Are Some of the Things Faculty Do to Maximize Their Student Evaluation of Teachers Scores Unethical?

Roberts, Rodney C.

doi:10.1007/s10805-015-9247-1

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, the pressures of external examinations might encourage classroom environments that place a high value on students' ability to recall JTBs in a narrow range of contexts (Roberts 2016). Whilst the acquisition of JTBs is an important aim of learning about science, students may acquire JTBs but fail to apply them in the same manner as expert scientists (Brock and Taber 2017a;Sabella and Redish 2007).…”

Section: 'Un-lucky' Teaching: Developing Awareness Of Cases Of Lucky mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lucky Belief in Science Education

Brock

2018

Sci & Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conceptualisation of knowledge as justified true belief has been shown to be, at the very least, an incomplete account. One challenge to the justified true belief model arises from the proposition of situations in which a person possesses a belief that is both justified and true which some philosophers intuit should not be classified as knowledge. Though situations of this type have been imagined by a number of writers, they have come to be labelled Gettier cases. Gettier cases arise when a fallible justification happens to lead to a true belief in one context, a case of 'lucky belief'. In this article, it is argued that students studying science may make claims that resemble Gettier cases. In some contexts, a student may make a claim that is both justified and true but which arises from an alternative conception of a scientific concept. A number of instances of lucky belief in topics in science education are considered leading to an examination of the criteria teachers use to assess students' claims in different contexts. The possibility of lucky belief leads to the proposal that, in addition to the acquisition of justified true beliefs, the development of reliable belief-forming processes is a significant goal of science education. The pedagogic value of various kinds of claims is considered and, it is argued, the criteria used to judge claims may be adjusted to suit the context of assessment. It is suggested that teachers should be alert to instances of lucky belief that mask alternative conceptions.

show abstract

Section: 'Un-lucky' Teaching: Developing Awareness Of Cases Of Lucky mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lucky Belief in Science Education

Brock

2018

Sci & Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, faculty may exhibit overly authoritarian-based behavior toward students, embed ideological bias into the course curriculum and grading process, and engage in acts of moral turpitude, such as teaching while intoxicated or starting inappropriate relationships with their students (Alt & Itzkovich, 2015 , 2019 ; Carrillo et al, 2019 ). Other faculty may offer students easier assignments and superfluous compliments to receive positive student evaluations, or, on the contrary, they could provide rude or inconsistent feedback and not be available to students (McNeill et al, 2016 ; Mohammadipour et al, 2018 ; Roberts, 2016 ). In a study exploring specifically online faculty uncivil behavior, McNeill et al ( 2016 ) found that online faculty members demonstrated general rudeness, implemented unanticipated changes in course requirements, and gave students insufficient or untimely feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Character Strengths and Ethical Engagement in Online Faculty

Greenberger

Milliken

2021

J Acad Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, the researchers investigated the relationships between character strengths and ethical engagement in online faculty. One of the ethical duties for higher education faculty is to engage in effective teaching practices. As online higher education becomes increasingly popular, online faculty also bear this duty. Numerous studies have shown that character strengths cultivate ethical behavior. Hence, we sought to determine the relationship between character strengths and ethical engagement in online faculty. Specifically, we focused on intellectual character strengths, interpersonal character strengths, and emotional character strengths because of their relevance to online faculty's teaching practices. Through correlational analyses, we learned that interpersonal and emotional character strengths were positively and moderately related to ethical engagement, whereas intellectual character strengths were weakly related to ethical engagement. The findings of this study provide insight into online faculty's character strengths and ethical engagement. However, further research is needed to understand the role of character strengths and ethical engagement in promoting effective teaching practices in online higher education classrooms.

show abstract

“…Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) is therefore considered an integral part of the educational and training process, and such evaluations are today the most important, and sometimes the sole, measure of a teacher's ability other than traditional forms of peer evaluation or self-assessment (Greenwood and Ramagli 1980). This creates a natural incentive for teachers to manipulate the scheme to their own advantage (Roberts 2016), e.g. by inflating grades to positively influence students' evaluations (Ewing 2012), with an obvious information bias on both actual quality of teaching and students' performance (Langbein 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student evaluation of teaching, social influence dynamics, and teachers’ choices: An evolutionary model

Antoci

Brunetti²,

Sacco

et al. 2020

J Evol Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issue of Student Evaluation of Teaching has been explored by a large literature across many decades. However, the role of social influence factors in determining teachers’ responses to a given incentive and evaluation framework has been left basically unexplored. This paper makes a first attempt in this vein by considering an evolutionary game-theoretic context where teachers face a two-stage process in which their rating depends on both students’ evaluation of their course and on retrospective students’ evaluation of their teaching output in view of students’ performance in a related follow-up course. We find that both high effort (difficult course offered) and low effort (easy course offered) outcomes may emerge, leading either to a socially optimal outcome for teachers or not, according to cases. Moreover, there may be a potential conflict between the optimal outcome for students and for teachers. We also consider possible ways to generalize our model in future research.

show abstract

Are Some of the Things Faculty Do to Maximize Their Student Evaluation of Teachers Scores Unethical?

Cited by 5 publications

References 11 publications

Lucky Belief in Science Education

Lucky Belief in Science Education

Character Strengths and Ethical Engagement in Online Faculty

Student evaluation of teaching, social influence dynamics, and teachers’ choices: An evolutionary model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About