Search results

This paper reports results of analyses made at an all-female Gulf Arab university measuring the nature and extent of biases in students' evaluation of faculty. Comparisons are made with research reporting the nature of similar relationships in North America. Two issues are investigated: 1) What variables (if any) bias faculty evaluation results at an all-female Arab university? 2) Are biasing variables different in nature or magnitude to those reported at North America universities? Using the population of 13,300 faculty evaluation records collected over two school years at Zayed University, correlations of faculty evaluation results to nine potentially biasing factors are made. Results show biases to faculty evaluation results do exist. However, biases are small, and strikingly similar in nature to those reported at North American universities.

The validity of student evaluation of teaching (SET) has been continually debated in the academic community. The primary purpose of this research is to survey student perceptions to provide any evidence of inherent weaknesses in the use of SETs to measure and report teaching effectiveness accurately. The study surveyed over 500 undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in various accounting courses over two years at a large public university. Students were asked to rate several factors on their importance in faculty evaluations and identify instructor traits and behaviors warranting lower ratings. The study provides further evidence that the use of student evaluations of teaching for personnel decisions is not appropriate. Students will punish instructors who engage in a number of well‐known learning/teaching techniques, which encourages instructors to increase SET scores by sacrificing the learning process. Other measures and methods should be employed to ensure that teaching effectiveness is accurately measured and properly rewarded. Using student data as a surrogate for teaching performance is an illusionary performance measurement system.

The aim of this paper is to generate a streamlined, transparent and effective instrument to fairly measure the contribution made by each student to a group project within a higher education context. The primary aim is to moderate the grades of underperforming students at the end of the project. There is a secondary benefit in alerting underperforming students to raise their contribution mid-task or face a potentially reduced grade at the final stage.

The development of this multi-dimensional instrument is guided by findings from previous research. The quest is to minimise the instructor's administrative work load in applying a moderation-only instrument that is open-source and available at no cost. Based on the literature, the survey instrument seeks to apply a peer-based, equitable and transparent evaluation of each member's contribution to a group task. The survey is applied at mid-task and again at end-task in order to afford underperformers the opportunity to address contribution deficits during the final phase of the project.

The instrument, called TANDEM©, offers a transparent, streamlined, equitable, confidential and practical measure of each student's contribution to a graded group task. Students whose end-task contribution falls below the group average rating receive a proportional reduction in their personal grade. Additionally, the end-task moderation instrument captures a single-item holistic measure of relative contribution that may, in the future, serve as a surrogate for the multi-dimensional measures currently in place.

TANDEM© was developed with group sizes of four or five members in mind. There is no evidence to support its application to three-person groups. Moreover, the application was applied only amongst under-graduate students. It is yet to be applied across post-graduate groups and within online learning environments. Future research into diverse cultural settings would serve to advance understanding of how moderation is perceived across borders.

Several existing group grade moderation methods propose complex algorithms that are “black box” solutions from a student's perspective. In establishing a fair, streamlined, confidential and transparent process for peer-rated moderation, TANDEM© deploys a concise instrument with a relatively small administrative load. TANDEM © may be applied to all groups or can selectively be applied to groups that report moderate, strong or extreme levels of conflict.

Students will appreciate the opportunity to rate peer contributions to group projects. This will dissipate the negative social sentiment that may arise when fellow students benefit from the work of others. Those students seeking conflict resolution within the group will value the transparent and equitable moderation of grades as well as the positive social implications that follow.

This research forms part of an ongoing quest to present a moderation instrument that fairly identifies student contribution to a group project. Whilst the solution proposed is one of many existing alternatives, its focus is on a practical moderation-only instrument that can immediately be applied to a course or major. The benefits lie in the ease of application and minimal administrative workload. This constitutes an original contribution to the individual (course or major) coordinator who seeks to apply a moderation-only instrument without having to commit to an extensive, broad-based group optimisation programme.

The purpose of this paper is to examine hypothesized links between the Dana Center Mathematics Pathways’ (DCMP) Foundations of Mathematical Reasoning curriculum and the four hypothesized sources of self-efficacy. The sample of developmental mathematics students who were taught with a curriculum that incorporates active and collaborative learning reported increased ratings on social persuasions from the beginning to the end of the semester.

The study examines changes in the four sources of self-efficacy. Students completed a pre- and post-survey. Non-parametric methods were conducted to measure changes.

The paper provides empirical insights into changes in the four sources of self-efficacy with the implementation of a new curriculum in developmental mathematics classrooms. Students in the DCMP Foundation course increased their ratings on social persuasions and mastery experiences and decreased their ratings on physiological states. The largest proportion of variability in the four sources that was accounted for by course grade was mastery experiences followed by vicarious experiences, social persuasions and physiological states.

A control group was not included. Therefore, comparisons between students enrolled in the intervention course and a traditional course were not possible.

An implication of the study is that a curriculum that has an emphasis on face-to-face communication with collaborative learning activities might be linked to more positive measures of the sources of self-efficacy.

