The Consequential Validity of Student Ratings: What do Instructors Really Think?

Authors

  • Tanya N. Beran University of Calgary
  • Jennifer L. Rokosh Golden Hills School Division

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11575/ajer.v55i4.55342

Abstract

This study investigates instructors’ perceptions about strengths and weaknesses of a student ratings instrument employed in their university. The sample consisted of 357 instructors in a major Canadian university where each term students are required to complete an evaluation at the end of every course. Qualitative analyses of their written responses indicate that most instructors held negative views about the ratings instrument, administration procedures, and use of results. They also reported concerns about biasing factors and the negative effect that ratings have on instructors. Few instructors provided positive comments about the validity of the ratings, the utility of ratings for the user groups, accountability, student representation, and cost efficient administration procedures. Moreover, only 25% considered ratings useful for improving teaching effectiveness.

Author Biographies

Tanya N. Beran, University of Calgary

Tanya Beran is an associate professor in medical education in the Department of Community Health Sciences. She is an international presenter and researcher in areas of education, measurement, and evaluation.

Jennifer L. Rokosh, Golden Hills School Division

Jennifer Rokosh is a provisional psychologist in Calgary. She graduated from the University of Calgary in 2006 with a Master of Science in school psychology from the Division of Applied Psychology. Her research interests are program evaluation and assessment.

Downloads

How to Cite

Beran, T. N., & Rokosh, J. L. (2010). The Consequential Validity of Student Ratings: What do Instructors Really Think?. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 55(4). https://doi.org/10.11575/ajer.v55i4.55342