Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:I:International Journal of Educational Management:Vol11.Issue4.1997:

(1)

(2)

Hian Chye Ko h and Te c k Me ng Tan

Empiric al inve stigatio n o f the fac to rs affe c ting SET re sults

Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f Educ atio nal Manage me nt 1 1 / 4 [1 9 9 7 ] 1 7 0 –1 7 8

ca n h ave s er iou s im p lica t ion s on ed u ca t ion a n d t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion .

In v iew of t h is, t h e st u dy a t t em p t s t o in ves -t iga -t e -t h e fa c-t or s a ffec-t in g s -t u d en -t -t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion r esu lt s. T h e fi n d in gs a r e exp ect ed t o b e u s efu l in p r ov id in g gu id a n ce in in t er -p r et in g eva lu a t ion s of t ea ch in g/ t ea ch er s a n d in id en t ify in g p ot en t ia l con fou n d in g va r i-a bles (i.e. b ii-a s es ).

T h e r em a in d er of t h e p a p er is d iv id ed in t o fou r m a jor s ect ion s. T h e fi r s t s ect ion r ev iew s t h e r ela t ed t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion lit er a t u r e. T h e s econ d sect ion p r es en t s t h e r es ea r ch m et h od ology a n d t h e t h ir d s ect ion d is cu s s es t h e r es u lt s a n d im p lica t ion s. F in a lly, t h e con clu d in g s ect ion su m m a r izes t h e fi n d in gs, h igh ligh t s t h e lim it a t ion s of t h e s t u dy a n d s u gges t s d ir ect ion s for fu t u r e r es ea r ch .

Literature review

N u m er ou s st u d ies h ave in ves t iga t ed fa ct or s a ffect in g SE T r es u lt s. For t h is st u dy, t h e fol-low in g ca t e gor ies of fa ct or s a r e s elect ed for in ves t iga t ion : su b ject ch a r a ct er is t ics, cla s s ch a r a ct er is t ics, eva lu a t ion ch a r a ct er is t ics a n d t ea ch er ch a r a ct er is t ics.

Subject characteristics

La n gb ein (1994) s u gges t ed t h a t SE T r es u lt s d e p en d on t h e level of t h e su b ject t a u gh t . T h a t is, h igh er level s u b ject s a r e gen er a lly t a u gh t t o h igh er level st u d en t s w h o a r e m or e m ot i-va t ed a n d m or e d iscr im in a t in g t h a n low er level s t u d en t s. T h e con s eq u en ce of t h is is t h a t SE T r es u lt s t en d t o b e m or e favou r a ble for h igh er level su b ject s. T h is b ia sin g fa ct or is a lso h igh ligh t ed by Ma r sh (1984) a n d H olt -fr et er (1991). In a r ev iew of p r ior s t u d ies, Alea m on i (1981) cit ed eigh t s t u d ies t h a t sh ow ed n o s ign ifi ca n t r ela t ion sh ip b et w een SE T r es u lt s a n d s t u d en t / s u b ject level a n d 18 st u d ies t h a t r e p or t ed a p osit ive a n d sign ifi -ca n t r ela t ion sh ip b et w een SE T r es u lt s a n d st u d en t / s u b ject level.

St od ols k y (1984) r e p or t ed t h a t d iffer en t su b ject s n eed d iffer en t t ea ch in g s k ills for t h e t ea ch er t o b e effect ive in t ea ch in g t h e s u b -ject s. H en ce, s om e s u b -ject s a r e m or e d ifficu lt t o t ea ch effect ively t h a n ot h er s a n d t h e n a t u r e of a su b ject m ay a ffect SE T r es u lt s. T h is con clu sion is con sis t en t w it h Cla r k (1993) w h o s u gges t ed t h a t su b ject n a t u r e m ay exp la in t h e va r ia t ion in SE T r es u lt s. It is a lso con s is t en t w it h DeBer g a n d Wils on (1990) w h o fou n d cou r s e id en t it y t o b e a con fou n d -in g fa ct or -in t ea ch -in g eva lu a t ion . Cr a n t on a n d Sm it h (1986) a lso r e p or t ed t h a t su b ject s fr om d iffer en t d e p a r t m en t s ca n lea d t o d iffer -en t s t u d -en t r a t in gs. Rela t ed t o t h is, La n gb ein (1994) r e p or t ed t h a t q u a n t it a t ive su b ject s

(b ein g gen er a lly m or e d ifficu lt t o

t ea ch / lea r n ) a r e exp ect ed t o b e r a t ed low er t h a n q u a lit a t ive on es.

Class characteristics

Som e st u d ies h ave s u ggest ed t h a t cla ss for -m a t -m ay a ffect SE T r esu lt s (e.g. DeBer g a n d Wilson , 1990; La n gb ein , 1994). In p a r t icu la r, st u d en t s ’ p er ce p t ion s of t ea ch in g effect ive-n ess ca ive-n b e a ffect ed by w h et h er t h e cla ss for m a t is r e gu la r m eet in g, com p r es sed , fu ll-d ay, sem in a r, lect u r e et c.

On e of t h e m ost con sist en t fi n d in gs in t h e lit er a t u r e is t h e effect of cla ss size on SE T r esu lt s. Gen er a lly, s m a ller cla s s size t en d s t o b e a ssocia t ed w it h b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion a lt h ou gh n on -lin ea r r ela t ion sh ip s h ave a lso b een r e p or t ed in t h e lit er a t u r e (H olt fr et er, 1991). Sever a l r ea son s for t h e cla ss s ize effect h ave b een s u ggest ed . T h e m ost com m on on es a r e t h a t st u d en t s p r efer sm a ller cla sses a n d lea r n m or e in su ch a con t ext a n d t h a t t ea ch er -st u d en t in t er a ct ion a n d r a p p or t a r e b et t er in sm a ller cla sses (Gla ss et a l., 1981; Toby, 1993). Besid es d ir ect effect s, sign ifi ca n t in t er a ct ion effect s of cla ss size (e.g. w it h t h e level of in st r u ct ion a n d t h e d e p a r t m en t in w h ich d a t a w er e collect ed ) h ave a lso b een r e p or t ed (Cr a n t on a n d Sm it h , 1986).

F in a lly, a s s u ggest ed by DeBer g a n d Wilson (1990), w h en a cou r se is t a u gh t (i.e. t h e t im e of t h e d ay ) ca n a ls o a ffect SE T r esu lt s. It is a r gu ed t h a t la t e a ft er n oon or even in g cla sses a r e n ot a s con d u cive for t ea ch in g/ lea r n in g b eca u se of st u d en t fa t igu e. T h is m ay im p a ct st u d en t s ’ p er ce p t ion s of t ea ch in g effect ive-n ess. T h e fi ive-n d iive-n gs t o d a t e, h ow ever, a r e ive-n ot con sist en t in t h a t som e st u d ies h ave in d i-ca t ed t h a t t h e t im e of t h e d ay a cou r se is offer ed d oes n ot sign ifi ca n t ly in fl u en ce st u -d en t r a t in gs (Alea m on i, 1981). Rela t e-d t o t h is, p r ev iou s r esea r ch er s h ave su ggest ed t h a t d ay of t h e w eek m ay b e a n im p or t a n t d et er m in a n t of SE T r es u lt s t oo (H u sb a n d s a n d Fosh , 1993).

