The Questionable Status of Student Evaluations of Teaching

Chandler, Theodore A.

doi:10.1207/s15328023top0503_12

Cited by 34 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…What appears clear is that considerably more research is needed on student course evaluations if they are to have significant impact upon the livelihood of universityfaculty and if faculty are to rely on them for self-improvement. In fact, this study adds to the evidence which suggests that the sole use of student ratings to evaluate teaching effectiveness is questionable (Greenwood, et al, 1976;Chandler, 1978).…”

Section: <001mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…In the past, student ratings were collected at the discretion of the individual instructor and were utilized primarily for self improvement (Centra, 1976). More recently, many colleges and universities require the administration of these rating forms, and the results often are important factors in faculty promotion, tenure and salary decisions (Bejar, 1975;Chandler, 1978;Seldin & Wakin, 1974). Thus, there are two practical reasons (teacher improvement and personnel decisions) for careful study of the construction of rating forms andvarious factors that may affect thedatathoseforms yield.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Class Size and College Major on Student Ratings of Psychology Courses

Gilmore

Swerdlik

Beehr

1980

Teaching of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: <001mentioning

confidence: 84%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Class Size and College Major on Student Ratings of Psychology Courses

Gilmore

Swerdlik

Beehr

1980

Teaching of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Faculty members generally believe that student evaluations are biased by a number of factors they believe to be unrelated to teaching effectiveness. These include course difficulty, grading leniency, instructor popularity, student interest in subject before course, and student's GPA Chandler 1978;Sheehan 1975). Although most studies have concluded that there is no basis for concern about these potential biases Sackloss 1973;Garverick and Carter 1962), a few studies have revealed that class workload or difficulty were the variables most likely to be strongly correlated with students' evaluations of teaching (Pohlman 1975).…”

Section: Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Marketing Professors: A Comparison of Student, Peer, and Self-Evaluations

Webster¹

1988

Organizational Behavior Teaching Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study sought to determine whether any differences existed between student, peer, and self-evaluations of marketing professors. Significant differences were found for a variety of important characteristics of teacher effectiveness. Most of these differences remained even after perception of course difficulty and class size effects were removed.Like most instructors in other disciplines, marketing professors are interested in and concerned about the evaluation of their teaching effectiveness. This concern is warranted as these evaluations provide (a) diagnostic feedback to faculty about the effectiveness of their teaching; (b) a measure of teaching effectiveness to be used in tenure/promotion decisions; and/or (c) information for stu-

show abstract

“…Other professionals (Chandler, 1978;Tetenbaum, 1975) are not as sanguine. They are impressed by the overwhelming finding that the student ratings depend primarily on the personality and popularity of the professor when teaching.…”

Section: Professional Attitudes Towards Student Ratings Of Professorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student evaluations and the university professor: Caveat professor

Cruse

1987

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research evaluating student ratingsofprofessorsrevealscontinuedcontroversy. Interpretations of student ratings of professors in terms of face validity are marred by halo affects, the apparent inability of even skilled raters to judge complex behaviors adequately, the salience of personality features in judging tasks, and a host of other variables. Research shows student ratings to be reliable, but design flaws for simple, first order, predictions usually omit the teacher as a cause. Interpretations of research are confusing because of justifications that indiscriminately involve nomological and applied models. Rating scale peculiarities, questionable validity, and scholastic homogeneity lead to diverse professional attitudes towards student opinions of professors, with a learner or consumer emphasis occupying the extremes. Several evaluation schemes are noted along with behaviors that tend to produce favorable student opinions.Interest in students evaluating professors in order to improve teaching has a long history and began early in American education (Boyce, 1915). The idea is based on the belief that students, because of their exposure to professors, should know best whether teaching is adequate and whether they are learning.The implementation of the idea is simplicity itself. A set of questions is constructed, questions that refer to the professor's clarity of speech, organization, involvement in student learning, presentation of different viewpoints, fairness in grading, work assignments, and other characteristics. The students are given these questions near the end of the semester, but before the final examination, and they anonymously rate the professor. The ratings are then analysed, related to some performance index, and the professor is, ipso facto, evaluated.The program is so simple, straightforward, and appealing that rating techniques have been developed and used at a number of colleges and universities (Centra, 1979). The ratings are used in selecting professors for salary increases, promotions, and tenure, and are sometimes published for the benefit of the students in course selection. Although student ratings are only one part of evaluation programs and separate fromchairperson evaluations, faculty peer ratings, informal student opinions, and other traditional methods of evaluations, they deserve special attention because of their widespread use and possible misinterpretatio m After three-quarters of a century, controversy still exists over interpretations and use of student ratings (Cohen, 1983;Dowell and Neal, 1983;Dunkin and Barnes, 1986;Murray, 1980). Diversity of opinion ranges from "Teacher evalu-

show abstract

The Questionable Status of Student Evaluations of Teaching

Abstract: Until much more research is done, caution should be exercised in possible misuse of these ratings.

Cited by 34 publications

References 16 publications

Effects of Class Size and College Major on Student Ratings of Psychology Courses

Effects of Class Size and College Major on Student Ratings of Psychology Courses

Evaluation of Marketing Professors: A Comparison of Student, Peer, and Self-Evaluations

Student evaluations and the university professor: Caveat professor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About