Looking for Bias in All the Wrong Places: A Search for Truth or a Witch Hunt in Student Ratings of Instruction?.

By M. Theall, Jennifer Franklin. 2001

269 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b10d8be13122ef9f0851f62e740b55a5f1d0b248

How researchers see this paper

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

In Accounting

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Student evaluation of teaching quality in higher education: development of an instrument based on 10 Likert‐scales (2007, background): “According to them, these evaluations can only be useful if students, who are being educated and instructed, are involved in this form of quality care (Theall & Franklin, 2001).”
Ratings of university teacher instruction: how much do student and course characteristics really matter? (2005, background): “Indeed, Theall and Franklin (2001) suggested that courses within the student’s program area tend to be given low ratings.”
Improving higher education practice through student evaluation systems: is the student voice being heard? (2014, background): “…regarding the reliability and function of student evaluations, it is argued that they offer a valuable insight into the student experience (Theall and Franklin 2001; Greenwald 2002), that they are stable formats (Piccinin, Cristi, and McCoy 1999) and that, on the whole, they tend to be…”
Teacher professionalism and student evaluation of teaching: will better teachers receive higher ratings and will better students give higher ratings? (2006, background): “@Students spend a full term in the course, observe the instructor in class and in interactions with students, and can accurately judge what or how much they have learned with respect to their knowledge at entry.”
Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction (2009, background): “…as student characteristics (i.e., ability), course and setting effects (i.e., class size), and extraneous instructor characteristics (i.e., grading standards) (e.g., Arreola 1995; Centra 1993; d’Apollonia and Abrami 1997; Feldman 1993; Marsh and Roche 1997; Theall and Franklin 2001; Wachtel 1998).”
Student Evaluations of Teaching: Are They Related to What Students Learn? (2009, background): “They are confident enough in their positive conclusions to dismiss negative findings as “myths” (Aleamoni, 1999; Marsh & Roche, 2000) and to wonder why negative comments continue to be found in the literature (Theall & Franklin, 2001).”
Survey of 12 Strategies to Measure Teaching Effectiveness (2005, background): “Theall and Franklin (2001) noted consistently high correlations between student ratings of “amount learned” and overall ratings.”
An Analysis on the Relationship between Lecturers' Competencies and Students' Satisfaction. (2013, background): “In other words the incompetence of lecturers in classroom interaction with the students could be responsible for the observed poor performance of students in the classroom (Cohen, 1981; Theall & Franklin, 2001).”