Student Ratings of Teaching Effectiveness: An Analysis of End-of-Course Faculty Evaluations

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to describe student ratings of teaching effectiveness for faculty in the College of Education (COE) at a Research I institution in the Southern United States. Student ratings of teaching effectiveness were analyzed for the 190 tenure-track faculty in this study based on race (White, Black, and Other racial groups which included Asians, Latinos, and Native-Americans). Three academic years of undergraduate and graduate level courses combined were used to analyze student ratings for 28 items (26 multidimensional and 2 global) on the end-of-course evaluation form. Mean ratings indicated that White faculty and faculty identified as Other executed the 26 multidimensional items often in their teaching, whereas Black faculty executed 16 multidimensional items often in their teaching and ten items were executed occasionally. On the two global items (overall value of course and overall teaching ability), student ratings were very good for White faculty and faculty who were identified as Other, and good for Black faculty. White faculty had significantly higher mean scores than Black faculty on the composite of multidimensional items and the two global items. ********** Student evaluations, peer evaluations, and self-evaluations are used in colleges and universities to evaluate teaching effectiveness. Of these three measures, student evaluation is most commonly used (Cashin, 1988). In fact, student evaluations have become routine at most colleges and universities in North America (Cashin, 1988; Hobson & Talbot, 2001; Richardson, 2005; Wagenaar, 1995). Student evaluations of teaching effectiveness are used primarily to give feedback to faculty for instructional improvement and to make personnel and administrative decisions such as promotion and tenure, merit increases, and teaching awards (Abrami, d'Apollonia, & Rosenfield, 1997; Centra, 1993; Marsh & Roche, 1993). Both of these uses of student evaluations are somewhat controversial (Donahue, 2000; Rifkin, 1995). While student evaluations are the most common measure of teaching effectiveness, their use as a legitimate indicator of quality in teaching is questionable (d'Apollonia & Abrami, 1997; Greenwald & Gillmore, 1997; Marsh & Roche, 2000). It is widely recognized that students' evaluations of their instructors tend to be capricious at best (DeFina, 1996). Problems with student evaluations of faculty include over-interpretation and students' not being equipped to judge some aspects of teaching (Cashin, 1989). It is not clear that data gathered through standardized teaching evaluations can improve teaching (Centra, 1993). Furthermore, student ratings appear to have little impact on improvement in teaching effectiveness (Murray, 1997). There is continuing debate about the kinds of measures that should be used (Cashin & Downey, 1992; Marsh & Dunkin, 1997), most particularly the role of student evaluations of teaching effectiveness, in making such decisions as promotions, tenure, or salary increases. According to DeFina (1996), a combination of the three forms of faculty evaluations--student, peer, and self--provides a more credible means of assessment than any form of evaluation alone. Student Evaluations at a Southern Research I University Student evaluations are widely employed in colleges and universities throughout the United States, and the College of Education (COE) at a Southern Research I university is no exception. The COE adapted a 36-item student evaluation form that is used in many of the college's nine departments. Some departments in the college have created and standardized a student evaluation form that more adequately reflects their disciplines. In other cases, faculty has elected to use an online version of the student evaluation form. However, all faculty in the COE use some form of standardized student evaluation. Of the 36 items on the college's adapted evaluation form, the COE uses the last two items (#35--overall value of course and #36--overall teaching ability) in making personnel decisions regarding promotion and tenure (University of Georgia, 2006), and merit increases. …