FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W219497629> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W219497629 startingPage "21" @default.
• W219497629 abstract "Abstract Most higher education institutions use some form of Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET) in order to gather information to gauge teaching performance and unit suitability. The value of SETs has come under increasing scrutiny, particularly in light of the study, which indicated that students are assessing charisma more than content. Similar results to the earlier study were found by the author during the process of moderating a teaching unit with a Dr Fox had received good student feedback, and yet turned out to have poor subject knowledge. Whilst SETs may arguably provide a form of valuable feedback on teaching, the concept of teaching effectiveness needs to be monitored beyond simply the perceptions of the students' derived from a limited set of questions. This study recommends that in addition to SETs, a Reflective Action Learning Process (RALP) model be adopted, involving the use of a critical friend to provide additional feedback intended to assist with teaching improvement. Key words: Student evaluation of teaching (SET), action learning, Fox. Introduction Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET) is a common device for assessing units and teaching ability in higher education (Pounder, 2007). The benefits and drawbacks of this approach have been discussed as far back as the 1920s (Wachtel, 1998), with mixed reports on the validity of the instruments and their usefulness in determining instructional effectiveness. Many writers have expressed reservations over the validity of SETs (Sheehan, 1975; Chandler, 1978; Powell, 1978; Vasta & Sarmiento, 1979; Dowell & Neal, 1982; Small, Hollenbeck, & Haley, 1982; Wilson, 1998; Slade & McConville, 2006). In particular, this form of evaluation has been criticised as encouraging inflating grades and dumb(ing) down material (Wilson, 1998: A12) in order to receive higher scores. However, it has also been discussed as being valid and accurate (Centra, 1977; Cohen, 1981; Marsh, 1984; McKeachie, 1990; Murray, Rushton, & Paunonen, 1990; Ramsden, 1991; Seldin, 1993; Koon and Murray, 1995) and can be an important product in striving for continual improvement (Wachtel, 1998). Many higher education institutions have mandatory student feedback questionnaires to gauge feedback on unit and teaching performance at or towards the end of each semester. As many of the questions tend to focus on the teacher rather than the script (Biggs, 2003), SETs tend to measure charisma (the personality of the lecturer) as opposed to content (the coverage of critical issues by the lecturer) (Ware and Williams, 1975). SETs have also been blamed for encouraging some academics to lower their standards and raise their grades in order to teach to the evaluations (Wilson, 1998: A12). The value of the academic's enthusiasm in influencing students was highlighted in research that sought to examine whether students are motivated by mandatory attendance policies (Verbeeten, 2007). When asked what can your professor do to make you come to class? (Verbeeten, 2007:31), the most popular response (90.4%) was if he/she makes the class interesting (Verbeeten, 2007:31). The second most common response (60%) was if he/she is excited about the (Verbeeten, 2007:31). This suggests that there is value in adding charisma to engage students in the learning environment. However, as SETs do tend to focus on measuring charisma, SETs should not be relied on exclusively. Critics of SETs have seized on Naftulin, Ware, and Donnelly's (1973) research, which is commonly referred to as the study. In the study, the authors hypothesised that SETs largely rate charisma and popularity and that even experienced educators exposed to an irrelevant and meaningless but charismatic lecture can be seduced into feeling satisfied that they have learned. To examine this, the authors prepared a professional actor who looked distinguished and sounded authoritative (Natfulin et al, 1973: 631) to deliver a charismatic but insubstantial lecture on a topic that the actor had no knowledge of. …" @default.
• W219497629 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W219497629 creator A5060683464 @default.
• W219497629 date "2008-01-01" @default.
• W219497629 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W219497629 title "A Semester with a Dr Fox: The Need to Go beyond SETS" @default.
• W219497629 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W219497629 type Work @default.
• W219497629 sameAs 219497629 @default.
• W219497629 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W219497629 countsByYear W2194976292012 @default.
• W219497629 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W219497629 hasAuthorship W219497629A5060683464 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C111919701 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C119857082 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C122637931 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C177264268 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C2776050585 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C2780791683 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C32772713 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W219497629 hasConcept C98045186 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C111919701 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C119857082 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C121332964 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C122637931 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C145420912 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C15744967 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C177264268 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C17744445 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C19417346 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C199360897 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C199539241 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C2776050585 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C2776291640 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C2780791683 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C32772713 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C41008148 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C62520636 @default.
• W219497629 hasConceptScore W219497629C98045186 @default.
• W219497629 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W219497629 hasLocation W2194976291 @default.
• W219497629 hasOpenAccess W219497629 @default.
• W219497629 hasPrimaryLocation W2194976291 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1532899361 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1597627793 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1603714241 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1736222174 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1769681700 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1804680178 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W1975944580 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2008549843 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2131355067 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W220913071 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2463398074 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2584908233 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2794397320 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W72297800 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W815257557 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W186303790 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2598591274 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2603365488 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W2624179596 @default.
• W219497629 hasRelatedWork W310605041 @default.
• W219497629 hasVolume "2" @default.
• W219497629 isParatext "false" @default.
• W219497629 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W219497629 magId "219497629" @default.
• W219497629 workType "article" @default.