Evaluation characteristics

Cr on in a n d Ca p ie (1986) fou n d t h a t t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion r esu lt s va r y fr om d ay t o d ay a n d va r ia t ion on scor es or r a t in gs fr om d ay t o d ay is gr ea t er t h a n va r ia t ion fr om ob ser ver t o ob ser ver. T h u s, w h en a n eva lu a t ion is con -d u ct e-d m ay in fl u en ce it s r esu lt . To -d a t e, eva l-u a t ion ch a r a ct er ist ics h ave n ot r eceived m u ch a t t en t ion in t h e lit er a t u r e.

Teacher characteristics

(3)

Gen er a lly, old er a n d m or e exp er ien ced t ea ch er s r eceive b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion . How -ever, som e r esea r ch er s (e.g. La n gb ein , 1994) h ave su ggest ed a n on -lin ea r r ela t ion sh ip b et ween t ea ch in g q u a lit y a n d a ge/ exp er ien ce.

P r ob a bly, t h e m ost com m on ly r es ea r ch ed t ea ch er ch a r a ct er ist ic is gen d er. T h e p r im a r y iss u e in ves t iga t ed is u su a lly w h et h er fem a le t ea ch er s a r e d iscr im in a t ed a ga in st in t h eir t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion , in v iew of t h e s t er eot y p -in g of fem a le t ea ch er s -in a m a le-d om -in a t ed p r ofes s ion . For exa m p le, fem a les a r e exp ect ed t o b e “w a r m ”, “n u r t u r in g” a n d “less p r om i-n ei-n t ”. Bot h d ir ect a i-n d ii-n t er a ct ioi-n effect s (e.g. w it h s t u d en t ’s gen d er, exp er ien ce w it h fem a le t ea ch er s, gr a d e exp ect a n cy, fr eq u en cy of con su lt a t ion et c.) h ave b een in ves t iga t ed (F a n d t a n d St even s, 1991; Lu eck , et a l., 1993; La n gb ein , 1994) a n d t h e r es u lt s r e p or t ed so fa r h ave b een m ixed . Wh ile s om e s t u d ies fou n d t h a t fem a le t ea ch er s gen er a lly r eceive less favou r a ble SE T r es u lt s com p a r ed t o t h eir m a le cou n t er p a r t s (e.g. Kier s t ea d et a l., 1988), ot h er s t u d ies h ave fou n d ot h er w ise (e.g. Lu eck et a l., 1993). T h er e a p p ea r t o b e com -p lex in t er a ct ion effect s.

F in a lly, m a n y of t h e st u d ies exa m in in g t ea ch er ch a r a ct er is t ics a n d t ea ch in g eva lu a -t ion in d ica -t e -t h a -t -t h e r a n k of -t h e -t ea ch er m ay b e a n im p or t a n t d et er m in a n t . For exa m p le, Lu eck et a l. (1993) s u gges t ed t h a t t ea ch er r a n k sh ou ld b e con t r olled in t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion a n d d iv id ed h is sa m p le in t o s en ior p r ofes sor s, m id -ca r eer p r ofessor s a n d p a r t -t im e in s t r u c-t or s. H olc-t fr ec-t er (1991) a ls o r e p or c-t ed a p osic-t ive, t h ou gh w ea k , r ela t ion sh ip b et w een fa cu lt y r a n k a n d s t u d en t r a t in gs. H ow ever, p r ior fi n d in gs s o fa r h ave b een m ixed (s ee Alea -m on i, 1981).

To su m m a r ize, t h e lit er a t u r e in d ica t es t h a t su b ject , cla s s, eva lu a t ion a n d t ea ch er ch a r a c-t er isc-t ics, a m on g oc-t h er s, a ffecc-t SE T r es u lc-t s.

Research methodology

To in ves t iga t e t h e fa ct or s a ffect in g s t u d en t t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion r es u lt s, t h e follow in g r es ea r ch m et h od ology is em p loyed in t h e s t u dy.

Research framework

T h e fa ct or s in clu d ed in t h e st u dy com p r is e va r ia bles w h ich h ave b een exa m in ed in p r ev i-ou s SE T r es ea r ch a n d for w h ich d a t a is ava ila ble in t h e N ila n yila n g Bu s in ess Sch ool (Sin gila p or e). T h ey ca n b e cla s s ifi ed in t o t h e follow -in g ca t e gor ies : s u b ject ch a r a ct er is t ics, cla s s ch a r a ct er is t ics, eva lu a t ion ch a r a ct er is t ics a n d t ea ch er ch a r a ct er is t ics.

T h e r es ea r ch fr a m ewor k lin k in g t h e d e p en -d en t a n -d in -d e p en -d en t va r ia bles is p r es en t e-d

in F igu r e 1. (DeBer g a n d Wilson (1990) p r o-v id ed a t h eor et ica l u n d er p in n in g of SE T o-v ia t h e Len s m od el p a r a d igm . In t h a t con t ext , b ia ses in SE T r esu lt s com e fr om im p r op er id en t ifi ca t ion a n d w eigh t in g of cu es.) As sh ow n , t h e d e p en d en t va r ia ble for t h e st u dy is SE T r es u lt s. In t h e N a n ya n g Tech n ologica l Un iver s it y, w h er e t h e st u dy is con d u ct ed , SE T is m ea su r ed by a n over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex. T h e in st r u m en t u sed t o d er ive t h e t ea ch in g in d ex m ea su r es or ga n iza t ion , k n ow led ge, p r esen t a -t ion , cla r i-t y, r eleva n ce a n d en -t h u sia sm on a fi ve-p oin t sca le. T h e s ca le is con s t r u ct ed su ch t h a t a gr ea t er va lu e r e p r esen t s a m or e favou r a ble feed b a ck (1 = “h a r d ly ever ” a n d 5 = “a lm ost a lw ay s”). T h e over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex is com p u t ed a s t h e t ot a l s cor e ob t a in ed fr om t h e m ea n r esp on ses t o t h e six q u est ion s id en t ifi ed a b ove, a s a p er cen t a ge of t h e m a xi-m u xi-m scor e of 30 (six q u est ion s xi-m u lt ip led by fi ve). T h e SE T for m is d evelop ed by t h e u n i-ver sit y ’s Cen t r e for E d u ca t ion a l Tech n ology a n d is p r esen t ed in t h e Ap p en d ix.

