The relationship between student personality characteristics, teacher ratings, and student achievement.

In Study 1, 388 undergraduates (a) rated themselves on the Adjective Check List (ACL), (b) viewed a videotape that varied in instructor expressiveness and lecture content, (c) evaluated the videotaped instructor and a test on the lecture, and (d) completed the ACL for the instructor. In Study 2, 87 Ss were also exposed to 2 videotaped lectures given 1 wk apart. In Study 3, 108 Ss completed the ACL for themselves and their instructors, evaluated their instructor's teaching, and completed a test on common course material. No meaningful or consistent relationship between ratings and student personality characteristics appeared to exist. Personality characteristics of instructors were related to teacher effectiveness ratings. Ratings predicted teacher-produced achievement equally well for classes that differed in the personality characteristics of the students enrolled. Teacher effects on ratings appeared significantly greater than teacher effects on achievement. (41 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Instructor reputation: An expectancy relationship involving student ratings and achievement.

Instructor reputation, defined as student expectations of an instructor's teaching ability, was investigated to determine its influence on student ratings and achievement. Two teaching behaviors, instructor expressiveness and lecture content, were combined with reputation in a 2–3 factorial design to assess interaction effects. 198 undergraduates read an introductory statement about an instructor (reputation), viewed a videotape lecture, rated the instructor, and took a test. Results indicate that reputation interacted with expressiveness but not content, in which students rated the positive, high-expressive instructor more favorably than the negative, high-expressive instructor. Results suggest a complex relationship in which reputation interacts with some teaching behaviors and affects some student outcomes. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Do teacher standards for assigning grades affect student evaluations of instruction?

Conducted 2 experiments to determine the effects of teacher standards for assigning grades on student ratings of teachers and student achievement. 143 undergraduates participated in Exp 1, in which instructor expressiveness (high, low), lecture content (high, low), and grading standards (B, C+, C) were factorially manipulated. In Exp II with 278 undergraduates, student incentive (high, low), instructor expressiveness (high, low), and grading standards (B+, B, C+, C) were factorially manipulated. Standards failed to affect student achievement in either experiment. Significant effects of standards on ratings were found, but not consistently for all types of ratings, instructors, or differences in standards. The size of the differences are considered to be relatively unimportant when ratings are used to make gross distinctions between teachers. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of teacher expressiveness: Mediated by teacher sex-typing?

Teacher expressiveness typically results in favorable student ratings, although teacher gender may affect these results. Eighty students viewed a videotape of either a male or female instructor acting either expressively or nonexpressively. Expressive instructors received the most positive student ratings, although expressiveness interacted with teacher gender on the rating of scholarship: The positive effect of expressiveness occurred only for the female instructor. Expressiveness significantly interacted with both teacher gender and student gender on achievement scores because of the differential effect of female expressiveness on male and female students. Student-perceived teacher sex-typing partially accounts for the effect of expressiveness on student ratings but not on student achievement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Validity of student ratings of instruction under different incentive conditions: A further study of the Dr. Fox effect.

Investigated the validity of student ratings of instruction for different lecturer types. 212 undergraduates were divided into 12 equivalent groups. Groups viewed a lecture that varied in substantive teaching points covered (high, medium, low) and expressiveness of delivery (high, low). Half were offered an incentive to learn before the lecture; the other half after the lecture. Ss then rated lecture effectiveness and completed an achievement test. Higher achievement was associated with more content coverage and before-lecture incentives. Differences in lecture expressiveness did not affect achievement. Student ratings generally reflected inservice and continuing-education programs; differences in content coverage under low-expressiveness conditions, but were not sensitive to variations in content coverage when lectures were high in expressiveness. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceived control in the college classroom: Limitations in instructor expressiveness due to noncontingent feedback and lecture content.

