___

• Arnon, S. ve Reichel, N. (2007). Who is the ideal teacher? Am I? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(5), 441 – 464.
• Bacon, D. R.ve Novotny, J. (2002). Exploring achievement strivingas a moderator of the grading leniency effect. Journal of Marketing Education 24(1), 4-14.
• Beishuizen, J. J., Hof, E., Van Putten, C. M., Bouwmeester, S. ve Asscher, J. J. (2001). Students’ and teachers’ cognitions about good teachers. (A. Tolmie, Ed.) British Journal ofEducational Psychology , 71 (2), 185‐201.
• Bong, M. (2001). Between- and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: Self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 23-34.
• Bong, M. (2004). Academic motivation in self-efficacy, task value, achievement goal orientations, and attributional beliefs. Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 287-297.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö.,Özkahveci, Ö. veDemirel, F. (2004). GüdülenmeveöğrenmestratejileriölçeğininTürkçeformunungeçerlikveg üvenirlikçalışması.KuramveUygulamadaEğitimBilimleri, 4(2), 207-239.
• Cashin, W.E. (1995). Student ratings of teaching: The research revisited.IDEA Paper No. 32, September, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
• Centra, J.A. (2003). Will teachers receive higher student evaluations by giving higher grades and less course work? Research in Higher Education, 44(5), 495-518.
• Chandler, J.A. (1978). The questionable status of student evaluations of teaching.Teaching of Psychology, 5,150-152.
• Connell, R. (2009). Good teachers on dangerous ground: Towards a new view of teacher quality and professionalism. Critical Studies in Education, 50(3), 213-229.
• Creemers, B.P.M. veKyriakides, L. (2006). Critical analysis of the current approaches to modeling educational effectiveness: The importance of establishing a dynamic model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,17(3), 347– 366.
• Epting, L., Zinn, T., Buskist, C. ve Buskist, W. (2004). Student perspectives on the distinction between ideal and typical teachers. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 181-183.
• Feldman, K.A. (1996). Identifying exemplary teaching: Using data from course and teacher evaluations. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 65, 41–50. Gökçe, E. (2002). İlköğretimöğrencileriningörüşlerinegöreöğretmenlerinetkililiği.Ankara ÜniversitesiEğitimBilimleriFakültesiDergisi, 35(1-2),111-119.
• Greenwald, A.G. (1997). Validity concerns and usefulness of student ratings. American Psychologist, 52, 1182-1186.
• Greenwald, A.G. ve Gillmore, J.M. (1997). No pain, no gain? The importance of measuring course workload in student ratings of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 743-751.
• Grimes, P. W., Millea, M. J. ve Woodruff, T. W. (2004).Grades; who to blame? Student evaluation of teaching and locus of control.Journal of Economic Education,35(2), 129-147.
• Helterbran, V.R. (2008). The ideal proffessor: Student perceptions of effective instructor practices, attitudes and skills. Education, 129(1), 125-138. Karakelle, S. (2005).Öğretmenlerinetkiliöğretmentanımlarınınetkiliöğretmenlikboyut larınagöreincelenmesi.EğitimveBilim,30(135), 1-10.
• Kember, D. ve McNaught, C. (2007). Enhancing university teaching: lessons from research into award winning teachers. Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge.
• Kızıltepe, Z. (2002). İyi ve etkili öğretmen. EğitimveBilim,27(126), 10-14.
• Kulik, J.A. (2001). Student ratings: Validity, utility, and controversy. New Directions for Institutional Research, 109, 9-25.
• Leventhal, L. (1975). Teacher rating forms: Critique and reformulation of previous validation designs. Canadian Psychological Review, 16, 269-276.
• Liem, A.D., Lau, S. veNie, Y. (2008), The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486–512.
• Ling, R. (2001). Exploration of professional development of excellent middle school teachers in China. Journal of Cahngshu College, 6, 26–30.
• Marsh, H.W. (1981). Students' evaluations of tertiary instruction: Testing the applicability of American surveys in an Australian setting. Australian Journal of Education, 25, 177-192.
• Marsh, H.W. (1982). Validity of students' evaluations of college teaching: A multitrait-multimethod analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 264-279.
• Marsh, H.W. (1983). Multidimensional ratings of teaching effectiveness by students from different academic settings and their relation to student/course/instructor Psychology, 75, 150-166.
• characteristics.Journal of Educational
• Marsh, H.W. (1984). Students’ evaluation of university teaching: Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 707-754.