As sh ow n in F igu r e 1, t h e in d ep en d en t va r i-a bles i-a r e t h e fi-a ct or s i-a ffect in g SE T r esu lt s i-a n d ca n b e ca t e gor ized a s su b ject , cla ss, eva lu a -t ion a n d -t ea ch er ch a r a c-t er is-t ics. For su b jec-t ch a r a ct er ist ics, p r ior st u d ies h ave sh ow n t h a t t h e n a t u r e of t h e su b ject , t h e level of t h e su b -ject , a n d wh et h er t h e su b -ject is q u a lit a t ive or q u a n t it a t ive m ay a ffect t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion ou t com es. Accor d in gly, t h e follow in g t h r ee va r ia bles a r e exa m in ed : st r ea m (i.e. a ccou n -t a n cy or bu sin ess su b jec-t ), yea r (i.e. fi r s-t -, secon d - or t h ir d -yea r su b ject ) a n d t y p e (i.e. q u a lit a t ive or q u a n t it a t ive su b ject ). It is n ot ed t h a t t h e N a n ya n g Bu sin ess Sch ool h a s t wo m a jor st r ea m s (i.e. a ccou n t a n cy a n d bu sin ess) a n d offer s b ot h B Acc a n d B Bu s d egr ees.

As for cla ss ch a r a ct er ist ics, t h e for m a t , size, t im e a n d d ay of t h e cla s s h ave b een fou n d in p r ior st u d ies t o b e d et er m in a n t s of SE T r esu lt s. In t h is st u dy, t h e cla ss va r ia bles in vest iga t ed com p r is e t h e follow in g: for m a t (i.e. lect u r e or t u t or ia l), size (i.e. n u m b er of st u d en t s), t im e (i.e. m or n in g or a ft er n oon ), a n d d ay (i.e. ea r ly (Mon d ay t o Wed n esd ay ) or la t e (T h u r sd ay t o Sa t u r d ay ) p a r t of t h e w eek ). It is a r gu ed t h a t t h e d ay of t h e w eek a cla ss is con d u ct ed ca n h ave a n im p a ct on SE T r esu lt s, sim ila r t o t h e t im e of t h e d ay effect . How ever, t h e d ir ect ion is n ot obv iou s in t h a t w h ile st u d en t s m ay gr ow t ir ed a s t h e w eek p r o-gr es ses, t h ey m ay a lso feel r elieved t ow a r d s t h e en d of t h e w eek in a n t icip a t ion of t h e w eek en d . T h is va r ia ble h a s n ot b een in vest i-ga t ed m u ch in p r ior st u d ies bu t is su fficien t ly in t er est in g t o in vest iga t e.

(4)

ch a r a ct er is t ics, w h en SE T is a d m in is t er ed m ay a ffect t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion ou t com es. Also, a r ela t ion sh ip b et w een t h e n u m b er of r esp on s es a n d t h e s t u d en t s’ p er ce p t ion of a t ea ch er ’s effect iven ess is exp ect ed . H en ce u n d er eva lu a t ion ch a r a ct er is t ics, t h e follow -in g t h r ee va r ia bles a r e exa m -in ed : r es p on s e (i.e. n u m b er of SE T r es p on s es ), t im e (i.e. m or n in g or a ft er n oon ), a n d d ay (i.e. ea r ly (M on d ay t o Wed n esd ay ) or la t e (T h u r sd ay t o Sa t u r d ay ) p a r t of t h e w eek ).

F in a lly, for t ea ch er ch a r a ct er is t ics, t h e exist in g lit er a t u r e in d ica t es t h a t a ge, gen d er a n d r a n k a r e im p or t a n t d et er m in a n t s of st u d en t eva lu a t ion of t ea ch in g. Accor d in gly, t h e follow in g va r ia bles a r e in clu d ed in t h e st u dy : a ge (i.e. n u m b er of yea r s old ), gen d er (i.e. fem a le or m a le) a n d r a n k (i.e. ju n ior fa cu lt y or s en ior fa cu lt y ).

As ca n b e n ot ed , exce p t for cla s s s ize, eva lu a t ion r es p on se a n d a ge, a ll t h e ot h er in d e p en -d en t va r ia bles a r e m ea s u r e-d a s ca t e gor ica l (or d u m m y ) va r ia bles. T h e cod in g s ch em e em p loyed is p r es en t ed in Ta ble I.

To su m m a r ize, t h e r esea r ch h y p ot h eses ca n b e st a t ed in t h e n u ll for m a s follow s: H 1. Su b ject ch a r a ct er ist ics h ave n o sign ifi

-ca n t effect on SE T r esu lt s.

H 2. Cla ss ch a r a ct er ist ics h ave n o sign ifi ca n t effect on SE T r esu lt s.

H 3. E va lu a t ion ch a r a ct er ist ics h ave n o sig-n ifi ca sig-n t effect osig-n SE T r esu lt s.

H 4. Tea ch er ch a r a ct er ist ics h ave n o sign ifi -ca n t effect on SE T r es u lt s.

Sample and data collection

St u d en t eva lu a t ion of t ea ch in g is p a r t of t h e a n n u a l a ssess m en t of a ca d em ic s t a ff a t t h e N a n ya n g Tech n ologica l Un iver sit y (Sin ga -p or e) a n d is con d u ct ed a t t h e en d of ever y sem est er for ever y s t a ff m em b er. T h e st u dy is con d u ct ed on t h e SE T r esu lt s in t h e N a n ya n g Bu s in ess Sch ool for t h e sem est er en d in g in Decem b er 1995. Da t a w er e collect ed over t h e p er iod J a n u a r y t o Ma r ch 1996. T h e d e p en d en t va r ia ble, over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex, is s u p p lied by t h e com p u t er cen t r e of t h e u n iver sit y a ft er p r ocessin g t h e st u d en t eva lu a t ion for m s. T h e in d e p en d en t va r ia bles (i.e. su b ject , cla ss, eva lu a t ion a n d t ea ch er ch a r a ct er ist ics) a r e ext r a ct ed fr om h ist or ica l r ecor d s. T h ese in clu d e for m s com p et ed by s t u d en t s a n d a ca d em ic s t a ff a t t h e t im e of SE T a d m in ist r a -t ion a n d a r ch iva l r ecor d s of -t h e u n iver si-t y a n d sch ool w it h r esp ect t o t h e su b ject s, cla ss es a n d t ea ch er s.

Figure 1

Stude nt e valuatio n o f te ac hing re s e arc h frame wo rk

1 Stre am: ac c o untanc y, bus ine s s 2 Ye ar: firs t, s e c o nd, third 3 Type : qualitative , quantitative

1 Fo rmat: le c ture , tuto rial 2 Size : numbe r o f s tude nts 3 Time : mo rning, afte rno o n 4 Day: e arly, late (part o f we e k)

1 Re s po ns e : numbe r o f re s po ns e s 2 Time : mo rning, afte rno o n 3 Day: e arly, late (part o f we e k)

1 Age : numbe r o f ye ars o ld 2 Ge nde r: fe male , male

3 Rank: junior fac ulty, senior fac ulty

Te ac hing e valuatio n re s ults

(te ac hing Inde x)

Table I

Co ding s c he me fo r c ate go ric al inde pe nde nt variable s

Variable Codes

Stream 1 = Ac c ountanc y 0 = Business

Year – dummy1 1 = Year 1 0 = Otherwise

Year – dummy2 1 = Year 2 0 = Otherwise

Type 1 = Qualitative 0 = Quantitative

Format 1 = Lec ture 0 = Tutorial

Time 1 = Morning 0 = Afternoon

Day 1 = Early part of 0 = Otherwise the week

Time 1 = Morning 0 = Afternoon

Day 1 = Early part of 0 = Otherwise the week

Gender 1 = Female 0 = Male

Rank 1 = Junior fac ulty 0 = Senior fac ulty

Note:

(5)

Statistical methods

Des cr ip t ive st a t ist ics a r e u sed t o d evelop a p r ofi le of t h e sa m p le a n d t o s u m m a r ize t h e va r ia bles. To in ves t iga t e t h e fa ct or s a ffect in g SE T r esu lt s, m u lt ip le r e gr es s ion is u sed . T h e s ign ifi ca n ce of t h e r e gr es s ion coefficien t s is exa m in ed t o a s s ess t h e effect s of t h e in d e p en -d en t va r ia bles. A sign ifi ca n ce level of 0.05 is em p loyed .

