinions and review results (pass or fail). If the materials are found to not meet the requirements during the review process, they can be returned to the teacher for resubmission. A multi-level review process is supported to ensure the quality of the materials, and the review results at each level can be independently scored without interfering with each other.

[0053] S5, dynamic review;

[0054] Provincial administrators set up review rules and review teams. The review rules include review type (online review or offline review), review method (scoring system, pass system or rating system), determination of review rules (joint signature or signature), score display method, minimum word count of expert opinions, and definition of review results.

[0055] The review team is set up according to the academic stage and subject, and the system provides the functions of automatic allocation of review works and manual allocation of review works.

[0056] After logging into the system, experts will review the materials submitted by participating teachers according to the review rules, provide their comments, and provide their review results. Comments should be no less than the set minimum word count. The system automatically summarizes the review progress of all experts and determines the final review results based on the review rules.

[0057] S6. Expert voting and result determination;

[0058] After the review is completed, an expert voting session will be held. Experts will vote on the scores given in the previous review step. They can choose to pass or fail and reserve their own reasons.

[0059] The team leader sets the final review score based on the final review and voting results. The system then assigns a recognition result to the materials based on the review results, publicly announcing the recognized data. Once approved, the data is archived and fed back to the teacher basic information system to generate a corresponding selection record for the teacher, or archived to data systems such as the Master Teacher Studio, achieving the final selection function.

[0060] Based on the above method, a software design device for solving the teacher selection problem in this embodiment includes: at least one memory and at least one processor;

[0061] The at least one memory is configured to store a machine-readable program;

[0062] The at least one processor is used to call the machine-readable program to execute a software design method for solving the teacher selection problem.

[0063] The above-mentioned specific implementation methods are only specific cases of the present invention. The patent protection scope of the present invention includes but is not limited to the above-mentioned specific implementation methods. Any technical solutions that conform to the above-mentioned specific implementation methods of the present invention and any appropriate changes or substitutions made thereto by ordinary technicians in the relevant technical field shall fall within the patent protection scope of the present invention.

[0064] While embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that various changes, modifications, substitutions, and variations may be made to these embodiments without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, and that the scope of the invention is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem, characterized by: Built based on Web technology and adopting B / S architecture, the system is divided into user layer, business logic layer and data layer. The user layer provides an interactive interface for users of different roles, the business logic layer handles various business processes and logics, and the data layer stores various types of data required for system operation.

2. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 1, characterized in that: The steps are as follows: S1. User role and permission management; S2. Selection management; S3. Selection registration and material submission; S4, multi-level selection and review; S5, dynamic review; S6. Expert voting and result determination.

3. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 2, characterized in that: In step S1, provincial administrators, state and city administrators, county and district administrators, school administrators, teachers, and experts are set up. The provincial administrators are responsible for creating and managing provincial selection activities. The aforementioned state and city administrators, county and district administrators, and school-level administrators are responsible for the management and review of selection activities at their respective levels; The teachers register, submit and modify materials; The experts are responsible for reviewing the submitted materials.

4. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 3, characterized in that: In step S2, the provincial administrator creates basic information for the activity and retrieves relevant teacher basic information from the teacher basic information archive system for verification, limiting the registration of qualified teachers; When setting the selection scope, the number of people participating in the selection from each regional organization is restricted to make the number of people participating in the selection from each region more fair and reasonable. At the same time, the review process is customized, including selecting reviews at all levels and setting push rules after the review is passed. Reviewers at each level can conduct evaluation and scoring without interfering with each other.

5. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 4, characterized in that: In step S3, teachers obtain basic information of teachers through the teacher basic information system and submit the registration. The system provides pre-verification. If the system verification rules are not met, the application cannot be submitted. If the rules are met, the user uploads relevant material files according to the system requirements, and the system verifies the format and size of the material files.

6. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 5, characterized in that: In step S4, administrators at all levels review the submitted materials according to the set review process, enter review opinions and review results, and pass or fail. If it is found that the materials do not meet the requirements during the review process, the materials will be returned to the teacher for resubmission.

7. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 6, characterized in that: In step S5, the provincial administrator sets the review rules and review team. The review team is set up according to the academic stage and subject, and the review work is automatically assigned and manually assigned. After the expert logs into the system, he reviews the materials of the participating teachers according to the review rules, fills in the review opinions and gives the review results. The review opinions should not be less than the set minimum number of words. The system automatically summarizes the review progress of all experts and determines the final review results according to the review rules.

8. A software design method for solving the teacher selection problem according to claim 7, characterized in that: In step S6, after the review is completed, the experts vote on the scores given in the previous review step. They can choose to pass or fail and provide their own reasons. The group leader sets the final review score based on the final review results and voting results, binds the materials to the recognition results based on the review results, publicizes the recognized data, archives it after the publicity is passed, and feeds the selection data back to the teacher basic information system to generate corresponding selection records for teachers, or archives it to data systems such as the Master Teacher Studio to realize the final function of the selection.

9. A software design device for solving the teacher selection problem, characterized in that: include: at least one memory and at least one processor; The at least one memory is configured to store a machine-readable program; The at least one processor is configured to call the machine-readable program to execute the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8.

Images