IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/ijhe11/v4y2015i2p116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Tail Wagging the Dog; An Overdue Examination of Student Teaching Evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Patti Miles
  • Deanna House

Abstract

Purpose- The purpose of this research is to examine the impact of several factors beyond the professor’s control and their unique impact on Student Teaching Evaluations (STEs). The present research pulls together a substantial amount of data to statistically analyze several academic historical legends about just how vulnerable STEs are to the effects of- class size, course type, professor gender, and course grades. Design/methodology/approach- This research is utilizes over 30,000 individual student evaluations of 255 professors, spanning six semesters, during a three year time period to test six hypotheses. The final sample represents 1057 classes ranging in size between 10 and 190 students. Each hypothesis is statistically analyzed, with either analysis of variance or a Regression model. Findings- This study finds support for 5 out of 6 hypotheses. Specifically, these data suggest STEs are likely to be closest to “5†(using a 1-5 scale with 5 being highest) in small elective classes, and lowest in large required classes taught by females. As well we find support for the notion that higher expected course grades may lead to higher STEs. Practical implications- The practical significance of this research is important. First this research utilized a large data set spanning several years and hundreds of professors and thousands of students and rigorous statistical analysis to assert several important findings. Indeed STEs are impacted significantly by class type, class size, the gender of the professor and the expected course grade. With these findings we suggest a more comprehensive mechanism is in order for evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Social implications- This research could have great social implications if widely read across academic circles. Indeed the tail is wagging the dog; or the student is influencing teaching across America’s universities. It is time to examine teaching effectiveness through a different lens, because using teaching evaluations to determine promotion and tenure, sparse bonus allocation, and teaching awards may be short sighted. Research limitations- While this research is statistically accurate, it is limited by the notion that the data was collected from one large area. As such, care should be taken in generalizing these results to other areas that may have different demographic composition, funding etc. Originality/value- To the best of the authors’ knowledge this research is the first of its kind to statistically analyze such a large body of data and provide a useful guide to help evaluate professors utilizing what information is available.Â

Suggested Citation

  • Patti Miles & Deanna House, 2015. "The Tail Wagging the Dog; An Overdue Examination of Student Teaching Evaluations," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(2), pages 116-116, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:4:y:2015:i:2:p:116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/download/6418/4025
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/view/6418
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Bosshardt & Michael Watts, 2001. "Comparing Student and Instructor Evaluations of Teaching," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 3-17, January.
    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. Nilss Olekalns, 2002. "The Teaching of First Year Economics in Australian Universities," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 848, The University of Melbourne.
    2. N Dorasamy, 2013. "Role of Student Ratings of Lecturers in Enhancing teaching at Higher Education Institutions: A case study of the Durban University of Technology," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 5(5), pages 268-281.
    3. Mouhcine Tallaki & Enrico Bracci & Monia Castellini, 2015. "Accounting learning preferences: the role of visualisation," Working Papers 2015094, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    4. Angelo Antoci & Irene Brunetti & Pierluigi Sacco & Mauro Sodini, 2021. "Student evaluation of teaching, social influence dynamics, and teachers’ choices: An evolutionary model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 325-348, January.
    5. Joe Hirschberg & Jenny Lye & Martin Davies & Carol Johnston, 2011. "Measuring Student Experience: Relationships between Teaching Quality Instruments (TQI) and Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ)," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1134, The University of Melbourne.
    6. Franklin G. Mixon & Richard J. Cebula (ed.), 2014. "New Developments in Economic Education," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15538.
    7. Akbar Marvasti, 2007. "Foreign-Born Teaching Assistants and Student Achievement: An Ordered Probit Analysis," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 51(2), pages 61-71, October.
    8. Gorry, Devon, 2017. "The impact of grade ceilings on student grades and course evaluations: Evidence from a policy change," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 133-140.
    9. Bruce A. Weinberg & Belton M. Fleisher & Masanori Hashimoto, 2007. "Evaluating Methods for Evaluating Instruction: The Case of Higher Education," NBER Working Papers 12844, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Yoav Gal & Adiv Gal, 2014. "Knowledge Bias: Is There a Link Between Students’ Feedback and the Grades They Expect to Get from the Lecturers They Have Evaluated? A Case Study of Israeli Colleges," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(3), pages 597-615, September.
    11. Martin Davies & Joe Hirschberg & Jenny Lye & Carol Johnston & Ian Mcdonald, 2007. "Systematic Influences On Teaching Evaluations: The Case For Caution," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 18-38, March.
    12. Horacio Matos-Díaz & Alfred J. Crouch Ruiz, 2008. "¿Es sesgada la evaluación estudiantil? El caso de la Universidad de Puerto Rico en Bayamón," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 10(18), pages 241-260, January-J.
    13. Warburton, C.E.S., 2020. "Pedagogical Ethics And Economic Growth," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 20(2), pages 19-34.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:jfr:ijhe11:v:4:y:2015:i:2:p:116. 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: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.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.