IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/umiodp/72013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Können sich Hochschuldozenten bessere studentische Lehrevaluationen "erkaufen"?

Author

Listed:
  • Lütkenhöner, Laura

Abstract

In dieser Studie werden 128 Fälle betrachtet, in denen dieselben Studenten eine Vorlesung zu zwei verschiedenen Zeitpunkten evaluiert haben. Die Besonderheit dabei ist, dass ausschließlich Fälle berücksichtigt werden, in denen die zum Zeitpunkt der Evaluation erwartete oder bereits erhaltene Note zum späteren Zeitpunkt besser ist als zum früheren Zeitpunkt. Die Ergebnisse lassen darauf schließen, dass sich (vielfach beobachtete) Zusammenhänge zwischen Noten und Evaluationsergebnissen nicht allein mit dem Effektive-Lehre-Ansatz und/ oder dem Studenten-Charakteristika-Ansatz erklären lassen. Vielmehr scheinen Dozenten durchaus die Möglichkeit zu haben, bessere Lehrbewertungen zu erkaufen. Binäre logistische Regressionen zeigen aber auch, dass die Wahrscheinlichkeit, mit der ein Student auf eine Notenverbesserung mit einer besseren Lehrbewertungen reagiert, vom Geschlecht und vom Elternhaus sowie von einer bereits absolvierten Ausbildung beeinflusst wird. In Bezug auf die Wahrscheinlichkeit für eine solche Reaktion bestehen auch signifikante Unterschiede zwischen verschiedenen Dozenten.

Suggested Citation

  • Lütkenhöner, Laura, 2013. "Können sich Hochschuldozenten bessere studentische Lehrevaluationen "erkaufen"?," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 7/2013, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:72013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/80339/1/756525616.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael A. McPherson & R. Todd Jewell, 2007. "Leveling the Playing Field: Should Student Evaluation Scores be Adjusted?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 88(3), pages 868-881, September.
    2. Michael A. McPherson, 2006. "Determinants of How Students Evaluate Teachers," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 3-20, January.
    3. Krautmann, Anthony C. & Sander, William, 1999. "Grades and student evaluations of teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 59-63, February.
    4. Selten, Reinhard & Ockenfels, Axel, 1998. "An experimental solidarity game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 517-539, March.
    5. Frank, Bjorn & Schulze, Gunther G., 2000. "Does economics make citizens corrupt?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 101-113, September.
    6. John R. Carter & Michael D. Irons, 1991. "Are Economists Different, and If So, Why?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 171-177, Spring.
    7. Michael A McPherson & R Todd Jewell & Myungsup Kim, 2009. "What Determines Student Evaluation Scores? A Random Effects Analysis of Undergraduate Economics Classes," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 37-51.
    8. Paul Isely & Harinder Singh, 2005. "Do Higher Grades Lead to Favorable Student Evaluations?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 29-42, January.
    9. Ewing, Andrew M., 2012. "Estimating the impact of relative expected grade on student evaluations of teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 141-154.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Donghun Cho & Joonmo Cho, 2017. "Does More Accurate Knowledge of Course Grade Impact Teaching Evaluation?," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 12(2), pages 224-240, Spring.
    2. Maarten Goos & Anna Salomons, 2017. "Measuring teaching quality in higher education: assessing selection bias in course evaluations," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 58(4), pages 341-364, June.
    3. Anna Salomons & Maarten Goos, 2014. "Measuring Teaching Quality in Higher Education: Assessing the Problem of Selection Bias in Course Evaluations," Working Papers 14-16, Utrecht School of Economics.
    4. Anne Boring, 2015. "Gender Biases in student evaluations of teachers," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2015-13, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    5. Rieger, Matthias & Voorvelt, Katherine, 2016. "Gender, ethnicity and teaching evaluations: Evidence from mixed teaching teamsAuthor-Name: Wagner, Natascha," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 79-94.
    6. R. Todd Jewell & Michael A. McPherson & Margie A. Tieslau, 2013. "Whose fault is it? Assigning blame for grade inflation in higher education," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1185-1200, March.
    7. Joonmo Cho & Wonyoung Baek, 2019. "Identifying Factors Affecting the Quality of Teaching in Basic Science Education: Physics, Biological Sciences, Mathematics, and Chemistry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    8. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1seuirq4ak9b9bouu1j29ebui7 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Cho, Donghun & Baek, Wonyoung & Cho, Joonmo, 2015. "Why do good performing students highly rate their instructors? Evidence from a natural experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 172-179.
    10. Wagner, N. & Rieger, M. & Voorvelt, K.J., 2016. "Gender, ethnicity and teaching evaluations : Evidence from mixed teaching teams," ISS Working Papers - General Series 617, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    11. Boring, Anne, 2017. "Gender biases in student evaluations of teaching," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 27-41.
    12. Beleche, Trinidad & Fairris, David & Marks, Mindy, 2012. "Do course evaluations truly reflect student learning? Evidence from an objectively graded post-test," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 709-719.
    13. Potrafke, Niklas & Fischer, Mira & Ursprung, Heinrich, 2013. "Does the Field of Study Influence Students' Political Attitudes?," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79934, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Gerald Eisenkopf & Pascal A. Sulser, 2016. "Randomized controlled trial of teaching methods: Do classroom experiments improve economic education in high schools?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 211-225, July.
    15. Gaviria Alejandro & Alejandro Hoyos, 2008. "Determinantes de los resultados de las evaluaciones de profesores: el caso de la Universidad de los Andes," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE, March.
    16. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Political Economists are Neither Selfish nor Indoctrinated," IEW - Working Papers 069, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    17. Bauman, Yoram & Rose, Elaina, 2011. "Selection or indoctrination: Why do economics students donate less than the rest?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 318-327, August.
    18. Rigdon, Mary & Ishii, Keiko & Watabe, Motoki & Kitayama, Shinobu, 2009. "Minimal social cues in the dictator game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 358-367, June.
    19. De Witte, Kristof & Rogge, Nicky, 2011. "Accounting for exogenous influences in performance evaluations of teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 641-653, August.
    20. Ewing, Andrew M., 2012. "Estimating the impact of relative expected grade on student evaluations of teachers," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 141-154.
    21. Ruske, René & Suttner, Johannes, 2012. "Wie (un-)fair sind Ökonomen? Neue empirische Evidenz zur Marktbewertung und Rationalität," CIW Discussion Papers 03/2012, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • A20 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - General
    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:72013. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ilmuede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.