• Marsh, H.W. (1987). Students' evaluation of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253-388.
• Marsh, H.W. (2007). Students’ evaluations of university teaching: A multidimensional perspective. İçinde R. P. Perry ve J. C. Smart (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence- based perspective (pp.319-384). New York: Springer.
• Marsh, H.W. ve Dunkin, M. (1997). Student evaluation of university teaching: A multidimensional perspective. İçinde Perry, P. R. ve Smart, J. C. (Ed.), Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice. (pp. 241-320). Agathon, New York.
• Marsh, H.W. ve Hocevar, D. (1991). Students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness: The stability of mean rating of the same teachers over a 13-year period. Teaching & Teacher Education, 7(4), 303-14.
• Marsh, H.W. ve Overall, J.U. (1980). Validity of students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness: Cognitive and affective criteria. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 468-475.
• Marsh, H.W. ve Roche, L.A. (1992). The use of student evaluations of university teaching in different settings: The applicability paradigm. Australian Journal of Education, 36, 278-300.
• McKeachie, W.J. (1997). Student ratings: The validity of use. American Psychologist, 52, 1218-1225.
• Moore, M.L., Moore, R.S. veMcDonald, R. (2008). Student characteristics and expectations of university classes: A free elicitation approach. College Student Journal, 42(1), 82-89.
• Murphy, K. R. ve Cleveland, J. N. (1995). Understanding performance appraisal: Social, organizational, and goal-based perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Okpala, C.O. ve Ellis, R.R. (2005). The perceptions of college students on teacher quality: A focus on teacher qualifications. Education, 126(2), 374-383. Onural, H.
• (2006).Öğretmenadaylarının ideal
• öğretmenniteliklerineilişkingörüşleri.ÇağdaşEğitimDergisi, 31(327), 29- 35. Oktar, İ. veYazçayır, N.
• (2008).Öğrencileregöreetkiliöğretmenözellikleri.MilliEğitim, 180, 8-23.
• Overall, J.U. ve Marsh, H.W. (1980). Students' evaluations of instruction: A longitudinal study of their stability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 321-325.
• Özgüngör, S. (2010a). Identifying dimensions of students' ratings that best predict satisfaction.EğitimAraştırmaları, 38, 146-163. self efficacy, course value and
• Özgüngör, S. (2010b, Eylül). Öğrenciözelliklerinegöre “en iyi” ve “en kötü” öğretimelemanlarınıyordayanöğretimetkinliği .19.UlusalEğitimBilimleriKurultayı.Lefkoşa: UluslararasıKıbrısÜniversitesi. alt boyutları
• Reynolds, D. ve Teddlie, C. (2000). The processes of school effectiveness. İçinde C. Teddlie ve D. Reynolds (Eds.), The international handbook of school effectiveness research. London: Falmer.
• Richardson, T.R., veKring, J.P. (1997). Student characteristics and learning or grade orientation influence preferred teaching style. College Student Journal, 31(3), 347.
• Schunk, D.H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231.
• Spooren, P. ve Mortelmans, D. (2006). Teacher professionalism and student evaluation of teaching: Will beter teachers receive higher ratings and will better students give higher ratings? Educational Studies, 32(2),201- 214.
• Strage, A. (2008).Traditional and non-traditional college students' descriptions of the "ideal" professor and the "ideal" course and perceived strengths and limitations. College Student Journal, 42(1), 225-231.
• Telli, S., Brok, P. veÇakıroğlu, J. (2008). Teachers' and students' perceptions of the ideal teacher.EğitimveBilim, 33(149), 118-129. Ubuz, B. ve Sarı, S. (2009). Sınıföğretmeniadaylarınıniyiöğretmenolmaileilgiligörüşleri.OndokuzMa yısÜniversitesiEğitimFakültesiDergisi, 28, 53-61.
• Young, S.Y. ve Shaw, D.G. (1999).Profiles of effective college and university teachers.The Journal of Higher Education,70(6), 670-686.
• Watkins, D., Marsh, H.W. ve Young, D. (1987). Evaluatingtertiary teaching: A New Zealand perspective.Teaching andTeacher Education: An international Journal of Research andStudies, 2:41 -53.
• Worthington, A.C. (2002). The impact of student perceptions and characteristics on teaching evaluations: A case study in finance education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education: An International Journal, 27(1), 49-64.