Abstract
College students (N = 1,374) evaluated teaching effectiveness both at the end of each course (N = 100) and again 1 year after graduation. Mean end-of-term ratings were similar to those collected after graduation, and the two sets of ratings were highly correlated (median r = .83). The purpose of this study was to determine the relative contribution of course level (undergraduate vs. graduate), course type (accounting, economics, finance, etc.), and the specific instructor in determining evaluations of teaching. Results showed variance attributable to the specific instructor was much larger than that due either to course level or course type for both end-of-term and follow-up ratings, and the effects were stable. These findings indicate that both the type of course and the level at which it is taught are relatively less important in determining the outcome of student ratings than who teaches it.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.