Consistent with various control theories, recent evidence suggests that exposure to noncontingent outcomes interferes with instructional quality in the college classroom. The present study examined whether the density of negative noncontingent outcomes limits instructor expressiveness as an effective teaching behavior in different lecture content conditions. 361 undergraduates took an aptitude test that provided contingent feedback (CF) or low or medium noncontingent failure feedback (NCFF). Ss completed an attribution questionnaire and then observed a videotaped lecture low or high in content given by a low- or high-expressive instructor, after which Ss responded to a postlecture achievement test and an attribution questionnaire. Medium NCFF reduced Ss' perceived control and lowered their internal attribution locus for their aptitude performance, compared to low NCFF and CF. Postlecture results indicated that for high-content lectures, instructor expressiveness facilitated achievement and confidence in Ss who received CF and low NCFF but not in Ss who received medium NCFF. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of teacher sex, student sex, and teacher warmth on the evaluation of college instructors.

Examined the influence of teacher sex, student sex, and teacher warmth as perceived by students and teachers on teacher evaluation. Male and female instructors in the same department were matched on the level of course taught. 22 pairs of courses evaluated by 838 college students were obtained. Twenty Instructional Improvement Questionnaire items that directly evaluate instructor performance were analyzed using a 3-factor analysis of variance and the .0025 level of significance. No interactions between faculty sex, student sex, and teacher warmth were found. When Ss rated their instructor's interest and warmth, teachers who were warmer and primarily interested in students received higher ratings in teaching effectiveness. When teachers rated themselves on warmth and interest, self-ratings interacted with faculty sex. Generally, female teachers received higher effectiveness ratings than did male teachers when they considered themselves low in warmth or interested in course content. Male teachers who rated themselves high in warmth or primarily interested in students received higher ratings than did male teachers who rated themselves low in warmth or primarily interested in course content, respectively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Student/instructor attitude similarity, student ratings, and course performance.

Investigated the validity of student ratings of instructional effectiveness by exploring the relations among student ratings, course performance, and the perceived attitude similarity of students and their instructors. 349 college students enrolled in 22 classes first rated instructor effectiveness on a 28-item rating form and then rated their own attitudes plus instructor attitudes on an attitude scale adapted from D. Byrne (1971). Another 296 college students enrolled in 19 classes rated instructor effectiveness and then their own attitudes plus instructor attitudes on an attitude scale adapted from F. E. Hofman and L. Kremer (see record 1980-33352-001). For both S groups, official end-of-term grades were also collected. Consistent with prior research, modest correlations were found between student ratings and perceived attitude similarity. There was also a modest relation between similarity and course grades. These relations were greatly reduced (56.2 and 44.5%, respectively) when the large influence of instructors on ratings and achievement was removed. Findings fail to support the claim that perceived attitude similarity is a substantial source of bias in student ratings. (13 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of expressiveness, content coverage, and incentive on multidimensional student rating scales: New interpretations of the Dr. Fox effect.

Reanalyzed data from 2 studies with 419 undergraduates of the Dr. Fox effect (R. G. Williams and J. E. Ware; see PA, Vol 55:8285 and Vol 60:12778). Factor analysis identified 5 evaluation factors that varied in the way they were affected by experimental manipulations of instructor expressiveness (IE) and content coverage in 3 incentive conditions. For Ss in the incentive condition most like the actual classroom, the Dr. Fox effect was not supported in that (a) IE only affected ratings of Instructor Enthusiasm—the factor most logically related to the manipulation—and (b) content coverage affected ratings of Instructor Knowledge—the factor most logically related to that manipulation—and examination performance, but not ratings of Instructor Enthusiasm. However, when Ss were not given the incentive to learn, IE had a greater impact than did content coverage on each of the rating factors (supporting the Dr. Fox effect) and examination performance. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Navigating student ratings of instruction.

Many colleges and universities have adopted the use of student ratings of instruction as one (often the most influential) measure of instructional effectiveness. In this article, the authors present evidence that although effective instruction may be multidimensional, student ratings of instruction measure general instructional skill, which is a composite of 3 subskills: delivering instruction, facilitating interactions, and evaluating student learning. The authors subsequently report the results of a meta-analysis of the multisection validity studies that indicate that student ratings are moderately valid; however, administrative, instructor, and course characteristics influence student ratings of instruction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Gain–loss versus reinforcement–affect ordering of student ratings of teaching: Effect of rating instructions.

