The Authority of the Student Evaluation Questionnaire

By Rachel Johnson. 2000

104 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.

Students evaluating teachers: exploring the importance of faculty reaction to feedback on teaching (2005, background): “But possibly the most serious attack on the use of SETs in higher educational environments comes from commentators such as Johnson (2000) and Wilson et al .”
‘Feed‐forward’: improving students' use of tutors' comments (2007, background): “The low take‐up of this offer was surprising to us as many students had expressed through previous module evaluation forms their desire for more one‐to‐one tutorial opportunities (but see Johnson for a closer examination of this problem; Johnson, 2000 ).”
The use and misuse of student evaluations of teaching (2007, background): “Lastly, Johnson (2000) argues that SETs only serve the needs of a bureaucratic and shallow notion of education, and are perceived by lecturers as a form of surveillance, generating fear and self-doubt in them.”
On the Validity of Student Evaluation of Teaching (2013, background): “Most SET procedures allow little or no space for discussing, explaining, or negotiating the results with the students (Johnson, 2000).”