Results and implications

T h e r es u lt s of t h e a n a ly ses a r e s u m m a r ized b elow.

Descriptive statistics

For t h e s em es t er en d in g in Decem b er 1995, t h e N a n ya n g Bu s in ess Sch ool a d m in is t er ed 170 s t u d en t t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion s on it s a ca d e-m ic s t a ff. T h e e-m ea n SE T r es u lt (i.e. over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex) is 79.18, w it h a st a n d a r d d ev i-a t ion of 8.66. T h e m in im u m i-a n d m i-a xim u m over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex is 52.33 a n d 99.33 r es p ect ively (m a xim u m p os s ible is 100.00). T h e d es cr ip t ive st a t is t ics for t h e in d e p en d en t va r ia bles a r e s u m m a r ized in Ta ble II.

As ca n b e s een , ou t of 170 s t u d en t t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion s a d m in is t er ed , 75 (44.1 p er cen t ) r ela t e t o a ccou n t a n cy s u b ject s a n d 95 (55.9 p er cen t ) t o bu sin ess su b ject s. T h ese su b ject s a r e t a u gh t p r im a r ily t o a ccou n t a n cy a n d bu s i-n es s s t u d ei-n t s r es p ect ively. Als o, 61 (35.9 p er cen t ) of t h e eva lu a t ion s a r e for fi r s t yea r s u b ject s, 49 (28.8 p er cen t ) for s econ d yea r s u b -ject s, a n d 60 (35.3 p er cen t ) for t h ir d -yea r s u b ject s. (T h e u n d er gr a d u a t e p r ogr a m m es in t h e N a n ya n g Bu s in ess Sch ool a r e a ll t h r ee-yea r p r ogr a m m es.) As for s u b ject t y p e, 113 (66.5 p er cen t ) a r e q u a lit a t ive su b ject s a n d 57 (33.5 p er cen t ) a r e q u a n t it a t ive on es.

As for cla s s ch a r a ct er is t ics, 83 (48.8 p er cen t ) of t h e 170 s t u d en t t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion s a r e for lect u r es a n d 87 (51.2 p er cen t ) for t u t o-r ia ls. T h e aveo-r a ge cla s s s ize is 147.31, w it h a s t a n d a r d d ev ia t ion of 222.65. T h e la r ge va r ia -t ion in cla s s s ize is a ls o b or n e ou -t by -t h e w id e r a n ge of 8 t o 867 s t u d en t s p er cla s s. Gen er a lly, lect u r e cla s s es t en d t o b e m u ch la r ger t h a n t u t or ia l cla s ses. On e h u n d r ed a n d t h r ee (60.6 p er cen t ) a n d 88 (51.8 p er cen t ) of t h e cla s s es a r e h eld in t h e m or n in g a n d ea r ly p a r t of t h e w eek (i.e. Mon d ay s t o Wed n esd ay s), r es p ect ively.

T h e m ea n n u m b er of r es p on s es for t h e 170 eva lu a t ion s is 77.54, w it h a s t a n d a r d d ev ia -t ion of 106.15. T h e r a n ge is fr om 8 -t o 504. On e h u n d r ed a n d on e (59.4 p er cen t ) of t h e eva lu a -t ion s a r e con d u c-t ed in -t h e m or n in g a n d 69 (40.6 p er cen t ) in t h e a ft er n oon . Als o, 79 (46.5 p er cen t ) of t h e eva lu a t ion s a r e d on e in t h e

ea r ly p a r t of t h e w eek a n d 91 (53.5 p er cen t ) in t h e la t er p a r t .

As for t ea ch er ch a r a ct er ist ics, t h e aver a ge a ge of t h e eva lu a t ed t ea ch er s is 42.33 yea r s old , w it h a s t a n d a r d d ev ia t ion of 9.11 yea r s. T h e r a t io of fem a le t o m a le a ca d em ic st a ff is 39 (22.9 p er cen t ) t o 131 (77.1 p er cen t ). T h is seem s t o su p p or t t h e b elief t h a t t er t ia r y ed u ca t ion is ver y m u ch d om in a t ed by m a le t ea ch -er s. F in a lly, 66 (38.8 p -er cen t ) of t h e a ca d em ic st a ff eva lu a t ed a r e ju n ior fa cu lt y m em b er s.

M ultiple regression results

T h e m u lt ip le r e gr ession r esu lt s a r e su m m a -r ized in Ta bles III a n d IV. As sh ow n , t h e m od el is sign ifi ca n t , w it h a p va lu e of 0.0003. In ot h er wor d s, t h e in d ep en d en t va r ia bles (i.e. fa ct or s) collect ively h ave a sign ifi ca n t effect on t h e d e p en d en t va r ia ble (i.e. over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex). Con sist en t w it h p r ev iou s st u d ies, t h e Table II

De s c riptive s tatis tic s

Variable Frequency Per cent

Stream Accountancy 7 5 4 4 .1

Business 9 5 5 5 .9

Year First 6 1 3 5 .9

Second 4 9 2 8 .8

Third 6 0 3 5 .3

Type Qualitative 1 1 3 6 6 .5

Quantitative 5 7 3 3 .5

Format Lecture 8 3 4 8 .8

Tutorial 8 7 5 1 .2

Time M orning 1 0 3 6 0 .6

Afternoon 6 7 3 9 .4

Day Early 8 8 5 1 .8

Late 8 2 4 8 .2

Time M orning 1 0 1 5 9 .4

Afternoon 6 9 4 0 .6

Day Early 7 9 4 6 .5

Late 9 1 5 3 .5

Gender Female 3 9 2 2 .9

M ale 1 3 1 7 7 .1

Rank Junior faculty 6 6 3 8 .8

Senior faculty 1 0 4 6 1 .2

M ean 1 4 7 .3 1

Standard deviation 2 2 2 .6 5

M ean 7 7 .5 4

Standard deviation 1 0 6 .1 5

M ean 4 2 .3 3

(6)

coefficien t of d et er m in a t ion (i.e. R2_{) is m od}

-est , a t 0.2173 (a d ju st ed R2_{= 0.1466). Th a t is, t h e}

su b ject , cla ss, eva lu a t ion a n d t ea ch er ch a r a c-t er isc-t ics exa m in ed ca n exp la in on ly a b ou c-t 21.73 p er cen t of t h e va r ia t ion in t h e over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex. Sin ce t h e st u dy d oes n ot a t t em p t t o con st r u ct a p r ed ict ion m od el, t h is level of R2_{is con sid er ed a cce p t a ble.}

