Students’ Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness: Satisfaction and Related Factors

  • Michele Lalla
  • Patrizio Frederic
  • Davide Ferrari
Conference paper
Part of the Contributions to Statistics book series (CONTRIB.STAT.)


Student evaluation of teaching (SET) has been widely studied in the past century and considerable research has been devoted to investigate its reliability, validity, and unbiasedness [7, 25]. Often, the overall goal of the evaluations is to gauge teaching effectiveness, understood as the extent to which a given learning objective is accomplished. Effectiveness can be evaluated through (i) direct assessment of knowledge and skills acquired by the students or (ii) a questionnaire designed to survey students’ opinion about the teaching styles and behaviours of teachers and/or their satisfaction [34]. Since there is no universally accepted strategy to achieve the measurements of effectiveness, students’ ratings are usually employed as a primary source of data as they are easier to collect than measurements of learned knowledge/skills. As a consequence, they represent the basis for measuring not only teaching effectiveness, but also active participation and students’ attitude toward academic activity, which are critical factors for the success of any teaching system. However, it is often claimed that students’ evaluations do not reveal true teaching performance and can only gauge the satisfaction with their instructors.


Female Student Teaching Effectiveness Large Class Size Reference Field Teaching Evaluation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Davide Ferrari is supported by a research scholarship provided by Associazione Nazionale Cavalieri del Lavoro, group of Emilia Romagna, Italy, at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia.


  1. 1.
    Agresti A (2002) Categorical data analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, NJCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amemya T (1981) Qualitative response models: a survey. J Econ Lit XIX(4):1483–1538Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arubayi EA (1987) Improvement of instruction and teacher effectiveness: are student ratings reliable and valid? Higher Educ 16(2):267–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Basow SA (1995) Student evaluations of college professors: when gender matters. J Educ Psychol 87(2):656–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Basow SA, Montgomery S (2005) Student ratings and professor self-ratings of college teaching: effects of gender and divisional affiliation. J Pers Eval Educ 18(2):91–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Becker WE Jr, Watts M (1999) How departments of economics evaluate teaching. Am Econ Rev 89(2):344–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boex LFJ (2000) Attributes of effective economics instructors: an analysis of student evaluations. J Econ Educ 31(3):211–227Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bosshardt W, Watts M (2001) Comparing student and instructor evaluations of teaching. J Econ Educ 32(1):3–17Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Byrne CJ (1992) Validity studies of teacher rating instruments: design and interpretation. Res Educ 48 (November):42–54Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cashin WE, Downey RG (1992) Using global student rating items for summative evaluation. J Educ Psychol 84(4):563–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Centra JA, Gaubatz NB (2000) Is there gender bias in student evaluations of teachers? J Higher Educ 71(1):17–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen Y, Hoshower LB (1998) Assessing student motivation to participate in teaching evaluations: an application to expectancy theory. Issues Account Educ 13(3):531–549Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chiandotto B, Gola MM (2000) Questionario di base da utilizzare per l’attuazione di un programma per la valutazione della didattica da parte degli studenti. Rapporto finale del gruppo di ricerca (RdR 1/00), MURST, Osservatorio (ora Comitato nazionale) per la valutazione del sistema universitario, Roma (
  14. 14.
    D’Appollonia S, Abrami PC (1997) Navigating student ratings of instruction. Am Psychol 52(11):1198–1208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    DeCanio SJ (1986) Student evaluations of teaching: a multinominal logit approach. J Econ Educ 17(3):165–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Feldman K (1989) Instructional effectiveness of college teachers as judged by teachers themselves, current and former students, colleagues, administrators, and external (neutral) observers. Res Higher Educ 30(2):137–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Feldman K (1993) College students views of male and female college teachers: Part II – evidence from students’ evaluations of their classroom teachers. Res Higher Educ 34(2):151–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gomez-Mejia LR, Balkin DB (1992) Determinants of faculty pay: an agency theory perspective. Acad Manage J 35(5):921–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Greene WH (2003) Econometric analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kasten KL (1984) Tenure and merit pay as rewards for research, teaching, and service at a research university. J Higher Educ 55:500–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Katz DA (1973) Faculty salaries, promotions and productivity at a large university. Am Econ Rev 63:469–477Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kwan K-P (1999) How fair are student ratings in assessing the teaching performance of university teachers? Assess Eval Higher Educ 24(2):181–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lalla M, Facchinetti G, Mastroleo G (2004) Ordinal scales and fuzzy set systems to measure agreement: an application to the evaluation of teaching activity. Qual Quant 38:577–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin YG, McKeachie WJ, Tucker DG (1984) The use of student ratings in promotion decisions. J Higher Educ 55(5):583–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marsh HW (1987) Students’ evaluations of university teaching: research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. Int J Educ Res 11(3):263–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Marsh HW, Hocevar D (1991) Students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness: the stability of mean ratings of the same teachers over a 13-year period. Teaching and Teacher Educ 7(4):303–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Marsh HW, Roche LA (1993) The use of students’ evaluations and an individually structured intervention to enhance university teaching effectiveness. Am Educ Res J 30(1):217–251Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Marsh HW, Roche LA (1997) Making students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: the critical issues of validity, bias and utility. Am Psychol 52(11):1187–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mehdizadeh M (1990) Loglinear models and student course evaluations. J Econ Educ 21(1):7–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nelson JP, Lynch KA (1984) Grade inflation, real income, simultaneity, and teaching evaluations. J Econ Educ 15(1):21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schuman H, Presser S (1996) Questions and answers in attitude surveys: experiments on question form, wording, and context. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Seiler VL, Seiler MJ (2002) Professors who make the grade. Rev Bus 23(2):39–44Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Seldin P (1993) The use and abuse of student ratings of professors. Chron Higher Educ (July 21) 39(46):A40Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Simon B, Haghirian P, Schlegelmilch BB (2003) Enriching global marketing education with virtual classrooms: an effectiveness study. Mark Educ Rev 13(3):27–39Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tang TLP (1997) Teaching evaluation at a public institution of higher education: factors related to the overall teaching effectiveness. Public Pers Manage 26(3):379–389Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michele Lalla
    • 1
  • Patrizio Frederic
    • 1
  • Davide Ferrari
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Economia PoliticaUniversità di Modena e Reggio EmiliaModenaItaly

Personalised recommendations