This paper fulfils a need to study how the implementation of an alternative curriculum in developmental mathematics classrooms can be linked to students’ self-efficacy.

Competition among higher education institutions has pushed universities to expand their competitive advantages. Based on the assumption that the core functions of universities are academic, understanding the teaching–learning process with the help of student evaluation of teaching (SET) would seem to be a logical solution in increasing competitiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The current paper presents a narrative literature review examining how SETs work within the concept of service marketing, focusing specifically on the search, experience, and credence qualities of the provider. A review of the various factors that affect the collection of SETs is also included.

Relevant findings show the influence of students’ prior expectations on SET ratings. Therefore, teachers are advised to establish a psychological contract with the students at the start of the semester. Such an agreement should be negotiated, setting out the potential benefits of undertaking the course and a clear definition of acceptable performance within the class. Moreover, connections should be made between courses and subjects in order to provide an overall view of the entire program together with future career pathways.

Given the complex factors affecting SETs and the antecedents involved, there appears to be no single perfect tool to adequately reflect what is happening in the classroom. As different SETs may be needed for different courses and subjects, options such as faculty self-evaluation and peer-evaluation might be considered to augment current SETs.

To present a framework to facilitate comprehension of research on the effectiveness of the teaching evaluation process.

A comprehensive review of the literature that identifies common categories and factors that can be used to construct an analytical framework.

Identifies student related, course related and teacher related aspects of research on teaching evaluations. Factors commonly addressed within these aspects are also identified.

Use of the framework to analyse the literature on the student evaluation of teaching (SET) process leads to the view that the time is right to explore other methods of assessing classroom dynamics that could supplement the conventional teacher evaluation process.

Educational literature is replete with studies of the SET system, yet due to the preponderance of these studies, it is difficult to take an overview on the effectiveness of this system. On the basis of a comprehensive survey of the literature, this paper identifies and discusses the central factors influencing SET scores. These factors are then presented in a comprehensible table that can be used as a reference point for researchers and practitioners wishing to examine the effectiveness of the SET system.

The paper is one of the few to attempt to make sense of the myriad of studies on teacher evaluation and to develop a framework to facilitate analysis of the effectiveness of the SET system.

The purpose of this study is to examine student sentiments regarding high-quality vs low-quality teaching.

This study uses a text mining technique to identify the positive and negative patterns of student sentiments from student evaluations of teaching (SET) provided on Ratemyprofessors.com. After identifying the key positive and negative sentiments, this study performs generalized linear regressions and calculates cumulative logits to analyze the impact of key sentiments on high- and low-quality teaching.

Results from 6,705 SET provided on Ratemyprofessors.com indicated that students express different sets of sentiments regarding high- vs low-quality teaching. In particular, the authors found positive sentiments such as passionate, straightforward, accessible, hilarious, sweet, inspiring and clear to be predictive of high-quality teaching. Additionally, negative sentiments such as disorganized, rude, difficult, confusing and boring were significantly related to low-quality teaching.

This study is one of the first few studies confirming that high- and low-quality teaching are not completely opposite to each other from the student’s perspective. That is, the presence of high-quality teaching does not necessarily mean the absence of low-quality teaching. As such, this study provides an important theoretical base for future researchers who wish to explore approaches for improving faculty teaching in the higher education setting. Additionally, this study offers educators some recommendations that may help students experience positive sentiments while minimizing negative sentiments.

In this paper it is argued that the degree of emotional competence demonstrated by members of a team will determine whether member interactions build cohesiveness and high performance. The study presented examines the relationship between the average score of team members on thirteen emotional intelligence (EI) competencies, and ratings of team cohesiveness and performance in 18 teams in an Executive MBA program. Results showed EI competencies of influence, empathy, and achievement orientation were positively related to student and faculty ratings of team cohesiveness. Empathy was positively related to student and faculty ratings of team performance, and achievement orientation was positively related to student ratings of team performance. Implications are discussed.

This paper aims to investigate the educational benefits and challenges of introducing natural science students to on-campus and off-campus sustainability research projects as an approach to education for sustainability.

The course “Science and Sustainability” at the University of Leuven is a stand-alone course that aims at providing master students in the natural sciences, education for (the benefit of) sustainability action. It was launched in 2016-2017 and has been running for two years now. The first year focused on getting students acquire a similar level of knowledge in sustainability, while, on a higher level, the experiential learning phase (project work) was supported with specific reflection assignments. In the second year, more specific attention was directed toward allowing students to get acquainted with systems thinking and deal with inter- and transdisciplinary issues by approaching problems from a multi-stakeholder view. Insight in the impact and the appreciation of the setup of the course was obtained from a series of questionnaires offered to all participating students at the beginning, about midway, and again at the end of the course.

Analysis of the students’ self-reported sustainability competence development shows a clear positive impact for almost all students who participated. A clear relation between the observed change and the students’ self-rating and attitude at the start, as well as with their discipline, is observed.

Information is gained on a number of factors of importance to impact the students’ attitude toward action for sustainability, and how this can be further improved.