A Guide for Making Valid Interpretations of Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) Results

Royal, Kenneth D.

doi:10.3138/jvme.1215-201r

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Royal emphasized that while the validity of the tool was important, validity also includes accurately interpreting the SET scores and making appropriate judgments about the quality of the teaching. To interpret SET results, the teacher, administrators, promotion and tenure committees, and others need to consider the margin of error (MOE), or sampling error.…”

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To interpret SET results, the teacher, administrators, promotion and tenure committees, and others need to consider the margin of error (MOE), or sampling error. The MOE is influenced by sample size: when the sample size increases, the MOE decreases . How many students were in the course or clinical practicum and the response rate are critical in accurately and appropriately interpreting the results.…”

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Royal 16 emphasized that while the validity of the tool was important, validity also includes accurately interpreting the SET scores and making appropriate judgments about the quality of the teaching.…”

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The MOE is influenced by sample size: when the sample size increases, the MOE decreases. 16 How many students were in the course or clinical practicum and the response rate are critical in accurately and appropriately interpreting the results. Many nursing courses involve small numbers of students and faculty, and others reviewing SET scores should consider this in the interpretation of the faculty member's teaching effectiveness.…”

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Student evaluations of teaching (SET): Guidelines for their use

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student evaluations of teaching (SET) provide a structured way of collecting feedback from students about the course and teacher's effectiveness. We reviewed literature describing use of SET across a broad range of disciplines in undergraduate and graduate education to provide guidelines for faculty in using SET in a nursing or other health professions program. On SET tools, students typically rate their satisfaction with a course and perceptions about the quality of the teaching. It is important to evaluate SET tools prior to their use including pilot testing tools with students because studies show students may not interpret items or questions on a SET tool as faculty intended. Common uses of the evaluation data from SET include improvement of courses and teaching, and for personnel decisions.

show abstract

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reliability and Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Student evaluations of teaching (SET): Guidelines for their use

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[7][8][9] Adequate response rates for the population are a major key to valid results, minimizing the risk of sampling errors and biased results. [8,10,11] SETs are required at the University of Minnesota by university policy as well as by departmental and collegiate promotion and tenure guidelines. Each semester, students are asked to rate each of their courses and instructors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving response rates for course and instructor evaluations using a global approach

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policy Pearls intRoductionStudents perspectives on their instructors and courses (student ratings of instruction, student ratings of teaching, student evaluation of teaching (here referred to as SETs)) continue to be a topic of extensive research and debate. [1][2][3][4] The use of SETs is expanding globally with increasing value placed on the data for promotion, tenure, and retention. [5] While SETs are not infallible and should not be used in isolation, most agree that student input is essential for evaluation of teaching and course effectiveness. [6][7][8] Many suggest that the problems associated with these surveys have small effects on the final score as long as enough information is collected and interpretation is appropriate. [7][8][9] Adequate response rates for the population are a major key to valid results, minimizing the risk of sampling errors and biased results. [8,10,11] SETs are required at the University of Minnesota by university policy as well as by departmental and collegiate promotion and tenure guidelines. Each semester, students are asked to rate each of their courses and instructors. For many years, course evaluation forms included nine separate criteria and instructor evaluations included twelve. Comments were requested for each of the categories. For our class sizes (approximately 100 students per cohort) and survey design, a >50% response rate was calculated as necessary for reasonable score validity when the average score variability (SD) was ≤1.0. [10,11] For many years, we experienced such low response rates that score validity was in question. Multiple methods were attempted to improve response rates including using forms with fewer questions, only requesting surveys if an instructor taught more than three sessions in a course, opening surveys mid-semester for earlier input, offering rewards for high participation rates, prize drawings, and attempts to withhold grades until surveys were returned. Despite these efforts, response rates continued to decline. However, without an obvious alternative, the data were still used by the curriculum committee for course decision-making and were considered for promotion and salary decisions by departments.In recent years, we changed our practices and significantly improved both course and instructor evaluation response rates and data quality in a time-efficient manner. The purpose of this article is to describe this model to help educators at other Obtaining sufficient survey responses to make course and instructor evaluation results meaningful is a challenge in many, if not most, health professions training programs. This paper describes a series of policy changes that significantly improved data quality at one college of veterinary medicine located in the United States. The steps consisted of minimizing the number of items appearing on the instruments, providing students adequate time and space for completion, clearly explaining the purpose and value of the evaluations, simplifying data collection, collecting verbal feedback, and closing the l...

show abstract

Equity and Efficacy in Teaching Effectiveness Assessment (TEA)

Erickson

Dariotis

2022

Emancipatory Change in US Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Guide for Making Valid Interpretations of Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) Results

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

Student evaluations of teaching (SET): Guidelines for their use

Student evaluations of teaching (SET): Guidelines for their use

Improving response rates for course and instructor evaluations using a global approach

Equity and Efficacy in Teaching Effectiveness Assessment (TEA)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About