This study investigated the effect of specific summative performance evaluation (grade feedback) on student evaluations of instruction (SEIs). Expectancy and attribution theories suggested predictions of better evaluations before explicit grade feedback than after. SEI data from eight pairs of sections of business courses confirmed these predictions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, J.
(1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436.
2.
Adams, J.
(1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 267-299). New York: Academic Press.
3.
Bausell, R.
, & Magoon, J. (1972). Expected grades in a course, gradepoint average, and student rating of instructor. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 32, 1013-1023.
4.
Bridgeman, N.
(1986). Student evaluations viewed as a group process factor. Journal of Psychology, 120(2), 183-190.
5.
Brown, D.
(1976). Faculty rating and student grades: A university-wide multiple regression analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 573-578.
6.
Brown, K.
(1984). Explaining group poor performance: An attributional analysis. Academy of Management Review, 9(1), 54-63.
7.
Cashin, W.
(1988). Student ratings of teaching: A summary of the research (Idea Paper No. 20). Manhattan: Kansas State University, Center for Faculty Evaluation & Development.
8.
Cohen, P.
(1983). Comment on a selective review of the validity of student ratings of teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 54(4), 448-458.
9.
Connolly, T.
(1976). Some conceptual and methodological issues in expectancy models of work performance motivation. Academy of Management Review, 1(4), 37-47.
10.
Costin, F.
, Greenough, W., & Menges, R. (1971). Student ratings of college teaching: Reliability, validity, and usefulness. Review of Educational Research, 41, 511-535.
11.
Danielson, A.
, & White, R. (1976). Some evidence on the variables associated with student evaluations of teachers. Journal of Economic Education, 7, 117-119.
12.
Eckrich, D.
(1990). If excellent teaching is the goal, student evaluations are backfiring. Marketing Educator, 9(3), 1, 6, 8.
13.
Engdahl, R.
(1986). In search of a PASE (Performance Appraisal System Evaluation)—to help organizations run better (Working paper). Wilmington: University of North Carolina at Wilmington.
14.
Feldman, J.
(1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 127-148.
15.
Feldman, K.
(1990). Interview in instructional evaluation. The Teaching Professor, 4(10), 5-7.
16.
Freedman, R.
, & Stumpf, S. (1977a). Course-faculty evaluation—Instrument development, correlates and validity extension (Unpublished manuscript #77-54). New York: New York University Graduate School of Business Administration.
17.
Freedman, R.
, & Stumpf, S. (1977b). A model to identify contaminants in the rating process (Unpublished manuscript #77-56). New York: New York University Graduate School of Business Administration.
18.
Freedman, R.
, & Stumpf, S. (1978). Student evaluations of courses and faculty based on perceived learning criterion: Scale construction, validation and comparison of results. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 189-202.
19.
Gillmore, G.
, Kane, M., & Naccarato, R. (1978). The general ability of student ratings of instruction: Estimation of the teacher and course components. Journal of Educational Measurement, 15, 1-13.
20.
Green, S.
, & Mitchell, T. (1979). Attributional processes of leaders in leader-member interactions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 249-258.
21.
Heider, F.
(1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
22.
Howard, G.
(1984). Thoughts on assumptions in "Exploring some pitfalls in student evaluation of teaching."Teaching of Psychology, 11(3), 184-185.
23.
Ilgen, D.
, & Feldman, J. (1983). Performance appraisal: A process focus (Draft, 1981). In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
24.
Kelly, H.
(1971). Attribution in scial interaction. Moonstoron, NJ: General League Press.
25.
Kennedy. W.
(1975). Grades expected and grades received—Their relationship to students' evaluations of faculty performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 109-115.
26.
Knowlton, W.
, & Mitchell, T. (1980). Effects of causal attributions on a supervisor's evaluation of subordinate performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 459-466.
27.
McKeachie, W.
, Lin, Y., & Mann, W. (1971). Student ratings of teacher effectiveness: Validity studies. American Educational Research Journal, 8, 435-445.
28.
Mirus, R.
(1973). Some implications of student evaluation of teachers. Journal of Economic Education, 4, 35-37.
29.
Nimmer, J.
, & Stone, E. (1991). Effects of grading practices and time of rating on student ratings of faculty performance. Research in Higher Education, 32, 195-215.
30.
Owie, I.
(1985). Incongruence between expected and obtained course grades and students' rating of the instructor. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 12(4), 196-199.
31.
Sample, J.
(1984). The expectancy theory of motivation: Implications for training and development. In J. Pfeiffer & L. Goodstein (Eds.), The 1984 annual: Developing human's resources (pp. 257-261). San Diego, CA: University Associates.
32.
Schwab, D.
(1975). Course and student characteristic correlates of the course evaluation instrument. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 742-747.
33.
Schwab, D.
(1976). Manual for the Course Evaluation Instrument. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Madison Graduate School of Business and Industrial Relations Research Institute.
34.
Shannon, C.
, & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
35.
SPSS, Inc.
(1986). SPSS-X user's guide (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
36.
Stumpf, S.
, & Freedman, R. (1977). The nature of expected grade bias in course-faculty evaluations (Unpublished manuscript #77-08). New York: New York University Graduate School of Business Administration.
37.
Weiner, B.
(1974). An attributional interpretation of expectancy-value theory. In B. Weiner (Ed.), Cognitive views of human motivation (pp. 51-69). New York: Academic Press.
