The medium is the message: Comparing paper-based and web-based course evaluation modalities

Fogarty, Timothy J.; Jonas, Gregory A.; Parker, Larry M.

doi:10.1016/j.jaccedu.2013.03.002

Cited by 8 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers refer to course evaluations in a variety of ways, including student evaluation of teaching (SET) (Fogarty et al, 2013;Reisenwitz, 2015); end-of-course evaluations (EOCE) (Jaquett, et al,2017;Marks et al, 2017); end-of-course critiques (EOCC) (Morrison, 2011) or course evaluations (Kuch & Roberts, 2018;Perrett, 2013). Throughout this paper, we use the term course evaluation to describe the process of garnering student-provided feedback (paper-pencil or online) at the end of a term.…”

Section: Course Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Literature suggests that the practice of post-secondary institutions collecting student feedback via course evaluations dates back to the early 1970s (Fogarty et al, 2013;Wallace et al, 2019). The traditional methods for collecting student feedback involved paper-pen surveys, typically administered during class time towards the end of a course by instructors/professors or administrative faculty.…”

Section: Evolution Of Course Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior to the 2020 COVID-19 crisis, many post-secondary institutions had already transitioned to using online course evaluations for some, if not all of their programs (Dommeyer et al, 2004;Avery et al, 2006;Ardalan et al, 2007;Burton et al, 2012;Fogarty et al, 2013;Morrison, 2013;Blair & Inniss, 2014;Kuch & Roberts;. However, for institutions facing a sudden transition from paper to online course evaluations to accommodate students during emergency remote learning, concerns about the quality of student feedback may be prevalent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Examining Online Course Evaluations and the Quality of Student Feedback

Plante¹,

LeSage²,

Kay³

2022

JEdInfo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article was to provide a comprehensive review of research on the quality of student feedback from post-secondary institutions using online course evaluations versus traditional paper-pencil methods. Nineteen peer-reviewed articles published from 2000 to 2020 were examined for changes to course evaluations following a transition to online collection methods. Three themes emerged from the literature: effects on response rates, presence of non-response bias, and effects on comment quality. Results suggest that using online methods for collecting student feedback tends to decrease response rates somewhat, however, the effect is often temporary. Further, using online methods generated conflicting results on the presence of a non-response bias in open-ended comments with online methods. Many studies demonstrated that online methods increase the word counts in student-provided comments and that the constructive nature of the comments improved as well. The results may inform teaching and policy decisions as more institutions transition to online course evaluation collection methods, particularly given the restrictions imposed by the current COVID-19 crisis. Suggestions for future research include examining the usability of comments as well as trends in student feedback quality following the transition to emergency remote teaching during the global pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Course Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evolution Of Course Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining Online Course Evaluations and the Quality of Student Feedback

Plante¹,

LeSage²,

Kay³

2022

JEdInfo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, experimental studies comparing the degree of impression management or studying social desirability effects inferred from other self-reports could not unequivocally confirm this effect. Some authors observed increased self-disclosure when surveys were administered over the Internet, whereas others found only small or even null effects (e.g., Carlbring et al, 2007; Fogarty, Jonas, & Parker, 2013; Risko, Quilty, & Oakman, 2006). For example, students evaluate instructors and their courses more critically in web-based as compared with paper-and-pencil questionnaires (Fogarty et al, 2013), and people also report slightly higher levels of depression on the Internet (Carlbring et al, 2007), whereas Risko et al (2006) found no evidence of such mode differences for various measures of social desirability.…”

Section: Mode Effects and Social Desirabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Socially Desirable Responding in Web-Based Questionnaires: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Candor Hypothesis

Gnambs

Kaspar

2016

Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unproctored, web-based assessments supposedly reduce social desirability distortions in self-report questionnaires because of an increased sense of privacy among participants. Three random-effects meta-analyses focusing either on social desirability ( k = 30, total N = 3,746), the Big Five of personality ( k = 66, total N = 2,951), or psychopathology ( k = 96, total N = 16,034) compared social desirability distortions of self-reports across computerized and paper-and-pencil administration modes. Overall, a near-zero effect, Δ = 0.01, was obtained that did not indicate less socially desirable responding in computerized assessments. Moreover, moderator analyses did not identify differential effects for proctored and unproctored procedures. Thus, paper-and-pencil and computerized administrations of self-report scales yield comparable mean scores. Unproctored web-based surveys do not offer an advantage with regard to socially desirable responding in self-report questionnaires.

show abstract

“…"Significantly lower evaluation scores for both the instructor and the course are produced when a web-based modality is used. In general, these results did not vary for courses at different levels of matriculation or at different levels of student participation" [13]…”

Section: Examples Of Research On Student Evaluation Of Teaching (Set)mentioning

confidence: 88%

Online Evaluations of Online Courses: Another Obstacle to Involving Full Time Faculty in Distance Learning?

Ruth¹

2018

INTED Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While there are many criticisms of online courses, their growth is beyond doubt. Nearly a third of all college students in the United States are taking at least one course online, and that percentage is increasing. As the many controversial facets of comparing online with traditional courses increase-only 30% of full-time professors approve of them--there is one issue that is almost ignored. Many studies have indicated a significant difference in outcomes between Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) submitted for online courses and the traditional in class paper and pencil manner. On the positive side, online comments tend to be considerably more detailed, and probably more valuable and qualitatively superior. And, of course they are far more efficient and less costly. But many studies over the past decade have indicated that online SET grades often lower, that is, more critical of the instructor. And to add to the problem, online evaluation response rates are consistently lower than the paper and pencil results. Does this present a disadvantage that further discourages full time faculty from teaching at distance? This paper examines the possible effect of this phenomenon from three perspectives: first, the evidence that online SET scores are frequently lower and response rates always lower than face-toface SET procedures; second, the dilemma of faculty, especially full-time faculty, in facing the decision to teach online, when uncertain evaluation results could possibly harm their careers; and third, various remedial actions that have been proposed to remedy the problem

show abstract

The medium is the message: Comparing paper-based and web-based course evaluation modalities

Cited by 8 publications

References 30 publications

Examining Online Course Evaluations and the Quality of Student Feedback

Examining Online Course Evaluations and the Quality of Student Feedback

Socially Desirable Responding in Web-Based Questionnaires: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Candor Hypothesis

Online Evaluations of Online Courses: Another Obstacle to Involving Full Time Faculty in Distance Learning?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About