评估学术严谨性，第二部分:学生评分、课程成绩和课程水平的调查

Q4 Social Sciences

Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Pub Date : 2020-07-23 DOI:10.5325/jasseinsteffe.9.1-2.0049

James E. Johnson, James A. Jones, T. Weidner, Allison K. Manwell

{"title":"评估学术严谨性，第二部分:学生评分、课程成绩和课程水平的调查","authors":"James E. Johnson, James A. Jones, T. Weidner, Allison K. Manwell","doi":"10.5325/jasseinsteffe.9.1-2.0049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract:Part I of this project (Johnson, Weidner, Jones, & Manwell, 2018) confirmed the definition of course rigor, as well as the development of questions used to assess rigor. This paper, part II of this project, assessed the student ratings rigor questions to investigate course rigor relative to instructor ratings, course ratings, course grades, enrollment, and course level. A total of 203 courses (2,720 students) participated during a three-year period. Results indicated that course rigor is strongly related to instructor and course ratings, but minimally to course grades. Lower-level courses also were found to have significantly lower rigor than upper-level courses. These results contradict the theory of retributional bias and suggest that faculty are more likely to receive high student ratings if perceived rigor is high. This study also provides a foundation from which course rigor can be further evaluated in different academic contexts.","PeriodicalId":56185,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness","volume":"35 1","pages":"49 - 78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Academic Rigor, Part II: An Investigation of Student Ratings, Course Grades, and Course Level\",\"authors\":\"James E. Johnson, James A. Jones, T. Weidner, Allison K. Manwell\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/jasseinsteffe.9.1-2.0049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract:Part I of this project (Johnson, Weidner, Jones, & Manwell, 2018) confirmed the definition of course rigor, as well as the development of questions used to assess rigor. This paper, part II of this project, assessed the student ratings rigor questions to investigate course rigor relative to instructor ratings, course ratings, course grades, enrollment, and course level. A total of 203 courses (2,720 students) participated during a three-year period. Results indicated that course rigor is strongly related to instructor and course ratings, but minimally to course grades. Lower-level courses also were found to have significantly lower rigor than upper-level courses. These results contradict the theory of retributional bias and suggest that faculty are more likely to receive high student ratings if perceived rigor is high. This study also provides a foundation from which course rigor can be further evaluated in different academic contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56185,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"49 - 78\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/jasseinsteffe.9.1-2.0049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jasseinsteffe.9.1-2.0049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:该项目的第一部分(Johnson, Weidner, Jones， & Manwell, 2018)确认了课程严谨性的定义，以及用于评估严谨性的问题的发展。本文是该项目的第二部分，评估了学生评分严格性问题，以调查课程严格性与教师评分、课程评分、课程成绩、入学和课程水平的关系。在三年期间，共有203门课程(2 720名学生)参加。结果表明，课程严谨性与教师和课程评分密切相关，但与课程成绩关系不大。低水平课程的严谨性也明显低于高水平课程。这些结果与报复性偏见理论相矛盾，表明如果教师的严密性高，他们更有可能得到学生的高分。本研究也为课程严谨性在不同学术背景下的进一步评估提供了基础。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Evaluating Academic Rigor, Part II: An Investigation of Student Ratings, Course Grades, and Course Level

abstract:Part I of this project (Johnson, Weidner, Jones, & Manwell, 2018) confirmed the definition of course rigor, as well as the development of questions used to assess rigor. This paper, part II of this project, assessed the student ratings rigor questions to investigate course rigor relative to instructor ratings, course ratings, course grades, enrollment, and course level. A total of 203 courses (2,720 students) participated during a three-year period. Results indicated that course rigor is strongly related to instructor and course ratings, but minimally to course grades. Lower-level courses also were found to have significantly lower rigor than upper-level courses. These results contradict the theory of retributional bias and suggest that faculty are more likely to receive high student ratings if perceived rigor is high. This study also provides a foundation from which course rigor can be further evaluated in different academic contexts.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Social Sciences-Education

CiteScore

0.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness publishes scholarly work on the assessment of student learning at the course, program, institutional, and multi-institutional levels as well as more broadly focused scholarship on institutional effectiveness in relation to mission and emerging directions in higher education assessment. JAIE is the official publication of the New England Educational Assessment Network, established in 1995 and recognized as one of the leaders in supporting best practices and resources in educational assessment.