P r ior s t u d ies h ave gen er a lly r e p or t ed R2_of

les s t h a n 0.20 (see, for exa m p le, H olt fr et er, 1991; La n gb ein , 1994). T h e m a in r ea son for t h is m od es t level is om it t ed va r ia bles, t h e m os t obv iou s of w h ich is t h e a ct u a l q u a lit y of t ea ch in g. In t h e r e gr es s ion a n a ly sis, t h e over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex is r e gr es s ed on t h e p ot en -t ia l b ia s fa c-t or s. I-t ca n b e exp ec-t ed -t h a -t -t h e va r ia t ion in t h e over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex is b es t exp la in ed by t h e va r ia t ion in t h e a ct u a l q u a l-it y of t ea ch in g (w h ich is n ot in clu d ed in t h e m od el) a n d n ot t h e fa ct or s. Ot h er w is e, t h e SE T in s t r u m en t / m ea su r em en t is su sp ect . Alt h ou gh t h er e a r e 14 in d e p en d en t va r i-a bles in t h e m od el, m u lt icollin ei-a r it y d oes n ot a p p ea r t o b e a p r oblem . T h e va r ia n ce in fl a -t ion fa c-t or s (s ee Ta ble III) a r e a ll b elow -t h e r u le-of-t h u m b of t en (Myer s, 1990).

At a s ign ifi ca n ce level of 0.05, t h e s u b ject ch a r a ct er is t ic yea r, cla s s ch a r a ct er is t ic size, a n d eva lu a t ion ch a r a ct er is t ics r es p on s e a n d d ay a r e s ign ifi ca n t . T h e cor r es p on d in g p -va lu es a r e 0.0026, 0.0170, 0.0471 a n d 0.0041, r es p ect ively. N on e of t h e t ea ch er ch a r a ct er is-t ics in is-t h e m od el is sign ifi ca n is-t . Given is-t h e

a b ove, t h e n u ll h y p ot h eses H 1 t o H 3 for su b -ject ch a r a ct er ist ics, cla ss ch a r a ct er ist ics a n d eva lu a t ion ch a r a ct er ist ics ca n b e r eject ed . T h e st a n d a r d ized coefficien t s in d ica t e t h a t t h e r ela t ive im p or t a n ce of t h e sign ifi ca n t va r ia bles in d escen d in g or d er is a s follow s: d ay of eva lu a t ion (–0.421), cla ss size (–0.418), n u m b er of r esp on ses (0.318), a n d yea r / level of su b ject (–0.261).

Findings and implications

An exa m in a t ion of t h e coefficien t s a n d m ea n over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex for d iffer en t levels of t h e sign ifi ca n t in d e p en d en t va r ia bles in d i-ca t e t h a t b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion is a ssoci-a t ed w it h ssoci-a sm ssoci-a ller clssoci-a ss size ssoci-a n d ssoci-a lssoci-a r ger n u m b er of r es p on ses t o t h e eva lu a t ion . As su ggest ed in t h e lit er a t u r e, s m a ller cla sses a r e m or e con d u cive t o lea r n in g a n d in t er a c-t ion . T h e r esu lc-t is b ec-t c-t er c-t ea ch in g eva lu a c-t ion by st u d en t s. On t h e n u m b er of r esp on ses, on e sp ecu la t ion m igh t b e t h e follow in g: st u d en t s w h o a r e m ot iva t ed t o r esp on d t o a t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion a r e lik ely t o b e t h ose w h o a r e in t er est ed in t h e s u b ject . P r ev iou s st u d ies h ave fou n d a p osit ive r ela t ion sh ip b et w een SE T ou t com es a n d in t er est (H olt fr et er, 1991; La n gb ein , 1994). H en ce, t h e p osit ive a ssocia -t ion b e-t w een -t h e n u m b er of r esp on ses a n d b et t er SE T r esu lt s. T h is in t er p r et a t ion sh ou ld of cou r s e b e su b ject ed t o m or e r igor -ou s t es t in g b efor e b ein g a cce p t ed .

T h e r esu lt s a lso in d ica t e t h a t m id d le-level su b ject s t en d t o d r aw less favou r a ble t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion . T h a t is, b et t er SE T r es u lt s a r e a ssocia t ed w it h fi r st - a n d t h ir d -yea r su b ject s. T h a t h igh er level s t u d en t s give b et t er t ea ch -in g eva lu a t ion s h a s b een exp la -in ed -in t h e lit er a t u r e by a t t r ibu t in g gr ea t er m a t u r it y, d iscr im in a t in g a b ilit y a n d m ot iva t ion t o t h em . P er h a p s, on e r ea son w h y fi r st -yea r su b ject s r eceive b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion is t h eir r ela t ive ea se t o lea r n , given t h eir in t r o-d u ct or y n a t u r e a n o-d st u o-d en t s ’ fa m ilia r it y w it h t h em (t h r ou gh t h eir p r e-u n iver sit y s t u d ies). St u d en t s in t h e N a n ya n g Bu sin es s Sch ool st a r t t o sp ecia lize in t h eir r esp ect ive fi eld s in t h e secon d yea r a n d t h is m ay p r ove ch a llen g-in g a s st u d en t s r eq u ir e som e a d ju st m en t a n d r e-or ien t a t ion a ft er t h eir fi r st yea r. H en ce, t h e less favou r a ble t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion for sec-on d -yea r su b ject s.

Table III

Multiple re gre s s io n re s ults

Variable Coefficient t-statistic p-value Std Coeff VIF

Intercept 8 4 .1 4 1 7 .3 4 9 0 .0 0 0 1 * 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 0

Stream 0 .4 8 0 .3 3 0 0 .7 4 2 1 0 .0 2 8 1 .3 9

Year – dummy1 0 .4 3 0 .2 5 0 0 .8 0 2 6 0 .0 2 4 1 .8 2

Year – dummy2 –4 .9 7 –3 .0 6 1 0 .0 0 2 6 * –0 .2 6 1 1 .4 4

Type 0 .4 0 0 .2 8 8 0 .7 7 3 8 0 .0 2 2 1 .2 1

Format –2 .2 5 –1 .1 6 7 0 .2 4 4 8 –0 .1 3 0 2 .4 7

Size –0 .0 2 –2 .4 1 4 0 .0 1 7 0 * –0 .4 1 8 5 .9 4

Time –3 .0 3 –1 .4 7 2 0 .1 4 2 9 –0 .1 7 2 2 .6 9

Day 2 .4 1 0 .9 7 7 0 .3 3 0 2 0 .1 4 0 4 .0 5

Response 0 .0 3 2 .0 0 2 0 .0 4 7 1 * 0 .3 1 8 4 .9 9

Time 1 .8 8 0 .9 1 7 0 .3 6 0 4 0 .1 0 7 2 .6 9

Day –7 .2 8 –2 .9 1 6 0 .0 0 4 1 * –0 .4 2 1 4 .1 2

Teacher characteristics:

