1991
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.1991.10117505
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Objectivity of Student Evaluations of Instructors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
41
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
2
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In business classes, expected grades have been found to create a significant difference in the evaluations of instructors (Bharadwaj, Futrell, & Kantak, 1993;Goldberg & Callahan, 1991). Two negative hypotheses have been advanced.…”
Section: Methodological Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In business classes, expected grades have been found to create a significant difference in the evaluations of instructors (Bharadwaj, Futrell, & Kantak, 1993;Goldberg & Callahan, 1991). Two negative hypotheses have been advanced.…”
Section: Methodological Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, characteristics of the instructor are also believed to influence student ratings of both the instructor and the course (Kierstad, D'Agostino, and Dill 1988;Smith and Kinney 1992;Goldberg and Callahan 1991;Ghorpade and Lackritz 1991;Basow and Silberg 1987). This study examined two faculty characteristics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, some studies of academic rank have shown no differences among differing rank [27,28]. According to Goldberg and Callahan, there is a perception that higher grades lead to higher scores and that not-tenure-track faculty may give higher grades and, therefore, gains higher student evaluations of teaching [29].…”
Section: B Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%