Medical Science Educator

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 210–215 | Cite as

Factors that Impact Teaching Evaluations: a Case Study

  • Shi-Hao Wen
  • Xiu-Qiang Ma
  • Jan D. Carline
  • Wei-Min Ren
  • Xin-Wen Yan
  • Yue Wang
Original Research


Introduction: A system of teaching evaluation was developed at the Second Military Medical University, Shanghai. The system combined student ratings of teachers with peer reviews. This study explores factors that may influence teaching evaluations, as well as the perceptions of effectiveness of the evaluation system. Methods: Teaching evaluation data from 2006 to 2009 were analyzed. A survey was conducted to collect the perceptions of students and faculty members about the system. Results: Teaching evaluation ratings were higher when the faculty knew which course session would be observed. Student ratings showed a correlation with peer ratings. Advanced students provided higher ratings. Currently employed faculty peer reviewers provided higher ratings than retired reviewers. Peer reviewers in the same department as the faculty being observed provided higher ratings than peers from other departments. Reviewers with prior experience provided ratings similar to new reviewers. All faculty members indicated they would not make their course easier in response to student evaluations. Conclusion: The year of student enrollment in the program, relationships among peer reviewers and faculty, and whether faculty are cognizant of which session would be observed have a direct impact on rating results. There is a correlation between the student evaluation and peer evaluation. Training reviewers is important to improve rating validity. Faculty members appreciate the assistance for improvement of teaching provided by the evaluations.


Teaching Evaluation Peer review Student rating Factor China 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Rosenbaum ME, Ferguson KJ, Kreiter CD, Johnson CA. Using a peer evaluation system to assess faculty performance and competence. Fam Med. 2005;37(6):429–33.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gimbel RW, Cruess DF, Schor K, Hooper TI, Barbour GL. Faculty performance evaluation in Accredited U.S. Public Health Graduate Schools and Programs: a national study. Acad Med. 2008;83:962–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bland CJ, Wersal L, VanLoy WE, Jacott W. Evaluating faculty performance: a systematically designed and assessed approach. Acad Med. 2002;77:15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paulsen MB. Evaluating teaching performance. New Directions for Institutional Research. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Valle R, Alaminos I, Contreras E, Salas L E, Tomasini P, Varela M. Student questionnaire to evaluate basic medical science teaching. Rev Med IMSS. 2004; 42(5):405–11.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jahangiri L, Mucciolo TW, Choi M, Spielman AI. Assessment of teaching effectiveness in U.S. dental schools and the value of triangulation. J Dent Educ. 2008;6:707–18.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williams BC, Pillsbury MS, Stern DS, Grum CM. Comparison of resident and medical student evaluation of faculty teaching. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2001(24)1:53–60.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Copeland HL, Hewson MG. Developing and testing an instrument to measure the effectiveness of clinical teaching in an academic medical center. Acad Med. 2000;75:161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beckman TJ, Ghosh AK, Cook DA, Erwin PJ, Mandrekar JN. How reliable are assessments of clinical teaching: a review of the published instruments. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19:971–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Irby DM. Peer review of teaching in medicine. J Med Educ. 1983;(58)6:457–61.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kogana JR, Sheab JA. Course evaluation in medical education. Teach Teach Educ. 2007;(23):251–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Downing SM. Threats to the validity of clinical teaching assessments: what about rater error? Med Educ. 2005;39:350–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norcini JJ. Peer assessment of competence. Med Educ. 2003;37:539–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wen SH, Jiang XB, Yang H. Problems in evaluating teaching quality in colleges and universities and related measures to deal with the problems. Res Med Educ. 2003;(2)4:17–19.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wen SH, Jiang XB, Jiang P. Study on the problems in the teaching evaluation system and feedback in university. Northwest Med Educ. 2004;(12)1:20–21.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li P, Wang ZW, Wang ZQ, Wang Y. Study on the situation and tendency of teaching evaluation in university in China. Northwest Med Educ. 2009;(17)2:211–12Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cao J, Chen LL, Chen WH. Comparison and analysis of teaching quality assessment between students and teaching supervisors. Chin J Med Educ. 2006;(26)3:92–93.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu YP, Qian FP. Problems of student evaluation of teaching quality in colleges and universities. Chin Elec Educ. 2009;8:53–54.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Huemer M. Student evaluations: a critical review. See: http:///øwl//sef.htm Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Levine H, Vanek E, Lefferts G, Michener W, Weiker G. A peer review process to assess the quality of graduate medical education. J Med Educ. 1988;(63)4:288–93.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fu LQ, Li JC, Zhang XM. Situation and countermeasures of the educational inspection for colleges and universities. Res Med Educ. 2008;(7)11:1136–37.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen RS. Study on the correlation between peer review and student evaluation of teaching. Petrolic Educ. 2009;3:56–58Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shi-Hao Wen
    • 2
  • Xiu-Qiang Ma
    • 2
  • Jan D. Carline
    • 1
  • Wei-Min Ren
    • 2
  • Xin-Wen Yan
    • 2
  • Yue Wang
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Washington School of MedicineSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Training DepartmentSecond Military Medical UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations