Understanding Student Evaluations: What All Faculty Should Know

Hobson, Suzanne; Talbot, Donna M.

doi:10.1080/87567550109595842

Cited by 97 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although validity of SET instruments has been a controversial issue due to several confounding factors related to instructor, course, and student (Addison, Bet, &Warrington, 2006;Baldwin & Blattner, 2003;Otto et al, 2008), SET scores are mostly considered to be reliable (Alaemoni 1999;Hobson & Talbot, 2001). However, as discussed in this paper, there are some problems associated with the reliability of SET scores.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Reliability-Related Issues in the Context of Student Evaluations of Teaching in Higher Education

Kalender

2015

IJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student evaluations of teaching (SET) have been the principal instrument to elicit students' opinions in higher education institutions. Many decisions, including high-stake ones, are made based on SET scores reported by students. In this respect, reliability of SET scores is of considerable importance. This paper has an argument that there are some problems in choosing and using of reliability indices in SET context. Three hypotheses were tested: (i) using internal consistency measures is misleading in SET context since the variability is mainly due to disagreement between students' ratings, which requires use of inter-rater reliability coefficients, (ii) number of minimum feedbacks is not achieved in most of the classes, resulting unreliable decisions, and (iii) calculating reliability coefficient assuming a common factor structure across all classes is misleading because a common model may not be tenable for all. Results showed that use of internal consistency only to assess reliability of SET scores may result in wrong decisions. Considerable large numbers of missing feedbacks were observed to achieve acceptable reliability levels. Findings also indicated that factorial model differed across several groups.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Reliability-Related Issues in the Context of Student Evaluations of Teaching in Higher Education

Kalender

2015

IJHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even though the teaching literature states this as best practice, 24,29 there are still many faculty who dismiss the ratings as invalid, and therefore by extension, do not consider them useful. 30 While some administrators may use student ratings as a summative assessment of teaching effectiveness, participants in this study appear to view them more as formative assessments.…”

Section: A J P Ementioning

confidence: 99%

How Faculty Recognized for Teaching Excellence Interpret and Respond to Student Ratings of Teaching

Cain

Stowe

Ali

et al. 2019

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To determine how experienced pharmacy educators who have been recognized for teaching excellence interpret and respond to end-of course student ratings of teaching.Methods. An expert sampling technique was used to identify pharmacy faculty who have been recognized by the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) for teaching excellence as potential participants in the study. Sixteen faculty members were independently identified by two or more of the researchers as trusted candidates for the study and ten were randomly selected and invited to be interviewed via a web-conferencing platform. The interviews were transcribed and thematic analysis was used to identify overall themes.Results. Nine faculty members representing both practice-based (n=5) and non-practice (n=4) backgrounds participated in the interviews. The three primary themes emerging from the interviews

show abstract

“…Student evaluations of courses and lecturers are also one of the most controversial and highly-debated measures [42]. Nonetheless, they are still widely used and many have argued that there is no other option that provides the same sort of quantifiable and comparable data [40].…”

Section: Background Of Course and Lecturer Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normalisation of Technology Use in a Developing Country Higher Education Institution

Adam¹,

Issah²

2017

ijacsa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The purpose of this study is to understand how the use of an online course and lecturer evaluation becomes a normalised way of evaluating courses and lecturers in a developing country higher education institution. Extant literature on course and lecturer evaluations has concentrated on the approaches to evaluating courses, lecturers, and its effectiveness and benefits. However, less attention has been paid to how online evaluations become the medium for lecturer and course evaluation. To address this gap, this study used an interpretive case study approach to collect data through semi-structured interviews, documents and participant observation. Data analysis was conducted using hermeneutics and using Normalisation Process Theory as the theoretical lens. The results show that the online evaluation of courses and lecturers is now a normal practice because of participant's investment in the meaning of the online evaluation process, their enrolment in the process and the crucial investment of their actions, feedback during implementation, and use of which ensured the normalization.

show abstract

Understanding Student Evaluations: What All Faculty Should Know

Cited by 97 publications

References 23 publications

Reliability-Related Issues in the Context of Student Evaluations of Teaching in Higher Education

Reliability-Related Issues in the Context of Student Evaluations of Teaching in Higher Education

How Faculty Recognized for Teaching Excellence Interpret and Respond to Student Ratings of Teaching

Normalisation of Technology Use in a Developing Country Higher Education Institution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About