Student perception of teaching effectiveness: development and validation of the Evaluation of Teaching Competencies Scale (ETCS)

2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 701-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor M. Catano ◽  
Steve Harvey
Keyword(s):  
Teaching Effectiveness ◽  
Student Perception ◽  
Teaching Competencies ◽  
Evaluation Of Teaching ◽  
Development And Validation

scholarly journals Development and Validation of the Inviting Teaching Effectiveness Scale based on the Invitational Theory

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 679
Author(s):  
Neaman M. S. Al-Musawi
Keyword(s):  
Classroom Environment ◽  
Teaching Effectiveness ◽  
Test Construction ◽  
Teaching Competencies ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
New Instrument ◽  
Invitational Theory ◽  
University Of Bahrain ◽  
The University ◽  
Development And Validation

This study reports on a new instrument, the Inviting Teaching Effectiveness Scale (ITES), which is a 20-item measure based on the fundamental teaching competencies derived from the principles of Invitational Education (Purkey & Novak, 1984). The initial instrument had included 30 items and was then validated on a random sample of 640 students enrolled at the University of Bahrain. The final version of the developed Scale contains 20 items and measures four aspects of inviting teaching effectiveness: Invitational instruction, inviting relationships, invitational assessment and inviting classroom environment. As the new Scale displayed sound psychometric properties, it can be considered as a potentially useful tool to assess teacher performance and improve teaching practices at tertiary level of education. Information about test construction, reliability, validity, and generalizability are presented and implications and benefits associated with use of the instrument as a tool for measuring teaching effectiveness are discussed.

scholarly journals Lessons Learned from Research on Student Evaluation of Teaching in Higher Education

2021 ◽  
pp. 237-256
Author(s):  
Bob Uttl
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Effective Teaching ◽  
Teaching Effectiveness ◽  
Student Evaluation ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Student Evaluation Of Teaching ◽  
Knowledge Class ◽  
Teaching Awards ◽  
Student Preference ◽  
Evaluation Of Teaching

AbstractIn higher education, anonymous student evaluation of teaching (SET) ratings are used to measure faculty’s teaching effectiveness and to make high-stakes decisions about hiring, firing, promotion, merit pay, and teaching awards. SET have many desirable properties: SET are quick and cheap to collect, SET means and standard deviations give aura of precision and scientific validity, and SET provide tangible seemingly objective numbers for both high-stake decisions and public accountability purposes. Unfortunately, SET as a measure of teaching effectiveness are fatally flawed. First, experts cannot agree what effective teaching is. They only agree that effective teaching ought to result in learning. Second, SET do not measure faculty’s teaching effectiveness as students do not learn more from more highly rated professors. Third, SET depend on many teaching effectiveness irrelevant factors (TEIFs) not attributable to the professor (e.g., students’ intelligence, students’ prior knowledge, class size, subject). Fourth, SET are influenced by student preference factors (SPFs) whose consideration violates human rights legislation (e.g., ethnicity, accent). Fifth, SET are easily manipulated by chocolates, course easiness, and other incentives. However, student ratings of professors can be used for very limited purposes such as formative feedback and raising alarm about ineffective teaching practices.

scholarly journals Evolving Impressions: Undergraduate Perceptions of Graduate Teaching Assistants and Faculty Members over a Semester

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Denise Kendall ◽  
Elisabeth E. Schussler
Keyword(s):  
Student Perceptions ◽  
Teaching Assistants ◽  
Teaching Effectiveness ◽  
Student Perception ◽  
Graduate Teaching Assistants ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Science Courses ◽  
Graduate Teaching ◽  
Gateway Courses ◽  
Lower Division

Undergraduate experiences in lower-division science courses are important factors in student retention in science majors. These courses often include a lecture taught by faculty, supplemented by smaller sections, such as discussions and laboratories, taught by graduate teaching assistants (GTAs). Given that portions of these courses are taught by different instructor types, this study explored student ratings of instruction by GTAs and faculty members to see whether perceptions differed by instructor type, whether they changed over a semester, and whether certain instructor traits were associated with student perceptions of their instructors’ teaching effectiveness or how much students learned from their instructors. Students rated their faculty instructors and GTAs for 13 instructor descriptors at the beginning and near the end of the semester in eight biology classes. Analyses of these data identified differences between instructor types; moreover, student perception changed over the semester. Specifically, GTA ratings increased in perception of positive instructional descriptors, while faculty ratings declined for positive instructional descriptors. The relationship of these perception changes with student experience and retention should be further explored, but the findings also suggest the need to differentiate professional development by the different instructor types teaching lower-division science courses to optimize teaching effectiveness and student learning in these important gateway courses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document