Making Sense of Today’s Use of Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET)

Human Arenas - Trang 1-5 - 2023
Peter Graf1
1Memory & Cognition Laboratory, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Tóm tắt

Uttl (this issue) argues that scores from Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET) must not be used for making high-stakes career decisions because they are not predictive of effective teaching or of teacher effectiveness. I note in this article that teaching effectiveness can be operationalized with reference to outcomes like student test performance, with reference to processes like student engagement and motivation, or with reference to personal experiences like student satisfaction with courses and teachers. I argue that the latter of these alternatives is prioritized in today’s higher education marketplace, and this explains developments like grade inflation and course workload deflation because both are effective in elevating student satisfaction rating. By contrast to Uttl, I argue that as indicators of students’ satisfaction with courses and teachers, SET scores are valid and their use for career decision-making is understandable and defensible.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1990.tb00506.x

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.

American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychological Association.

Atkins, M., & Brown, G. (2002). Effective teaching in higher education. Routledge.

Campbell, R. J., Kyriakides, L., Muijs, R. D., & Robinson, W. (2004). Differential teacher effectiveness: Towards a model for research and teacher appraisal. Oxford Review of Education, 29, 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980307440

Canadian Psychological Association. (2017). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists fourth edition. Canadian Psychological Association.

Devlin, M., & Samarawickrema, G. (2010). The criteria of effective teaching in a changing higher education context. Higher Education Research & Development, 29, 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360903244398

Diane, D., Chapman, D. D., & Joines, J. A. (2017). Strategies for increasing response rates for online end-of-course evaluations. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29, 47–60.

Gagné, M., Forest, J., Gilbert, M.-H., Aube, C., Morin, E., & Malorni, A. (2010). The motivation at work scale: Validation evidence in two languages. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 628–646. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409355698

Luthans, K. (2000). Recognition: A powerful, but often overlooked, leadership tool to improve employee performance. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190000700104

Qureshi, S., & Ullah, R. (2014). Learning experiences of higher education students: Approaches to learning as measures of quality of learning outcomes. Bulletin of Education and Research, 36, 79–100. Available at: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Learning-Experiences-of-Higher-Education-Students%3A-Qureshi-Ullah/901e743718cd6193fe5c2fcde4b30c810fe6cedf#citing-papers

Useless studies: Was your degree really worth it? (2023, April 8). The Economist.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Human Arenas

1-5

Thông tin tác giả