Age 0 .0 1 0 .1 2 8 0 .8 9 8 0 0 .0 1 2 1 .8 3

Gender –0 .0 7 –0 .0 4 3 0 .9 6 5 9 –0 .0 0 3 1 .2 0

Rank –0 .7 8 –0 .4 6 3 0 .6 4 4 4 –0 .0 4 4 1 .7 7

Note:

* Signific ant at a 0 .0 5 signific anc e level

Table IV

So urc e s o f variatio n

Source Df Sum of squares M ean squareF value p value

M odel 1 4 2 7 5 4 .2 3 1 9 6 .7 3 3 .0 7 4 0 .0 0 0 3

Error 1 5 5 9 9 1 8 .2 9 6 3 .9 9

Total 1 6 9 1 2 6 7 2 .5 2

(7)

F in a lly, SE T con d u ct ed in t h e la t er p a r t of t h e w eek s eem s t o r es u lt in b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion . It m ay b e t h a t t h e m or e r ela xed m ood t ow a r d s t h e en d of t h e w eek m ay r es u lt in s t u d en t s giv in g b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion t h a n ot h er w is e. T h is, h ow ever, is on ly a s p ec-u la t ion . E va lec-u a t ion ch a r a ct er is t ics h ave n ot r eceived m u ch a t t en t ion in p r ev iou s st u d ies a n d m or e r esea r ch is n eed ed t o exp lor e t h e im p lica t ion s.

To s u m m a r ize, t h e fi n d in gs s h ow t h a t su b -ject , cla s s a n d eva lu a t ion ch a r a ct er is t ics d o a ffect SE T r es u lt s. Som ew h a t u n exp ect ed is t h e n on s ign ifi ca n ce of t ea ch er ch a r a ct er is -t ics in -t h e s -t u dy. Over a ll, -t h e d a n ger exis-t s t h a t SE T ca p t u r es n ot on ly s om e a sp ect s of t ea ch in g effect iven es s bu t a lso cer t a in fa ct or s t h a t a r e n ot r ela t ed t o t ea ch in g effect iven es s.

Given t h e p os sible exis t en ce of b ia s in g fa ct or s, SE T s h ou ld n ot b e t h e on ly m et h od of eva lu a t in g t ea ch er s. P r op er t ea ch in g eva lu a t -in g s h ou ld b e su p p lem en t ed by m et h od s s u ch a s cla s s r oom ob s er va t ion by ext er n a l a n d / or in d e p en d en t p a r t ies, p or t folio a n a ly sis, s elf-eva lu a t ion , su r vey of a lu m n i or p eer s, a n d a s sess m en t of s t u d en t a ch ievem en t (Toby, 1993). Also, con sis t en t w it h t h e r ecom m en d a -t ion s of p r ev iou s s-t u d ies, -t h e fi n d in gs h er e su ggest t h a t SE T r esu lt s s h ou ld b e u s ed w it h ca u t ion . Som e r es ea r ch er s h ave t a k en t h e m or e d r a s t ic v iew t h a t SE T r es u lt s s h ou ld b e a d ju st ed for b ia ses (see, for exa m p le, DeBer g a n d Wils on , 1990). Illu s t r a t ion s of t h e a d ju st -m en t p r ocess a r e p r ov id ed by St r a t t on (1990) a n d DeBer g a n d Wils on (1990).

Bes id es con fou n d in g fa ct or s, SE T h a s ot h er lim it a t ion s t oo. For exa m p le, even if SE T is r elia ble a n d va lid , t h er e a r e a s p ect s of t ea ch -in g a b ou t w h ich s t u d en t s ca n n ot b e exp ect ed t o k n ow su ch a s cu r r icu lu m con t en t , t ea ch er ’s k n ow led ge or m a st er y of su b ject , a p p r op r ia t en ess of r ea d in g lis t , cu r r en cy of m a t er ia ls et c. (N ew t on , 1988). On t h e b eh av -iou r a l sid e, Rya n et a l. (1980) a n d Ren n er (1981) h ave a r gu ed t h a t SE T m ay r es u lt in feelin gs of r es en t m en t , d ist r u s t a n d a lien -a t ion , r ed u ced m or -a le -a n d job s -a t is f-a ct ion a n d ot h er dy sfu n ct ion a l a sp ect s. F u r t h er, in ed u ca t ion , t h e p r od u ct (i.e. s t u d en t a ch ieve-m en t ) is ieve-m or e iieve-m p or t a n t t h a n t h e p r ocess (i.e. t ea ch in g). H en ce, t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion s h ou ld a lw ay s b e lin k ed t o st u d en t a ch ievem en t (N ew t on , 1988).

Conclusion

T h e ob ject ive of t h e s t u dy is t o in ves t iga t e t h e fa ct or s a ffect in g SE T r es u lt s. Da t a for t h e s t u dy com p r is es 170 t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion s con d u ct ed a t t h e N a n ya n g Bu s in ess Sch ool (Sin ga p or e) in 1995. T h e d e p en d en t va r ia ble

is t h e over a ll t ea ch in g in d ex a n d t h e in d e p en -d en t va r ia bles com p r ise su b ject ch a r a ct er is-t ics (i.e. sis-t r ea m , yea r a n d is-t y p e), cla ss ch a r a c-t er is c-t ics (i.e. for m a c-t , size, c-t im e a n d d ay ), eva l-u a t ion ch a r a ct er ist ics (i.e. r esp on se, t im e a n d d ay ), a n d t ea ch er ch a r a ct er ist ics (i.e. a ge, gen d er a n d r a n k ).

Mu lt ip le r e gr es sion r esu lt s in d ica t e t h a t b et t er t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion is a s socia t ed w it h a sm a ller cla s s size (p -va lu e = 0.0170) a n d a la r ger n u m b er of r esp on ses t o t h e eva lu a t ion (p -va lu e = 0.0471). Also, t ea ch er s of m id d le-level su b ject s r eceive r ela t ively p oor er SE T r esu lt s (p -va lu e = 0.0026). F u r t h er, SE T a d m in is t er ed in t h e la t er p a r t of t h e w eek a t t r a ct s b et t er st u d en t eva lu a t ion (p -va lu e = 0.0041). Con t r a r y t o som e p r ior r esea r ch , t h e st u dy fou n d t h a t t ea ch er ch a r a ct er ist ics h ave n o s ign ifi ca n t im p a ct on SE T r es u lt s. Over a ll, t h e fi n d in gs con fi r m t h e exist en ce of p ot en -t ia l b ia sin g fa c-t or s.

In in ter pr etin g th e fi n din gs of th e stu dy, a few lim ita tion s sh ou ld be bor n e in m in d. F ir st, wh ile su bject, cla ss, eva lu a tion a n d tea ch er ch a r a cter istics a r e in vestiga ted in th e stu dy, oth er va r ia bles th a t m ay a ffect SE T r esu lts h ave n ot been in clu ded. In pa r ticu la r, stu den t ch a r a cter istics h ave been om itted beca u se of da ta n on -ava ila bility. Th u s, th e stu dy is n ot a com pr eh en sive in vestiga tion of fa ctor s a ffect-in g stu den t eva lu a tion of tea ch ffect-in g.

