ERIC Identifier: ED289887
Publication Date: 1984-08-00
Author: Coburn, Louisa
Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Tests
Measurement and Evaluation Princeton NJ.
Student Evaluation of Teacher Performance.
Student evaluation of teacher performance, or student ratings, is one of the
most controversial techniques used to identify teacher effectiveness. Few
faculty members question the usefulness of ratings in providing feedback about
teaching that can result in improved instruction, but many continue to challenge
student rating use in making personnel decisions (Marsh and others 1979).
This Digest offers a rationale for the use of student ratings, describes the
research findings concerning the validity and reliability of such ratings, and
identifies the major issues involved in designing and administering rating forms
and reporting their results.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF STUDENT RATINGS
Aleamoni (1981) offers the following arguments to support the use of student
ratings of teacher performance:
--Students are the main source of information about the learning environment,
including teachers' ability to motivate students for continued learning, rapport
or degree of communication between instructors and students.
--Students are the most logical evaluators of the quality, the effectiveness
of, and satisfaction with course content, method of instruction, textbooks,
homework, and student interest.
--Student ratings encourage communication between students and their
instructor. This communication may lead to the kind of student and instructor
involvement in the teaching-learning process that can raise the level of
--Student ratings of particular instructors and courses can be used by other
students to select courses and instructors, and may increase the chances that
excellence in instruction will be recognized and rewarded.
FACULTY CONCERNS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS
Faculty are concerned about the use of student ratings in both formative and
summative evaluations for the following reasons: 1) students lack the maturity
and expertise to make judgments about course content or instructor style; 2)
students' ratings are measures of popularity rather than of ability; 3) the
rating forms themselves are both unreliable and invalid; and 4) other variables
(such as grades received from the instructor, class size, or whether the course
was required or elected) affect student ratings.
Research that addresses each of these issues is summarized below.
According to Peterson and Kauchak (1982), "researchers found that student
ratings of teachers are consistent among students and reliable from one year to
the next." Aleamoni (1981) cites research that indicates that "the correlation
between student ratings of the same instructors and courses ranged from .70 to
Student Ratings as Measures of Popularity
Citing his own research, Aleamoni (1981) found that udents frankly praised
instuctors for their warm, friendly, humorous manner in the classroom, but if
their courses were not well-organized or their methods of stimulating students
to learn were poor, the students equally frankly criticized them in those
Researchers cited by Peterson and Kauchak (1982) found that "students can
successfully differentiate between teaching effectiveness and other affective
dimensions such as attitude, interest, and friendliness of the teacher."
Student Rating Forms
Research evidence supports the view that carefully constructed evaluation
instruments with well-developed procedures for their administration can yield
high internal consistency reliabilities. Most of the research evidence
supporting the validity of rating forms in which student ratings were compared
to other methods of evaluation (colleague ratings, student learning measures,
and expert judges' ratings) indicates the existence of high to moderate positive
According to Aleamoni (1981), "correlational studies have reported widely
inconsistent grade-rating relationships. Some 22 studies have reported zero
relationships while another 28 studies have reported significant positive
relationships. In most instances, however, these relationships were relatively
Research is also divided on this issue. The belief that instructors of larger
classes receive lower ratings is supported by the results of some studies and
refuted by others.
Required Versus Elected Courses
Most of the reported research seems to support the belief that students who
are required to take a course rate it lower than students who elect to take the
DESIGNING THE RATING FORMS
Rating forms can be adopted from other institutions, or constructed by
students, faculty, administrators, or committees. Experts in questionnaire
design should be involved in the development of student rating forms to avoid
producing a finished questionnaire that reflects a bias toward any one aspect of
It is most important to decide the purpose of the form. Formative evaluation
requires information that can be used by the instructor to modify and improve
instruction. Summative evaluation requires information that can be used by a
third party for decisions about promotion, tenure, or merit pay. Each kind of
evaluation requires that decisions be made about the content, level of
inference, and type of item response.
ADMINISTERING THE RATING FORMS
The method of administering and gathering student responses can determine the
quality of the resulting data. If possible, the responsibility should be given
to instructional development or testing personnel.
Regardless of who does the actual administration, a standard set of
instructions and a designated time limit for filling out the questionnaire are
essential. Informal administration can lead to bias in the ratings, low return
of the forms, or less than candid responses on the part of students.
REPORTING THE RESULTS
If the results of student ratings are not reported in a timely manner, their
usefulness can be compromised. Decisions must be made about whether to return
the actual form or summaries of the data to the instructor. If the actual forms
are returned, then the instructors should be given a method of tabulating and
summarizing their own results so that they can avoid concentrating on negative
or positive feedback alone.
One of the most important decisions to be made is who will see or use the
results. Faculty have the right to know how the results will be reported and
should be given the option of releasing copies of the results if the evaluation
is not mandatory. To avoid subjective interpretations by third parties, it is
recommended that students' actual written comments not be reported to the
student body or the administration.
Results of the ratings can be reported in student newspapers or student
published books. Reporting the results in this way is most effective if it is
done in a positive manner with only the most highly rated instructors or courses
Finally, Aleamoni (1981) is careful to point out that the way student ratings
are used is of utmost importance. All who use the ratings must be careful to
avoid placing inappropriate emphasis on selected student responses. Ideally,
student ratings are but one component of a comprehensive instructional
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Aleamoni, Lawrence M. "Student Ratings of Instruction." In HANDBOOK OF
TEACHER EVALUATION, edited by Jason Millman. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE
Benton, Sidney E. RATING COLLEGE TEACHING: CRITERION VALIDITY STUDIES OF
STUDENT EVALUATION-OF-INSTRUCTION INSTRUMENTS. AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education
Research Report No. 1. Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher
Education, 1982. ED 221 147.
Marsh, Herbert W., and others. "Validity of Student Evaluations of
Instructional Effectiveness: A Comparison of Faculty Self-Evaluations and
Evaluations by their Students." JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY 71 (April
Peterson, Ken, and D. Kauchak. TEACHER EVALUATION: PERSPECTIVES, PRACTICES,
AND PROMISES. Salt Lake City, UT: Utah University, Center for Educational
Practice, 1982. ED 233 996.