Assessing faculty performance using student evaluations of teaching in an uncontrolled setting

Abstract

This paper provides new evidence on the disparity between student evaluation of teaching (SET) ratings when evaluations are conducted online versus in‐class. Using a multiple regression analysis, we show that after controlling for many of the class and student characteristics not under the direct control of the instructor, average SET ratings from evaluations conducted online are significantly lower than average SET ratings conducted in‐class. Further, we demonstrate the importance of controlling for the factors not under the instructor’s control when using SET ratings to evaluate faculty performance in the classroom. We do not suggest that moving to online evaluation is overly problematic, only that it is difficult to compare evaluations done online with evaluations done in‐class. While we do not suppose that one method is ‘more accurate’ than another, we do believe that institutions would benefit from either moving all evaluations online or by continuing to do all evaluations in‐class.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 67 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.