Investigated whether student rating instructions would influence the rank ordering by 83 undergraduates of 4 lecture quality sequences, (i.e., whether instructions influence primacy and recency effects). It was also investigated whether affect, self-esteem, and liking would show the same ordering for the 4 lecture quality sequences as ratings. In a laboratory analog of a classroom, using videotaped lectures, initial testing (good or poor Lecture 1), final teaching (good or poor Lecture 2), and student rating instructions (consider only Lecture 2, consider Lectures 1 and 2) were manipulated in a 2?×?2?×?2 design. Effects were measured on final ratings of the instructor, liking for the instructor, S affect, and S self-esteem. For Ss considering only Lecture 2, ratings and liking varied moderately and inversely with Lecture 1 quality (negative primacy effect) and greatly with Lecture 2 quality (positive recency effect), consistent with gain–loss theory. For Ss considering both Lectures 1 and 2, ratings and liking varied moderately with Lecture 1 quality (positive primacy effect) and greatly with Lecture 2 quality (positive recency effect), consistent with reinforcement–affect theory. Evidence failed to show that the effect of lecture quality on liking and ratings was mediated by affect or self-esteem. (19 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Relationship of student and instructor educational orientations with course ratings.

In a study with 359 undergraduates and 9 university faculty members, student and instructor educational orientations were examined in relation to course ratings in 9 classes. With 4 rating dimension scales (i.e., Teacher–Student Relationships, Course Objectives and Organization, Quality of Lectures, and Quality of Reading Assignments—Student Instructional Report), multiple regression analyses yielded an overall R–2 of 10 to 28%; instructor orientations were relatively more useful than student orientations in the regression equations. Spearman rhos between a measure of class–instructor orientation disparity and ratings were not significant. However, the negative sign of these coefficients is consistent with the congruence hypothesis of a person–environment interaction model. Discussion centers on the need for further study of student and instructor orientations and their "fit" in relation to outcomes for students. (28 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Validity of students' evaluations of college teaching: A multitrait–multimethod analysis.

College instructors in 329 classes evaluated their own teaching effectiveness with the same 35-item rating form used by their students. There was student–instructor agreement in courses taught by teaching assistants (r?=?.46), undergraduate courses taught by faculty (r?=?.41), and graduate level courses (r?=?.39). Separate factor analyses of the student and instructor ratings demonstrated that the same 9 evaluation factors (e.g., work load, organization, interaction) underlay both sets of ratings. A multitrait–multimethod analysis supported convergent and divergent validity of these rating factors. Not only were correlations between student and instructor ratings on the same factors statistically significant for each of 9 factors, but correlations between their ratings on different factors were low. Findings demonstrate student–instructor agreement on evaluation of teaching effectiveness, support the validity of student ratings for both graduate and undergraduate courses, and emphasize the importance of using multifactor rating scales derived through the application of factor analysis. (28 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Satisfaction with processes of collecting student opinions about instruction: The student perspective.

This study used a 2?×?2?×?2 factorial experiment to examine student satisfaction with eight processes of collecting student ratings of instruction by varying (a) method (group interviews vs. individual standardized rating forms), (b) timing (midterm vs. end of course), and (c) amount of instructor reaction to student ratings (restricted vs. extended). Consistent with predictions drawn from reactance and social comparison theories, students were more satisfied with interview methods at midterm followed by extended instructor reaction than with traditional approaches for collecting student opinions about instruction (i.e., standardized rating forms administered at the end of a course). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Primacy/recency effects in student ratings of instruction: A reinterpretation of gain–loss effects.

