The effect of timing on the validity of student ratings

Canaday, Stephen D.; Mendelson, Marilyn A.; Hardin, J. H.

doi:10.1097/00001888-197812000-00002

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two similar studies conducted before 1980 at the Medical University of South Carolina reported positive correlations (r ≈ 0.4) between student performance in a final exam and overall ratings of an anatomy course [ 17 , 18 ]. One of these studies also investigated whether the timing of data collection (i.e.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of factors influencing student ratings in undergraduate medical education course evaluations

Schiekirka

Raupach

2015

BMC Med Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundStudent ratings are a popular source of course evaluations in undergraduate medical education. Data on the reliability and validity of such ratings have mostly been derived from studies unrelated to medical education. Since medical education differs considerably from other higher education settings, an analysis of factors influencing overall student ratings with a specific focus on medical education was needed.MethodsFor the purpose of this systematic review, online databases (PubMed, PsycInfo and Web of Science) were searched up to August 1st, 2013. Original research articles on the use of student ratings in course evaluations in undergraduate medical education were eligible for inclusion. Included studies considered the format of evaluation tools and assessed the association of independent and dependent (i.e., overall course ratings) variables. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were checked by two independent reviewers, and results were synthesised in a narrative review.ResultsTwenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Qualitative research (2 studies) indicated that overall course ratings are mainly influenced by student satisfaction with teaching and exam difficulty rather than objective determinants of high quality teaching. Quantitative research (23 studies) yielded various influencing factors related to four categories: student characteristics, exposure to teaching, satisfaction with examinations and the evaluation process itself. Female gender, greater initial interest in course content, higher exam scores and higher satisfaction with exams were associated with more positive overall course ratings.ConclusionsDue to the heterogeneity and methodological limitations of included studies, results must be interpreted with caution. Medical educators need to be aware of various influences on student ratings when developing data collection instruments and interpreting evaluation results. More research into the reliability and validity of overall course ratings as typically used in the evaluation of undergraduate medical education is warranted.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0311-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of factors influencing student ratings in undergraduate medical education course evaluations

Schiekirka

Raupach

2015

BMC Med Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data show for example that students with a high initial interest in a course generally tend to rate it more positively than those with a low interest [7], [8]. Further studies found a positive correlation between exam performance and student ratings for an anatomy course [9], [10]. In this context, the importance of a clear definition of the construct of good teaching underlying the evaluation should be emphasized: Only after it has been clearly defined what is meant by "good teaching" can one identify and use an instrument that measures precisely this construct.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

National survey of evaluation practices and performance-guided resource allocation at German medical schools

Schiekirka-Schwake

Barth

Pfeilschifter³

et al. 2019

GMS German Medical Science; 17:Doc04

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Frey (1976a) found that evaluation results collected during the last week of an introductory Calculus course were not significantly different than those collected during the first week of the following term. Canaday, Mendelson, and Hardin (1978) employed a similar method, administering course evaluations to random groups of students at one of three time points: (a) preceding the final exam, (b) immediately following the final exam, and (c) after receiving course grades. Results indicated that there were no significant differences in evaluation scores between the groups.…”

Section: Administration Of Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of student course evaluations.

Sauer¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To Rod, my time as your graduate assistant was a tremendously rewarding experience but even more satisfying were the countless hours spent in your office conversing. It was during one of those conversations with Rod that the idea to explore student course evaluations was born.To Bob, I want to thank you for your support and for believing in the merit of this research, without which I would not have been able to conduct my study. I must also thank you and your research staff for dedicating innumerable hours to procuring and deidentifying data. Becky Patterson and Arnold Hook were tremendous assets and must be commended for their work in linking and mining the data that were analyzed in my study.To Joe, thank you for believing in me when I came to you as a student in counseling psychology and asked for admission into the ELFH program. Your extensive knowledge of student course evaluations, in particular the instrument used in the current study, was a great resource. concerning the instructor's teaching ability, preparation, grading, the course text and organization to which the student rates their agreement with the statement on a 5 point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 "Strongly Disagree", "Poor", or "Very Low" to 5 "Strongly Agree", "Excellent" or "Very High".In order to assess the relationship between the student, course, and instructor-level variables and the student course rating, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) analyses were conducted. Most of the variability in student course rating was estimated at the student-level and this was reflected in the fact that most of the statistically significant relationships were found at the student-level. Prior student course interest and the amount v of student effort were statistically significant predictors of student course rating in all of the regression models. These findings were supported by previous studies and provide further evidence of such relationships.Additional HLM analyses were conducted to assess the relationship between student course rating and final course grade. Results of the HLM analyses indicated that student course rating was a statistically significant predictor of student course grade. This finding is consistent with the existing literature which posits a weak positive relationship between expected course grade and student course rating.vi

show abstract

The effect of timing on the validity of student ratings

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

A systematic review of factors influencing student ratings in undergraduate medical education course evaluations

A systematic review of factors influencing student ratings in undergraduate medical education course evaluations

National survey of evaluation practices and performance-guided resource allocation at German medical schools

Predictors of student course evaluations.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About