IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v24y2003i1p1-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An economic analysis of the use of student evaluations: implications for universities

Author

Listed:
  • Kiridaran Kanagaretnam

    (Michael G.DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8S 4M4)

  • Robert Mathieu

    (School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5)

  • Alex Thevaranjan

    (School of Management, Syracuse University, NY 13244 - 2130, USA)

Abstract

In this paper, we develop an analytical model of joint maximizing behavior on the part of students and professors to develop policy rules for universities who use student evaluations as tools for increasing professor effort and, thereby, student knowledge. More precisely, we examine the potential benefits of student evaluations, the consequences of over-emphasizing them and the optimal level of emphasis that should be placed on them. This exercise allows us to determine conditions under which student evaluations would result in an increase in teaching effort and student knowledge, and environments where it would result in professors manipulating grading schemes to obtain higher student ratings, i.e., grade inflation. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Kiridaran Kanagaretnam & Robert Mathieu & Alex Thevaranjan, 2003. "An economic analysis of the use of student evaluations: implications for universities," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 1-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:24:y:2003:i:1:p:1-13
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.1099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/mde.1099
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.1099?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William E. Becker & Michael Watts, 2001. "Teaching Economics at the Start of the 21st Century: Still Chalk-and-Talk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 446-451, May.
    2. Allgood, Sam, 2001. "Grade targets and teaching innovations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 485-493, October.
    3. Siegfried, John J & Kennedy, Peter E, 1995. "Does Pedagogy Vary with Class Size in Introductory Economics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 347-351, May.
    4. Becker, William E, Jr, 1979. "Professorial Behavior Given a Stochastic Reward Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(5), pages 1010-1017, December.
    5. Donald G. Freeman, 1999. "Grade Divergence as a Market Outcome," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 344-351, December.
    6. Richard Sabot & John Wakeman-Linn, 1991. "Grade Inflation and Course Choice," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 159-170, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shao-Hsun Keng, 2016. "The Effect of a Stricter Academic Dismissal Policy on Course Selection, Student Effort, and Grading Leniency," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 11(2), pages 203-224, Spring.
    2. Horacio Matos-Díaz, 2014. "Measuring grade inflation and grade divergence accounting for student quality," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Wan-Ju Iris Franz, 2007. "Grade Inflation under the Threat of Students' Nuisance: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers 070806, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.
    4. Iris Franz, Wan-Ju, 2010. "Grade inflation under the threat of students' nuisance: Theory and evidence," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 411-422, June.
    5. Shao-Hsun Keng, 2018. "Tenure system and its impact on grading leniency, teaching effectiveness and student effort," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 1207-1227, November.
    6. Langbein, Laura, 2008. "Management by results: Student evaluation of faculty teaching and the mis-measurement of performance," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 417-428, August.

    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. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2008. "Differential Grading Standards and University Funding: Evidence from Italy," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 54(2), pages 149-176.
    2. Arpita Patnaik & Matthew J. Wiswall & Basit Zafar, 2020. "College Majors," NBER Working Papers 27645, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Michael C Herron & Zachary D Markovich, 2017. "Student sorting and implications for grade inflation," Rationality and Society, , vol. 29(3), pages 355-386, August.
    5. Ross Guest, 2001. "The Instructor's Optimal Mix of Teaching Methods," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 313-326.
    6. Horacio Matos-Díaz, 2014. "Measuring grade inflation and grade divergence accounting for student quality," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Nixon Chan & Peter E. Kennedy, 2002. "Are Multiple‐Choice Exams Easier for Economics Students? A Comparison of Multiple‐Choice and “Equivalent” Constructed‐Response Exam Questions," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 68(4), pages 957-971, April.
    8. Rebecca Summary & William Weber, 2012. "Grade inflation or productivity growth? An analysis of changing grade distributions at a regional university," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 95-107, August.
    9. Paul M. Anglin & Ronald Meng, 2000. "Evidence on Grades and Grade Inflation at Ontario's Universities," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 26(3), pages 361-368, September.
    10. Geraint Johnes & Kwok Tong Soo, 2017. "Grades across Universities over Time," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 85(1), pages 106-131, January.
    11. Cynthia L. Harter & William E. Becker & Michael Watts, 2011. "Time Allocations and Reward Structures for US Academic Economists from 1955–2005: Evidence from Three National Surveys," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 6-27.
    12. Ralph Stinebrickner & Todd R. Stinebrickner, 2014. "A Major in Science? Initial Beliefs and Final Outcomes for College Major and Dropout," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 426-472.
    13. Reinhilde Veugelers (ed.), 2009. "The Evaluation of the Finnish National Innovation System - Full Report," Books, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, number 495.
    14. J.R. Clark & Joshua C. Hall & Ashley S. Harrison, 2017. "The Relative Value of AER P&P Economic Education Papers," Working Papers 17-23, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    15. William E. Becker & Peter E. Kennedy, 2005. "Does Teaching Enhance Research in Economics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 172-176, May.
    16. Maria De Paola & Francesca Gioia, 2011. "Risk Aversion And Major Choice: Evidence From Italian Students," Working Papers 201107, Università della Calabria, Dipartimento di Economia, Statistica e Finanza "Giovanni Anania" - DESF.
    17. Bauer, Thomas K. & Grave, Barbara S., 2011. "Performance-related Funding of Universities: Does More Competition Lead to Grade Inflation?," IZA Discussion Papers 6073, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Castagnetti, Alessandro & Schmacker, Renke, 2022. "Protecting the ego: Motivated information selection and updating," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    19. John Robst & Jennifer VanGilder, 2016. "The relationship between faculty characteristics and the use of norm- and criteria-based grading," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1127746-112, December.
    20. Cynthia Harter & Georg Schaur & Michael Watts, 2015. "School, department, and instructor determinants of teaching methods in undergraduate economics courses," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 81(4), pages 1169-1188, April.

    More about this item

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:24:y:2003:i:1:p:1-13. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.