This study analyzes the student evaluation forms at the Darden Graduate School of Business. Through structural equation modeling, the author describes the relationships between “course effectiveness” and “instructor effectiveness” constructs. Her research suggests that instructors can alter the delivery of their courses to improve the quality of their instruction. The author also suggests that administrators modify the assessment form and improve the evaluation process. The changes recommended will result in a better assessment process, more useful feedback to faculty, and an improvement in the quality of instruction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Angelo, T. A.
,& Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college faculty(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2.
Bentler, P. M.
, & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significant tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
3.
Braskamp, L. A.
,& Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and institutional performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Braskamp, L. A.
, Ory, J. C., & Pieper, D. M. (1981). Student written comments: Dimensions of instructional quality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 65-70.
5.
Cashin, W. E. (1995). IDEA Paper No. 32: Student ratings of teaching: The research revisited. Manhattan: Kansas State University, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development.
6.
Centra, J. A.
(1979). Determining faculty effectiveness: Assessing teaching, research, and science for personnel decisions and improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
Centra, J. A.
(1993). Reflective faculty evaluation: Enhancing teaching and determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
Centra, J. A.
, & Creech, F. R. (1976). The relationship between student, teachers and course characteristics and student ratings of teacher effectiveness(Project Report 76-1). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
9.
Davis, B. G.
(1993). Tools of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Dewey, J.
(1987). Thinking in education. In L. B. Barnes, C. R. Christensen, & A. J. Hansen (Eds.), Teaching and the case method(3rd ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
11.
Educational Testing Service
. (1975). Comparative data guide: Student instructional report. Princeton, NJ: Author.
12.
Educational Testing Service
. (1977). Comparative data guide for two year colleges and technical institutions: Student instructional report. Princeton, NJ: Author.
13.
Feldman, K. A.
(1976a). Grades and college students’ evaluations of their courses and teachers. Research in Higher Education, 4, 69-111.
14.
Feldman, K. A.
(1976b). The superior college teacher from the students’ view. Research in Higher Education, 5, 243-288.
15.
Howard, G. S.
, & Maxwell, S. E. (1980). The correlations between student satisfaction and grades: A case of mistaken causation?Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 810-820.
16.
Howard, G. S.
, & Maxwell, S. E. (1982). Do grades contaminate student evaluations of instruction?Research in Higher Education, 16, 175-188.
17.
Marsch, H. W.
(1984). Students’ evaluations of university teaching: Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 707-754.
18.
McArdle, J. J.
(1988). Dynamic but structural equation modeling of repeated measures data. In J. R. Nesselroade & R. B. Cattell (Eds.), The handbook of multivariate experimental psychology(Vol. 2, pp. 561-564). New York: Plenum.
19.
Ory, J. C.
, Braskamp, L. A.,& Pieper, D. M. (1980). Congruency of student evaluative information and collected by three methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 181-185.
20.
Overall, J. U.
,& Marsh, H. W. (1980). Students’evaluations of instruction: Alongitudinal study of their stability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 321-325.
21.
Sixbury, G. R., & Cashin, W. E. (1995). IDEA Technical Report No. 9: Description of database for the IDEA Diagnostic Form. Manhattan: Kansas State University, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development.
