A small-scale comparison of the equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of student end-of-course evaluations |
| |
| Authors: | Ward Mitchell Cates |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. GenomCan Inc., Chengdu, Sichuan, China;;2. Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA;;3. Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA;;4. Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. |
| |
| Abstract: | This study compared responses to two versions of an end-of-course evaluation instrument completed by graduate students: the traditional printed form completed using pencil and paper, and a microcomputer-based form that presented equivalent items and accepted student responses. A finding of no significant difference in favorableness of composite ratings between the two versions prompted the researcher to perform item-by-item analyses of the two instruments. These analyses revealed that ratings of the individual items on one instrument were highly correlated with the ratings of their matched corresponding items on the other instrument. The paper-and-pencil and computerized evaluation instruments were found to be of almost identically high reliability. Possible limitations of the findings and areas for future research are discussed. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
