A path analytic technique is described for obtaining separate estimates of variables that are normally confounded. The particular problem involves ascertaining the relative contributions of the instructor and the course being taught in determining student ratings of teaching effectiveness. A series of six different path analytic models were used to estimate teacher and course effects, along with a variety of other parameters. The best model indicated that the effect of the teacher is about five times as large as the effect of the course and that the difference is even larger for components such as Overall Instructor and Instructor Enthusiasm. In contrast to the student rating items, background/demographic variables such as class size, students' prior subject interest, and reason for taking a course were largely a function of the course rather than the instructor.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bausell, R.B., Schwartz, S., & Purohit, A.An examination of the degree to which various student rating parameters replicate across time. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1975, 12, 273-280.
2.
Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1966.
3.
Centra, J.A.The relationship between student and alumni ratings of teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1974, 34, 321-326.
4.
Centra, J.A.Student ratings of instruction and their relationship to student learning . American Educational Research Journal, 1977 , 14, 17-24.
5.
Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D. T. Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand-McNally , 1979.
6.
Costin, F., Greenough, W.T., & Menges, R.J.Student ratings of college teaching: Reliability, validity, and usefulness . Review of Educational Research, 1971, 41, 511-535.
7.
Frey, P.W.Student ratings of teaching: Validity of several rating factors. Science, 1973, 182, 83-85.
8.
Frey, P.W., Leonard, D.W., & Beatty, W.W.Student ratings of instruction: Validation research. American Educational Research Journal, 1975, 12, 327-336.
9.
Gillmore, G.M., Kane, M.T., & Naccarato, R.W.The generalizability of student ratings of instruction: Estimating the teacher and course components. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1978,15, 1-15.
10.
Hildebrand, M., Wilson, R.C., & Dienst, E.R.Evaluating university teaching. Berkeley: University of California, Center for Research and Development in Higher Education , 1971.
11.
Kulik, J.A., & Kulik, C.C.Student ratings of instruction. Teaching of Psychology, 1974, 1, 51-57.
12.
Marsh, H.W.The validity of students' evaluations: Classroom evaluations of instructors independently nominated as best and worst teachers by graduating seniors. American Educational Research Journal, 1977,14, 441-447.
13.
Marsh, H.W.Students' evaluations of instructional effectiveness: Relationship to student, course, and instructor characteristics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto, March 1978. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 155 217)
14.
Marsh, H.W.The influence of student, course, and instructor characteristics on evaluations of university teaching. American Educational Research Journal , 1980,17, 219-237. (a)
15.
Marsh, H.W.Research on students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness. Instructional Evaluation, 1980, 4, 5-13. (b)
16.
Marsh, H.W.Validity of students' evaluations of college teaching: A multitrait-multimethod analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, in press. (a)
17.
Marsh, H.W.SEEQ: A reliable, valid and useful instrument for collecting students' evaluations of university teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology , in press. (b)
Marsh, H.W., Fleiner, H., & Thomas, C.S.Validity and usefulness of student evaluations of instructional quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975, 67, 833-839.
20.
Marsh, H.W., & Overall, J.U.Long-term stability of students' evaluations: A note on Feldman's "Consistency and variability among college students in rating their teachers and courses." Research in Higher Education, 1979,10, 139-147.
21.
Marsh, H.W., & Overall, J.U.Validity of students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness: Cognitive and affective criteria. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1980, 70, 468-475.
22.
Marsh, H.W., & Overall, J.U.Relative influence of course level, course type, and instructor on students' evaluations of instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 1981, 18, 103-112.
23.
Marsh, H.W., Overall, J.U., & Kesler, S.P.Validity of student evaluations of instructional effectiveness: A comparison of faculty self-evaluations and evaluations by their students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1979, 71, 149-160.
24.
McKeachie, W.J.Correlates of student ratings. In A. L. Sockloff (Ed.), Proceedings: The first invitational conference on faculty effectiveness as evaluated by students. Philadelphia : Temple University, Measurement and Research Center , 1973.
25.
McKeachie, W.J.Student ratings of faculty: A re-prise. Academe, 1979, 65, 384-397.
26.
Nie, N.H., Hull, C.H., Jenkins, J.G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. H. StatisticalPackage for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
27.
Overall, J.U., & Marsh, H.W.Students' evaluations of instruction: A longitudinal study-of their stability . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1980, 72, 321-325.
28.
Remmers, H.H.Ratings methods in research on teaching. In N. Gage (Ed.), Handbook on teaching. Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1963.
29.
Sullivan, A.M., & Skanes, G.R.Validity of student evaluation of teaching and the characteristics of successful instructors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 584-590.
30.
Winer, B.J.Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971.
