Effects of Grading Leniency and Low Workload on Students' Evaluations of Teaching: Popular Myth, Bias, Validity, or Innocent Bystanders?
Two studies debunk popular myths that student evaluations of teaching (SETs) are substantially biased by low workload and grading leniency. A workload bias is untenable because the workload-SET relation is positive. The small grade-SET relation (.20 for overall ratings) has many well-supported expla...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of educational psychology 2000-03, Vol.92 (1), p.202-228 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Two studies debunk popular myths that student evaluations
of teaching (SETs) are substantially biased by low workload and
grading leniency. A workload bias is untenable because the
workload-SET relation is positive. The small grade-SET
relation (.20 for overall ratings) has many well-supported
explanations that do not involve bias. Some SET factors (e.g.,Organization, Enthusiasm) are unrelated to grades, and the highest
relation is with Learning (.30), implying valid teaching effects
rather than bias. Structural equation models confirmed that
perceived learning and prior characteristics (course level, prior
subject interest) account for much of the grade-SET relation.
The relation is also nonlinear, so that high grades (sometimes
misused as a leniency measure) are unrelated to SETs. Contrary to
dire predictions based on bias claims, Workload, expected grades,and their relations with SETs were stable over 12 years. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0022-0663 1939-2176 |
DOI: | 10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.202 |