Online versus traditional teaching evaluation
Mode can matter
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19379859 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Eyal Gamliel (0000-0002-9594-2791, Ruppin Academic Center, corresponding author), Liema Davidovitz (Ruppin Academic Center) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 581-592 |
| Publication date | 2005-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0260-2938 • E-ISSN: 1469-297X |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/02602930500260647 |
| OpenAlex | W2169949301 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 10 |
| References cited | 9 |
Using an experimental mixed design, this study compared the traditional paper‐and‐pencil method for evaluating teaching with the online method. Replicating previous findings, the comparison revealed similar evaluation means of the two methods. However, the stability of teaching evaluations using paper‐and‐pencil twice was substantially higher than the corresponding stability using different methods—online and paper‐and‐pencil. One possible explanation for this finding is the different visual presentation of the scales: a typical form of the paper‐and‐pencil method presents the scale horizontally, enabling the subjects to examine the profile of their answers that might result in an artificially lower variability of the evaluations. In contrast, an electronic answering form can abolish this artificial answering effect
Evaluation methods · Higher education · Machine learning · Mathematics education · Optics · Reliability engineering · Computer Science · Engineering · Evaluation of Teaching Practices · Innovations in Educational Methods · Online and Blended Learning · Psychology · Artificial Intelligence
On the Validity of Student Evaluation of Teaching
Student Evaluation of Teaching
Do student and survey characteristics affect the quality of UK undergraduate medical education course evaluation? A systematic review of the literature
A comparison of online versus traditional student end‐of‐course critiques in resident courses
The effect of switching to mandatory online course assessments on response rates and course ratings
Understanding academics’ resistance towards (online) student evaluation
Student evaluation of instruction
A robust interpretation of teaching evaluation ratings
Distributional properties of the statistic of online student evaluations the mean does not mean what you think it means
A robust approach for assessing teaching performance during regular reviews
| Unique citing works | 10 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.67 |
| Citation span | 2011 - 2024 (14) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 10 |