Student evaluation of teaching: Individual differences and bias effects

Bonitz, Verena S.

doi:10.31274/etd-180810-334

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 230 publications

(386 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with prior research that expected SET to be higher in small classes compared to larger classes (e.g., Kwan, 1999;Liaw & Goh, 2003;Bonitz, 2011), the results show that class size has inappropriately influenced students' judgments on teaching evaluations, suggesting that classes with small enrolment receive good teaching ratings, whereas large classes are associated with poor evaluation ratings.…”

Section: Analysis Methodssupporting

confidence: 79%

“…While many researchers contend that SET scores obtained from students are valid and reliable measures of teaching effectiveness, there is still a large contingent that argue that the results from such instruments should not be relied upon for making personnel and tenure decisions (Sauer, 2012). Sproule (2000) and Bonitz (2011) argue that the use of SET for the purpose of formative and summative functions is controversial. a number of concerns, including the basic validity of these surveys and their sensitivity to external biases.…”

Section: Stated Thatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, they are related and influenced significantly by personal characteristics and institutional factors over which the faculty members have no control. In support of Yunker and Yunker (2003), Bonitz (2011) notes that a large proportion of SET research has been devoted to the issue of bias in student evaluations of faculty. Although most university administrators believe that students can reliably evaluate teaching effectiveness, prior research in higher education literature, however, provides evidence that many faculty members believe that student evaluations are simply a popularity contest and have no relation to the measurement of effective teaching (Morgan et al 2003).…”

Section: Stated Thatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pounder (2007) argues that the extent of reliance on the SET as the predominant measure of teaching effectiveness is not confined to the USA; it is a worldwide phenomenon. A common practice among colleges and universities is for the administration to use these SET scores as a diagnostic feedback tool for faculty (formative function) and as performance measures for personnel decisions such as hiring, tenure, promotion and salary reviews (summative function) (Emery et al, 2003;Bonitz, 2011). During the past decade or so, Johnson (2002) observes an increased emphasis on the use of SET as a measurement of teaching effectiveness across colleges and universities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior research shows that SET have become the most prevalent measure of teaching effectiveness across universities (Bonitz, 2011). Pounder (2007) argues that the extent of reliance on the SET as the predominant measure of teaching effectiveness is not confined to the USA; it is a worldwide phenomenon.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Determinants of Accounting Student Evaluations of Teaching Scores

Albuloushi¹,

Alfraih²

2015

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the prevalent use of the student evaluations of teaching (SET) as a measure of teaching effectiveness, this study aims to investigate the determinants of SET scores among students attending the College of Business Studies at the Public Authority for Applied Education and Training (PAAET), Kuwait. A total of 678 SET were analysed using univariate and multiple regression analyses. It was found that SET scores were significantly and positively biased by expected grade, student age and course level. In contrast, class size and faculty experience were found to be significantly and negatively related to SET. Expected grade had the strongest impact on SET scores. The study findings raise concerns about the reliability and validity of the SET as well as their suitability for evaluation purposes. As SET scores have an important assessment function and serve as formative and summative measures in personnel decisions, the incentives for faculty to compromise their grading standards to receive good teaching evaluations increase. Accordingly, administrators should devote more effort to ensure a careful and complete understanding and interpretation of SET if they want to effectively incorporate them into the faculty evaluation process. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to explore determinants of student evaluations of teaching scores in Kuwait.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Methodssupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Stated Thatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stated Thatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Determinants of Accounting Student Evaluations of Teaching Scores

Albuloushi¹,

Alfraih²

2015

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Student Evaluations of Teaching, Course and Student Characteristics at Andrews University

Nasser¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validation of a Short Scale for Student Evaluation of Teaching Ratings in a Polytechnic Higher Education Institution

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The general purpose of this work is 2-fold, to validate scales and to present the methodological procedure to reduce these scales to validate a rating scale for the student evaluation of teaching in the context of a Polytechnic Higher Education Institution. We explored the relationship between the long and short versions of the scale; examine their invariance in relation to relevant variables such as gender. Data were obtained from a sample of 6,110 students enrolled in a polytechnic higher education institution, most of whom were male. Data analysis included descriptive analysis, intraclass correlation, exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), confirmatory factorial analysis, correlations between the short and long form corrected for the shared error variance, gender measurement invariance, reliability using congeneric correlated factors, and correlations with academic achievement for the class as unit with an analysis following a multisection design. Results showed four highly correlated factors that do not exclude a general factor, with an excellent fit to data; configural, metric, and scalar gender measurement invariance; high reliability for both the long and short scale and subscales; high short and long-form scale correlations; and moderate but significant correlations between the long and short versions of the scales with academic performance, with individual and aggregate data collected from classes or sections. To conclude, this work shows the possibility of developing student evaluation of teaching scales with a short form scale, which maintains the same high reliability and validity indexes as the longer scale.

show abstract

Student evaluation of teaching: Individual differences and bias effects

Cited by 4 publications

References 230 publications

Determinants of Accounting Student Evaluations of Teaching Scores

Determinants of Accounting Student Evaluations of Teaching Scores

Student Evaluations of Teaching, Course and Student Characteristics at Andrews University

Validation of a Short Scale for Student Evaluation of Teaching Ratings in a Polytechnic Higher Education Institution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About