Communicating Student Evaluation of Teaching Results: Rating Interpretation Guides (RIGs)

109 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the literature (2005, background): “Potential users of student feedback need to be helped to understand and contextualize the results (Neumann, 2000).”
Building effectiveness in teaching through targeted evaluation and response: connecting evaluation to teaching improvement in higher education (2008, methodology): “In order to achieve this, the RIGs system (Neumann 2000) was implemented to help give teachers more interpretive leverage in considering their student evaluation results.”
Economic and non-financial performance indicators in universities (2007, unknown): “The recognition of the importance of intangibles in teaching and research (Neumann 1992, 1993, 1994; Clark 1995) and growing wider recognition of the importance of intellectual capital (IC) for innovation and creativity of organizations (Guthrie 2001; Carlin et al. 2005), could be influential in…”
Student Evaluation Of College Teaching: A Practice In Search Of Principles (2004, background): “In support and extension of Marsh’s work, Neumann (2000) suggested that a rating interpretation guide (RIG) that took into account different teaching contexts and emphasized a range of scores rather than a mean score was most effective.”