Secon d , t h e st u dy is con d u ct ed in t h e N a n ya n g Bu sin ess Sch ool in t h e N a n ya n g Tech n ologica l Un iver sit y (Sin ga p or e). It is d ou b t fu l if t h e fi n d in gs ca n b e gen er a lized t o ot h er in s t it u t ion s, cou n t r ies, d iscip lin es, con t ext s a n d s et t in gs. In ot h er wor d s, t h e fi n d in gs m ay la ck ext er n a l va lid it y. T h ir d , t h e in t er n a l va lid it y of t h e fi n d in gs d e p en d s t o a la r ge ext en t on t h e a p p r op r ia t e op er a t ion a l-iza t ion (i.e. m ea su r em en t ) of t h e va r ia bles.

In t h is con clu d in g sect ion , it is a p p r op r ia t e t o su ggest d ir ect ion s for fu t u r e r esea r ch . Som e of t h ese follow fr om t h e lim it a t ion s h igh ligh t ed a b ove. For exa m p le, fu t u r e r esea r ch ca n a t t em p t t o in vest iga t e a m or e com p r eh en sive set of fa ct or s a ffect in g SE T r esu lt s. P r ev iou s st u d ies h ave fou n d t h e fol-low in g st u d en t ch a r a ct er ist ics t o b e sign ifi-ca n t : gr a d e exp ect a t ion , over a ll gr a d e p oin t aver a ge, t im e sp en t on cou r se, p r ior in t er est , ob ject ives, se gm en t a t ion a n d gen d er (La n g-b ein , 1994; Ma r sh , 1987; Ya u a n d Kw a n , 1993). Ot h er im p or t a n t fa ct or s m ay in clu d e a d m in is-t r a is-t ive len ien cy, a ca d em ic fi eld , sis-t u d en is-t len ien cy, gr a d in g p olicy, cou r se d ifficu lt y, ava ila ble fa cilit ies, a n d cu r r icu lu m et c. (Holt -fr et er, 1991; McKen n a , 1981). Th e in clu sion of t h ese a n d ot h er va r ia bles ca n con t r ibu t e t o a m or e com p r eh en sive in vest iga t ion .

(8)

b ia sin g fa ct or s. Develop in g a t h eor et ica l fr a m ewor k of SE T ca n a lso gu id e fu t u r e r esea r ch . F in a lly, r e p lica t ion of SE T st u d ies is d es ir a ble in d er iv in g sy st em a t ic a n d u n iq u e fi n d in gs a cr os s s t u d ies.

It is h op ed t h a t d esp it e it s lim it a t ion s, t h e st u dy ca n m a k e a con t r ibu t ion t o t h e exis t in g t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion lit er a t u r e.

References

Alea m on i, L.M. (1981), “St u d en t r a t in gs of in st r u ct ion ”, in Millm a n , J . (E d .), H a n d b ook of T ea ch er E v a lu a tion , Sa ge P u blica t ion s, CA, p p. 110-45.

Am er ica n Accou n t in g Ass ocia t ion (1988), A F ra m ew ork for th e Dev elop m en t of A ccou n tin g E d u ca tion R esea rch , Am er ica n Accou n t in g Associa t ion , F L.

Boset t i, L. (1994), “Officia l p olicy a n d t r u n ca t ed p r a ct ice: a n eed t o r econ ce p t u a lise t h e eva lu a -t ion of -t ea ch er s”, S ch ool Orga n isa -tion , Vol. 14 N o. 1, p p. 49-61.

Cla r k , D. (1993),“Tea ch er eva lu a t ion : a r ev iew of t h e lit er a t u r e w it h im p lica t ion s for ed u ca -t or s”, sem in a r in E lem en -t a r y E d u ca -t ion , Ca lifor n ia St a t e Un iver s it y a t Lon g Bea ch , Sp r in g.

Cr a n t on , P. a n d Sm it h , R.A. (1986), “A n ew look a t t h e effect of cou r se ch a r a ct er ist ics on s t u d en t r a t in gs of in st r u ct ion ”, A m er ica n E d u ca tion a l R esea rch J ou r n a l, Sp r in g, p p. 117-28.

Cr a n t on , P. a n d Sm it h , R. A. (1990), “Recon s id er -in g t h e u n it of a n a ly sis : a m od el of s t u d en t r a t in gs of in st r u ct ion ”, J ou r n a l of E d u ca -tion a l Psych olog y, Vol. 82 N o. 2, p p. 207-12. Cr on in , L. a n d Ca p ie, W. (1986), “T h e in fl u en ce of

d a ily va r ia t ion in t ea ch er p er for m a n ce on t h e r elia b ilit y a n d va lid it y of a s sess m en t d a t a ”, p a p er p r esen t ed a t t h e An n u a l M eet in g of t h e Am er ica n E d u ca t ion a l Res ea r ch Ass ocia t ion , Ap r il.

DeBer g, C.L., a n d Wilson , J .R. (1990), “An em p ir i-ca l in vest iga t ion of t h e p ot en t ia l con fou n d in g va r ia bles in st u d en t eva lu a t ion of t ea ch in g”, J ou r n a l of A ccou n tin g E d u ca tion , Vol. 8 N o. 1, p p. 37-62.

E t h er in gt on , L.D. (1989), “Tow a r d a m od el of a ccou n t in g p ed a gogy : a cr it ica l in cid en t a n a ly sis”, Issu es in A ccou n tin g E d u ca tion , F a ll, p p. 309-26.

F a n d t , P.M. a n d St even s, G.E . (1991), “E va lu a t ion b ia s in t h e bu sin ess cla ssr oom : ev id en ce r ela t -in g t o t h e effect s of p r ev iou s exp er ien ces”, T h e J ou r n a l of Psych olog y, Vol. 125 N o. 4, p p. 469-77. Gla ss, G.V., McGaw, B. a n d Sm it h , M .L. (1981),

Met a -An a ly sis in Socia l Res ea r ch , Sa ge, CA. Gold b er g, G. a n d Ca lla h a n , J . (1991), “Ob ject iv it y of st u d en t eva lu a t ion s of in s t r u ct or s ”, J ou r -n a l of E d u ca tio-n for B u si-n ess, Vol. 66 N o. 6, p p. 377-8.

H a efele, D.L. (1993), “E va lu a t in g t ea ch er s: a ca ll for ch a n ge”, J ou r n a l of Person n el E v a lu a tion in E d u ca tion , Vol. 7 N o. 1, p p. 21-31.

H olt fr et er, R.E . (1991), “St u d en t r a t in g b ia ses: a r e fa cu lt y fea r s ju s t ifi ed ?”, T h e W om a n CPA , F a ll, p p. 59-62.

H oop er, P. a n d P a ge, J . (1986), “Mea su r in g t ea ch -in g effect iven ess by st u d en t eva lu a t ion ”, Issu es in A ccou n tin g E d u ca tion , Sp r in g, p p. 56-64.

H u s b a n d s, C.T. a n d Fosh , P. (1993), “St u d en t s ’ eva lu a t ion of t ea ch in g in h igh er ed u ca t ion : exp er ien ces fr om fou r E u r op ea n cou n t r ies a n d s om e im p lica t ion s of t h e p r a ct ice”, A ssessm en t a n d E v a lu a tion in H igh er E d u ca -tion , Vol. 18 N o. 2, p p. 95-114.

