Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Können sich Hochschuldozenten bessere studentische Lehrevaluationen "erkaufen"?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Lütkenhöner, Laura
Registered author(s):

    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. -- This study comprises 128 cases in which the same students have evaluated one lecture at two different points of time. The special feature of the study is that only such cases are considered in which the grade, expected or already received, has improved at the second point of time in comparison to the first point of time. The results suggest that correlations between grades and students' evaluations of teaching (which are often observed) are not fully explainable by the grading leniency hypothesis and/or the students' characteristics hypothesis. Rather university lecturers seem to have the opportunity to buy themselves good results in their students' teaching evaluations. However, binary logistic regressions also reveal the influence of other aspects on the likelihood that a student whose grade has improved gives a better teaching evaluation. These aspects are the student's gender, his or her parental home and the fact whether or not he or she has already finished an apprenticeship. The likelihood for such a reaction also differs between individual lecturers.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/80339/1/756525616.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics in its series Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics with number 7/2013.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: 2013
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:72013

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Universitätsstr. 14-16, 48143 Münster
    Phone: 02 51 / 83-2 29 10
    Fax: 02 51 / 83-2 83 99
    Web page: http://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/io/en/index.html
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords:

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. 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.
    2. 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, vol. 35(1), pages 37-51.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. 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.
    7. Selten, Reinhard & Ockenfels, Axel, 1998. "An experimental solidarity game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 517-539, March.
    8. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:umiodp:72013. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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