Examined how the side effects of initial and final lecture quality on end-of-course student ratings can be predicted from seemingly unrelated gain–loss theory. Also investigated was the effect on ratings of student belief that the instructor will use midterm rating feedback to improve teaching. Using videotaped lectures in a 2?×?2?×?2 laboratory analog study, the present authors manipulated Lecture 1 (good, poor), Lecture 2 (good, poor), and whether 131 college students were told that feedback to the instructor about Lecture 1 would be used to improve teaching (yes, no). With Lecture 2 ratings as the principal measure, ratings varied moderately and inversely with Lecture 1 quality (negative primacy effect), greatly and directly with Lecture 2 quality (positive recency effect), and trivially with feedback. The primacy/recency findings confirm gain–loss predictions and illustrate how gain–loss theory can be interpreted as primacy/recency effects. Implications for expectancy research and field research on instructors using midterm ratings to improve instruction in the final portion of the course are discussed. (32 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effective instruction and students' perceptions of control in the college classroom: Multiple-lectures effects.

Recent research indicates that instructor expressivenes is an effective teaching behavior for college students who perceive that they have control over their academic achievement. However, the achievement-enhancing effect of a high-expressive instructor is impeded when students experience temporary loss of control. We tested the persistence of this effect by giving students either contingent or noncontingent feedback on an aptitude test and then having them observe two lectures 1 week apart in which the expressiveness of the instructors varied. Lecture 1 results replicated previous findings in that the high-expressive instructor was effective for contingent students only. This pattern did not persist in Lecture 2, however, which suggests that effective instruction and reactance may counteract the negative consequences of loss of control. The remedial benefits of instructor expressiveness were considered for students lacking control in the college classroom. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attitudes toward instructors, social desirability, and behavioral intentions.

Examined whether student attitude toward instructors was related to subsequent behavior, such as the behavioral intention to take further courses with that instructor, and whether social desirability affected this relationship. 158 undergraduates completed instructor ratings, and a short form of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Principal components analysis and varimax rotation isolated 6 instructor rating factors. Ss also participated in a mock preregistration procedure assessing their intention to reregister for the same or different instructors. Results indicate that the 1st instructor rating factor, Instructor Skill, correlated .72 with intention to take further courses with that instructor. No other relationships or interactions were significant. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Educational seduction: The effect of instructor expressiveness and lecture content on student ratings and achievement.

Previous "educational seduction" research (D. H. Naftulin et al, 1973; J. E. Ware and R. G. Williams, 1975, 1977; Williams and Ware, 1976, 1977) suggests that teacher differences in expressiveness controlled the degree to which lecture content affected student ratings differently from student achievement. The present experiment with 245 university students attempted to replicate statistically this Expressiveness?×?Content?×?Measures interaction in a factorial design which investigated 4 simulated classes. The interaction was found for the high-incentive/no-study-opportunity class and the high-incentive/study-opportunity class, which most resembles typical classes, but not for the low-incentive/study-opportunity class or the low-incentive/no-study-opportunity class, which most resembles educational seduction research. In only the high-incentive/no-study-opportunity class did probes of the interaction replicate education seduction research in which content affected ratings and achievement similarly only for low expressiveness. (18 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Student written comments: Dimensions of instructional quality.

Students' written comments to 4 open-ended questions used in end-of-semester student evaluations of 60 courses from 10 different fields, taught by instructors of different ranks, were content analyzed and classified into 22 categories. Approximately 50% of the comments were about the instructor, with 1 of 4 comments pertaining to the instructor's pedogogical skills. The degree of favorableness of written comments about the instructor and course was sufficiently convergent with ratings based on fixed alternative items measuring overall instructor performance and course quality. Students provided similar evaluations of course and instructor quality on both open-ended and fixed alternative items; nevertheless, each type of item provides useful and different information. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of the semantic similarity of items on student ratings of instructors.

Investigated the effects of the semantic similarity of items on student ratings of instructors by asking 28 graduate students to rate several hypothetical instructor profiles that were constructed by systematically manipulating information about the instructors' classroom behaviors. Factor analyses of the student ratings were performed before and after all behavioral information in the instructor profiles had been statistically removed. Results revealed no substantive change in the underlying factor structure. In both analyses the factors represented clusters of semantically equivalent items. Thus, Ss appeared to be imposing an implicit semantic organization on their ratings, apart from any covariance among the instructors' actual classroom behavior. (30 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)