Student evaluation of teaching (SET) ratings are used to evaluate faculty's teaching effectiveness based on a widespread belief that students learn more from highly rated professors. The key evidence cited in support of this belief are meta-analyses of multisection studies showing small-to-moderate correlations between SET ratings and student achievement (e.g., Cohen, 1980, 1981; Feldman, 1989). We re-analyzed previously published meta-analyses of the multisection studies and found that their findings were an artifact of small sample sized studies and publication bias. Whereas the small sample sized studies showed large and moderate correlation, the large sample sized studies showed no or only minimal correlation between SET ratings and learning. Our up-to-date meta-analysis of all multisection studies revealed no significant correlations between the SET ratings and learning. These findings suggest that institutions focused on student learning and career success may want to abandon SET ratings as a measure of faculty's teaching effectiveness.Just think of the tens or hundreds of thousands of pay raises or promotions which might have hinged on the result of a meaningless measurement. An Emily Litella moment in an industry rife with Emily Litella moments.
Tuesday, August 15, 2017
Never Mind.
From Meta-analysis of faculty's teaching effectiveness: Student evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not related by Bob Uttl, et al. The abstract:
No comments:
Post a Comment