Kier st ea d , D., D’Agost in o, P. a n d Dill, H . (1988), “Sex r ole st er eot y p in g of colle ge p r ofessor s: b ia s in s t u d en t r a t in gs of in st r u ct or s”, J ou r -n a l of E d u ca tio-n a l Psych olog y, Vol. 80 N o. 3, p p. 342-4.

La n gb ein , L.I. (1994), “T h e va lid it y of st u d en t eva lu a t ion s of t ea ch in g”, Politica l S cien ce a n d Politics, Se p t em b er, p p. 545-53.

Lu eck , T.L., E n d r es, K.L. a n d Ca p la n , R. E . (1993), “T h e in t er a ct ion effect s of gen d er on t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion ”, J ou r n a lism E d u ca tion , Au t u m n , p p. 46-54.

M a r sh , H .W. a n d Over a ll, J .U. (1981), “T h e r ela t ive in fl u en ce of cou r se level, cou r se t y p e, a n d in s t r u ct or on st u d en t s’ eva lu a t ion s of colle ge t ea ch in g”, A m er ica n E d u ca tion a l R esea rch J ou r n a l, Sp r in g, p p. 103-12.

M a r sh , H .W. (1984), “St u d en t s ’ eva lu a t ion of u n i-ver s it y t ea ch in g: d im en sion a lit y, r elia b ilit y, va lid it y, p ot en t ia l b ia s es, a n d u t ilit y ”, J ou r n a l of E d u ca tion a l Psych olog y, Oct ob er, p p. 707-54. M a r sh , H .W. (1987), “St u d en t s ’ eva lu a t ion of u n

iver s it y t ea ch in g: r esea r ch fi n d in gs, m et h od -ologica l issu es, a n d d ir ect ion s for fu t u r e r es ea r ch ”, In ter n a tion a l J ou r n a l of E d u ca -tion a l R esea rch , Vol. 11 N o. 2, p p. 253-388. M cKen n a , B.H . (1981), “Con t ext / en v ir on m en t

effect s in t ea ch er eva lu a t ion ”, in Millm a n , J . (E d .), H a n d b ook of T ea ch er E v a lu a tion , Sa ge P u blica t ion s, CA, p p. 23-37.

M yer s, R.H . (1990), Cla ssica l a n d M od er n R eg res-sion w ith A p p lica tion s, P WS-Ken t P u blis h in g Com p a n y, Bost on , MA.

N ew t on , J .D. (1988), “Us in g st u d en t eva lu a t ion of t ea ch in g in a d m in ist r a t ive con t r ol: t h e va lid it y p r oblem ”, J ou r n a l of A ccou n tin g E d u ca -tion , Vol. 6 N o. 1, p p. 1-14.

N ew t on , E .H . a n d Br a it h w a it e, W.E . (1988), “Tea ch er p er sp ect ives on t h e eva lu a t ion of t ea ch er s”, E d u ca tion a l S tu d ies, Vol. 14 N o. 3, p p. 275-88.

Ren n er, R.R. (1981), “Com p a r in g p r ofessor s: h ow s t u d en t r a t in gs con t r ibu t e t o t h e d eclin e in q u a lit y of h igh er ed u ca t ion ”, Ph i Delta Ka p p a , Oct ob er, p p. 128-30.

Rya n , J .J ., An d er s on , J .A. a n d Bir ch ler, A.B. (1980), “St u d en t eva lu a t ion : t h e fa cu lt y r es p on d s ”, R esea rch in H igh er E d u ca tion , Vol. 12 N o. 4, p p. 317-33.

(9)

Sm it h , S.P. a n d Kin n ey, D.P. (1992), “Age a n d t ea ch in g p er for m a n ce”, J ou r n a l of H igh er E d u ca -tion , Vol. 63 N o. 3, p p. 282-302.

St od olsk y, S. (1984), “Tea ch er eva lu a t ion : t h e lim it s of look in g”, E d u ca tion a l R esea rch er , N ovem b er, p p. 11-8.

St r a t t on , W.O. (1990), “A m od el for t h e a s s es sm en t of st u d en t eva lu a t ion s of t ea ch in g, a n d t h e p r ofession a l d evelop m en t of fa cu lt y ”, T h e A ccou n tin g E d u ca tors’ J ou r n a l, Su m m er, p p. 77-101.

Toby, S. (1993), “Cla ss size a n d t ea ch in g eva lu a t ion or, t h e ‘gen er a l ch em ist r y effect r ev isit ed ’”, J ou r n a l of Ch em ica l E d u ca tion, J u n e, p p. 465-6. Wr igh t , P., Wh it t in gt on , R. a n d Wh it t en bu r g, G.E .

(1984), “St u d en t r a t in gs of t ea ch in g effect ive-n ess: w h a t t h e r esea r ch r evea ls”, J ou r ive-n a l of A ccou n tin g E d u ca tion , F a ll, p p. 5-30. Ya u , O.H .M. a n d Kw a n , W. (1993), “T h e t ea ch in g

eva lu a t ion p r ocess: s e gm en t a t ion of m a r k et -in g st u d en t s”, J ou r n a l of M a rk et-in g for H igh er E d u ca tion , Vol. 4 Is su e 1/ 2, p p. 309-23. Yu n k er, P. a n d Ster n er, J. (1988), “A su r vey of fa cu lty

per for m a n ce eva lu a tion in a ccou n tin g”, T h e A ccou n tin g Ed u ca tors’ J ou r n a l, F a ll, pp. 63-71.

Appendix. Student teaching evaluation form

T h is is a con fi d en t ia l su r vey. T h e p u r p ose of t h is s u r vey is t o ob t a in feed b a ck in for m a t ion for t h e im p r ovem en t of t ea ch in g. You a r e

r eq u ir ed t o d es cr ib e t h e t ea ch in g

p er for m a n ce of you r in st r u ct or by in d ica t in g t h e fr eq u en cy of occu r r en ce for t h e cr it er ia lis t ed b elow.

For ea ch it em , p lea s e in d ica t e by sh a d in g on e of t h e follow in g fi ve n u m b er s t o exp r ess you r v iew :

1 = H a r d ly ever ; 2 = Seld om ; 3 = Som et im es ; 4 = F r eq u en t ly ; 5 = Alm ost a lw ay s.

Criteria for consideration 1 Or ga n iza t ion – seem s t o h ave

w ell or ga n ized p la n for ea ch

cla ss ses sion : 1 2 3 4 5

2 Kn ow led ge – d em on st r a t es good

k n ow led ge of su b ject m a t t er : 1 2 3 4 5 3 P r es en t a t ion – p r esen t s m a t er ia l

in a st im u la t in g w ay : 1 2 3 4 5 4 Cla r it y – com m u n ica t es clea r ly

a n d t o t h e p oin t : 1 2 3 4 5

5 Releva n ce – u s es exa m p les t o illu st r a t e t h e r eleva n ce of h is

su b ject : 1 2 3 4 5

6 E n t h u sia sm – a p p ea r s en t h u sia st ic a n d en joy s