Missing the forest for the trees: investigating factors influencing student evaluations of teaching

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Richard O’Donovan
{"title":"Missing the forest for the trees: investigating factors influencing student evaluations of teaching","authors":"Richard O’Donovan","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2023.2266862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Student evaluations of teaching (SETs) feature prominently in higher education and can impact an academic’s career. As a result, they have attracted considerable research attention in order to identify evidence of bias and the influence of factors beyond an educator’s control. This study investigates the influence of seven factors on a large dataset of student evaluations (N = 376,805) of academics teaching at an Australian university. Students were invited to rate their experience at the end of each teaching period using an online survey instrument. The following factors are analysed comparing means between relevant groups to verify if: i) SET is dominated by students with strong feelings; ii) revenge reviews are given by angry students; iii) larger units are rated lower than smaller units; iv) different expectations/ratings are given by students of different gender and backgrounds; v) reticence of international students lowers overall ratings; vi) bigoted students skew results for some staff; and, vii) SET surveys during examinations disadvantaging academics teaching units with examinations. Overall, while statistically significant differences were found, they represented only small or trivial effects, with medium effects in only two limited cases. The results highlight the importance of explicitly reporting effect size of statistically significant results, and the benefits of representing differences visually in ways that avoid over-emphasising differences.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2266862","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Student evaluations of teaching (SETs) feature prominently in higher education and can impact an academic’s career. As a result, they have attracted considerable research attention in order to identify evidence of bias and the influence of factors beyond an educator’s control. This study investigates the influence of seven factors on a large dataset of student evaluations (N = 376,805) of academics teaching at an Australian university. Students were invited to rate their experience at the end of each teaching period using an online survey instrument. The following factors are analysed comparing means between relevant groups to verify if: i) SET is dominated by students with strong feelings; ii) revenge reviews are given by angry students; iii) larger units are rated lower than smaller units; iv) different expectations/ratings are given by students of different gender and backgrounds; v) reticence of international students lowers overall ratings; vi) bigoted students skew results for some staff; and, vii) SET surveys during examinations disadvantaging academics teaching units with examinations. Overall, while statistically significant differences were found, they represented only small or trivial effects, with medium effects in only two limited cases. The results highlight the importance of explicitly reporting effect size of statistically significant results, and the benefits of representing differences visually in ways that avoid over-emphasising differences.
只见树木不见森林:影响学生教学评价的因素调查
学生教学评估(set)在高等教育中占有重要地位,并可能影响一个学者的职业生涯。因此,他们吸引了相当多的研究关注,以确定偏见的证据和教育者无法控制的因素的影响。本研究调查了7个因素对澳大利亚一所大学学术教学的学生评价大数据集(N = 376,805)的影响。学生们被邀请在每个教学期结束时使用在线调查工具对他们的体验进行评分。通过对以下因素进行分析,比较相关群体间的均值,验证SET是否以情感强烈的学生为主;Ii)复仇评论由愤怒的学生给出;Iii)较大机组的额定值低于较小机组;Iv)不同性别和背景的学生有不同的期望/评分;5)国际学生的沉默降低了整体评分;Vi)偏执的学生对一些工作人员的结果产生了偏差;考试期间的SET调查对学术教学单位不利。总的来说,虽然发现了统计学上显著的差异,但它们只代表了很小或微不足道的影响,仅在两个有限的病例中具有中等影响。结果强调了明确报告统计显著结果的效应大小的重要性,以及以避免过度强调差异的方式直观地表示差异的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信