This article provides an extensive overview of the recent literature on student evaluation of teaching (SET) in higher education. The review is based on the SET meta-validation model, drawing upon research reports published in peer-reviewed journals since 2000. Through the lens of validity, we consider both the more traditional research themes in the field of SET (i.e., the dimensionality debate, the ‘bias’ question, and questionnaire design) and some recent trends in SET research, such as online SET and bias investigations into additional teacher personal characteristics. The review provides a clear idea of the state of the art with regard to research on SET, thus allowing researchers to formulate suggestions for future research. It is argued that SET remains a current yet delicate topic in higher education, as well as in education research. Many stakeholders are not convinced of the usefulness and validity of SET for both formative and summative purposes. Research on SET has thus far failed to provide c...

On the Validity of Student Evaluation of Teaching: The State of the Art

This paper concentrates upon the relationship between marriage, parental status, and publication productivity for women in academic science, with comparisons to men. Findings indicate that gender, family characteristics, and productivity are complex considerations that go beyond being married or not married, and the presence or absence of children. For women particularly, the relationship between marriage and productivity varies by type of marriage: first compared with subsequent marriage, and occupation of spouse (in scientific compared with non-scientific occupation). Further, type of family composition is important: women with preschool children have higher productivity than women without children or with school-age children. Women with preschool children are found to be a socially selective group in their characteristics, particularly in their allocations of time.

Gender, Family Characteristics, and Publication Productivity among Scientists

In the original chapter (1997), Feldman explores how student ratings can be used to identify those teachers who are seen by students as exemplary, while noting certain precautions (which involve myths, half-truths and bias) in doing so. He also analyzes how exemplary teaching itself can be identified in terms of specific pedagogical dispositions, behaviors and practices of teachers. While the essential findings of this earlier analysis remain valid, there have been changes in the nature and focus of research on college teaching and its evaluation. As well, new challenges and developments are forcing higher education to rethink its paradigms and practices in such areas as teaching, the evaluation of faculty performance, and the kinds of support faculty need to meet the increasingly complex professional demands placed on the professoriate. The co-authors of the commentary and update (Theall and Feldman) review the principal findings of the original chapter, discuss the literature of the past decade, and offer suggestions for ways in which higher education and the professoriate can survive and flourish in the future

Identifying Exemplary Teachers and Teaching: Evidence from Student Ratings 1

The previous decade witnessed significant advancements in the scholarship of teaching at the levels of both theory building and program development Notwithstanding these achievements, there remains considerable ambiguity regarding the meaning of the concept This ambiguity has implications for faculty evaluation Excellence in teaching, expertise in teaching, and the scholarship of teaching are analyzed according to the nature and sources of knowledge construction underlying each Practical examples are included to illustrate differences It is argued that excellence in teaching and the scholarship of teaching are both important but should be recognized and rewarded in their own right

Teaching Excellence, Teaching Expertise, and the Scholarship of Teaching

Although the student evaluation of teaching has been extensively researched, no general consensus has been reached about the validity of the process. One contentious issue has been the relationship between the evaluations and learning. If good instruction increases the amount of learning that takes place, then learning and the evaluations should be validly related to each other. A review of the literature shows that attempts to find such a nomological relationship has been complicated by practice, methodology, and interpretation. A meta-analysis of the literature shows that a small average relationship exists between learning and the evaluations but that the association is situational and not applicable to all teachers, academic disciplines, or levels of instruction. It is concluded that the more objectively learning is measured, the less likely it is to be related to the evaluations.

/pdf/student-evaluations-of-teaching-are-they-related-to-what-1bikx5zd3p.pdf

Student Evaluations of Teaching: Are They Related to What Students Learn?--A Meta-Analysis and Review of the Literature.

In order to assess, recognize, and reward the scholarship of teaching, it is critical to define its characteristics and outcomes. This chapter discusses evaluation criteria for both formative and summative purposes.

Assessing the Scholarship of Teaching: Valid Decisions from Valid Evidence.

Handicapped students' scores on timed and untimed editions of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) were studied in order to learn of the effects of extra time on test performance. Of the approximately 1800 students studied, 79 percent were learning disabled. Handicapped students' performance improved with extended time, the increase being greater than that for non-handicapped students tested with extra time. The average gains over scores earned in a timed administration were generally between 30 to 38 points on the SAT after growth in student ability, practice effects, and errors of measurement were taken into account. About one in seven gained over 100 points; between 3 to 7 percent decreased by at least 50 points. Score gains increased as time spent on the test increased, suggesting that the additional time was needed to reduce the effects of the examinee's impairment.

Handicapped Student Performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test

Six samples of Ph.D. recipients 3, 5, and 13 years after receiving the doctorate are examined for academic and personal characteristics associated with the career accomplishments of professional productivity and income. Both academic and nonacademic careers are included; the samples are professionals in chemistry, history, psychology, and the physical, biological, and social sciences. In general, the results suggest that academic ability and quality of the Ph.D. program influence job settings and responsibilities, which in turn directly influence both productivity and income. Number of years since the degree also is consistently related to both outcome measures.

Influences on the Career Accomplishments of Ph.D.'s.

Are traditional sources of information about exemplary teaching effective for identifying such teachers?—a review of the research and a proposal.

Identifying exemplary teachers: Evidence from colleagues, administrators, and alumni

There are numerous approaches to faculty evaluation. This chapter presents relevant research findings, references to instruments, and specific criteria and methods for evaluating teaching, research, and service.

Assessment of Faculty in Teacher Education Programs

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

John A. Centra

Author Tools

Chat about Author