Contaminating factors in university students' evaluation of instructors

Bu çalışma üniversite ortamında öğretim görevlilerine verilen öğrenci değerlendirme puanları arasındaki farklılıkları ayırma analizi yöntemi ile belirlemeye çalışmaktadır. Öğrenciler tarafından verilen puanlar ortalamalarına göre iki gruba ayrılmış ve öğretim görevlileri düşük-puanlı ve yüksek-puanlı olarak iki grup halinde tanımlanmıştır. Ayırma analizi ile tanımlanan kestiriciler (i) sınıf mevcudu, (ii) dersin kredisi, (iii) sınıf düzeyi, (iv) sınıf ortalaması ve (v) aynı dersi alan grup sayısıdır. Çalışmanın sonuçları düşük-puanlı öğretim görevlilerinin düşük sınıf mevcudu olan, düşük kredili, üst sınıf düzeylerinde, sene sonu not ortalamalası yüksek olan ve tek grupla sınıflarda eğitim yapanlar olduğunu ortaya çıkartmıştır. Öğrenci değerlendirmeleri arasındaki farklılıkları açıklayan kaynakların tanımlanması öğretimin etkinliğinin değerlendirilmesi ve iyileştirilmesi konusu ile ilgili olan kişisel için önemli bulgular sağlayabilir.

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin öğretim elemanlarını değerlendirmesinde etkili olan faktörler

The present study seeks to determine the variables explaining differences between the scores of student ratings given to instructors within the context of the university through discriminant analysis. Ratings given by students were grouped into two groups based on their means and instructors were labeled as low-rated and high-rated. Predictors identified by discriminant analysis are (i) class size, (ii) credit, (iii) grade level, (iv) mean grade, and (v) number of sections. Results of the study suggested that low rated instructors are those who teach courses with smaller number of students, lower credits, higher grade levels, higher mean grades, and one section. Identification of source of differences between ratings may provide invaluable information for those who are interested in assessment of instructional effectiveness.

PDF

___

Abrami, P. C., d’Apollonia, S., & Cohen, P. A. (1990). Validity of student ratings of instruction: what we know and what we do not. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 219-231.
Aleamoni, L. M. (1999). Student rating myths versus research facts from 1924 to 1998, Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 13(2), 153-166.
Aleamoni, L. M., & Hexner, P. Z. (1980). A review of the research on student evaluation and a report on the effect of different sets of instructions on student course and instructor evaluation. Instructional Science, 9, 67-84.
Arubayi, E. A. (1987). Improvement of instruction and teacher effectiveness: are student ratings reliable and valid. Higher Education, 16(3), 267-278.
Atamian, R., & Ganguli, G. (1993). Teacher popularity and teaching effectiveness: Viewpoint of accounting students. Journal of Education for Business, 68(3), 163-169.
Basow, S. A., & Silverg, N. T. (1987). Student evaluations of college professors: are female and male professors rated differently? Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 308-314. Braskamp, L. A., & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and institutional performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & Long, J. S. (Eds. ) Testing Structural Equation Models. pp. 136–162.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Caplan, R. E., Endres, K. L., & Lueck, T. L. (1993). The interaction effects of gender on teaching evaluations. Journalism Educator, 48(3), 235-248.
Cashin, W. E., Downey, R. G. , & Sixbury, G. R. (1994). Global and specific ratings of teaching effectiveness and their relation to course objectives. Journal of Educational Psychology. 86(4), 649-657.
Cashin, W. E. (1995). Student ratings of teaching: the research revisited. IDEA Paper No. 32. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_ storage_01/0000019b/80 /14/d2/44.pdf Chen, Y. & Hoshower, L. B. (2003). Student evaluation of teaching effectiveness: an assessment of student perception and motivation, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(1), 71-88.
Centra, J. A. (1973). Effectiveness of student feedback in modifying college instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 395-401.
Conran, P. B. (1991). High school student evaluation of student teachers: how do they compare with professionals? Illinois School Research and Development, 27(2), 81-92.
Costin, F., Greenough, W. T., & Menges, R. J. (1971). Student ratings of college teaching: reliability, validity, and usefulness. Review of Educational Research, 41, 511-535.
Donaldson, J. F., Flannery, D. , & Ross-Gordon, J. (1993). A triangulated study comparing adult college students’ perceptions of effective teaching with those of traditional students. Continuing Higher Education Review, 57(3), 147-165.
Ehie, I. C. & Karathanos, D. (1994). Business faculty performance evaluation based on the new aacsb accreditation standards. Journal of Education for Business. 69, 257-262.
Endo, G. T., Della-Piana, G. (1976). A validation study of course evaluation ratings. Improving College and University Teaching, 24(2), 84-86.
Frey, P. W. (1973). Student ratings of teaching: validity of several rating factors. Science, 182, 83-85. Gessner, P. K. (1973). Evaluation of instruction. Science, 180, 566-569.
Goldberg, G., & Callahan, J. (1991). Objectivity of student evaluations of instructors. Journal of Education for Business, 66(6), 377-378.
Greenwald, A. G., & Gillmore, G. M. (1997a). Grading leniency is a removable contaminant of student ratings. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1209-1217.
Greenwald, A. G., & Gillmore, G. M. (1997b). No pain, no gain? The importance of measuring course workload in student ratings of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 743-751.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1999). LISREL 8. 30. Chicago: Scientific Software International. Kalender, I., & Berberoglu, G. (2009). An assessment of factors related to science achievement of turkish students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(10), 1379 - 1394.
Klecka, William R. (1980). Discriminant analysis. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Series, No. 19. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Kierstead, D. D’Agostino, P., & Dill, H. (1988). Sex role stereotyping of college professors: Bias in students’ ratings of instructors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 342-344.
Kulik, J. A. (2001). Student ratings: validity, utility, and controversy. New Directions for Instructional Research, 27(5), 9-25.
Lin, W. Y. (1992). Is class size a bias to student ratings of university faculty? a review. Chinese University of Education Journal, 20(1), 49-53.
Marsh, H. W. (1984). Students’ evaluations of university teaching: dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 707-754.
Mateo, M. A., & Fernandez, J. (1996). Incidence of class size on the evaluation of university teaching quality. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5), 771- 778.
Menges, R. J. (1973). The new reporters: Students rate instruction. In C. R. Pace (ed.). ew directions in higher education: evaluating learning and teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Moritsch, B. G., & Suter, W. N. (1988). Correlates of halo error in teacher evaluation. Educational Research Quarterly, 12(3), 29-34.
Rodin, M., & Rodin, B. (1972). Student evaluations of teachers. Science, 177, 1164-1166.
Shapiro, G. E. (1990). Effect of instructor and class characteristics on students’ class evaluations. Research in Higher Education. 31(2), 135-148.
Sailor, P., Worthen, B., & Shin, E. H. (1997). Class level as a possible mediator of the relationship between grades and student ratings of teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(3), 261-269.
Tatro, C. N. (1995). Gender effects on student evaluations of faculty. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 28(3), 169-173.
UCLA Office of Instructional Development. (2006). Guide to evaluation of instruction. Retrieved from http://www.oid.ucla.edu/publications/evalofinstruction/index.html Yayan, B., & Berberoglu, G. (2004). A re-analysis of the TIMSS 1999 mathematics assessment data of the Turkish students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30, 87–104.