« Aleamoni 1999 » : différence entre les versions
(Page créée avec « Catégorie:article <!-- La catégorie article est une sous-catégorie de référence. Elle inclut les articles publiés dans des revues ou des journaux.--> = Student Ra... ») |
|||
| Ligne 57 : | Ligne 57 : | ||
<!-- Entrer ici un résumé personnel de l'article (facultatif) --> | <!-- Entrer ici un résumé personnel de l'article (facultatif) --> | ||
Article incontournable sur les croyances associées à l'évaluation de l'enseignement, s'appuyant sur 75 ans de recherche pour démonter 16 mythes. Les 16 mythes sont : | |||
* Myth 01: Students Cannot make Consistent Judgments About the Instructor and Instruction Because of their Immaturity, Lack of Experience, and Capriciousness | |||
* Myth 02: Only Colleagues with Excellent Publication Records and Expertise are Quali®ed to Teach and to Evaluate their Peers' Instruction | |||
* Myth 03: Most Student Rating Schemes are Nothing More than a Popularity Contest with the Warm, Friendly, Humorous Instructor Emerging as the Winner Every Time | |||
* Myth 04: Students are not able to make Accurate Judgments Until they have been away from the Course and Possibly away from the University for Several Years | |||
* Myth 05: Student Rating forms are both Unreliable and Invalid | |||
* Myth 06: The Size of the Class affects Student Ratings | |||
* Myth 07: The Gender of the Student and the Gender of the Instructor Affect Student Ratings | |||
* Myth 08: The Time of Day the Course is Offered Affects Student Ratings | |||
* Myth 09: Whether Students take the Course as a Requirement or as an Elective Affects their Ratings | |||
* Myth 10: Whether Students are Majors or Nonmajors affects their Ratings | |||
* Myth 11: The Level of the Course (Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, Senior, Graduate) Affects Student Ratings | |||
* Myth 12: The Rank of the Instructor (Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) affects Student Ratings | |||
* Myth 13: The Grades or Marks Students Receive in the Course are Highly Correlated with their Ratings of the Course and the Instructor | |||
* Myth 14: There are no Disciplinary Differences in Student Ratings | |||
* Myth 15: Student Ratings on Single General Items are Accurate Measures of Instructional Effectiveness | |||
* Myth 16: Student Ratings Cannot Meaningfully be used to Improve Instruction | |||
<br> | <br> | ||
== 6. Voir aussi == | == 6. Voir aussi == | ||
Version du 5 mai 2015 à 13:13
Student Rating Myths Versus Research Facts from 1924 to 1998
1. Références
- Référence complète APA : Aleamoni, L. (1999). Student Rating Myths Versus Research Facts from 1924 to 1998. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 13/2, 153-166.
- Auteur(s) : Lawrence Aleamoni
2. Copies
- Copie en ligne : http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1008168421283#page-2
- Copie locale : Fichier:Aleamoni 1999.pdf
- Copie physique :
3. Mots-clés
4. Abstract
Sixteen of the most common myths regarding student ratings of instructors and instruction are looked at from the perspective of the research that has been conducted on them over the past seventy-four years. It is concluded that the myths are, on the whole, myths. However, suggestions are made about how the information regarding the myths can be used to both improve and document instructional effectiveness.
5. Résumé (facultatif)
Article incontournable sur les croyances associées à l'évaluation de l'enseignement, s'appuyant sur 75 ans de recherche pour démonter 16 mythes. Les 16 mythes sont :
- Myth 01: Students Cannot make Consistent Judgments About the Instructor and Instruction Because of their Immaturity, Lack of Experience, and Capriciousness
- Myth 02: Only Colleagues with Excellent Publication Records and Expertise are Quali®ed to Teach and to Evaluate their Peers' Instruction
- Myth 03: Most Student Rating Schemes are Nothing More than a Popularity Contest with the Warm, Friendly, Humorous Instructor Emerging as the Winner Every Time
- Myth 04: Students are not able to make Accurate Judgments Until they have been away from the Course and Possibly away from the University for Several Years
- Myth 05: Student Rating forms are both Unreliable and Invalid
- Myth 06: The Size of the Class affects Student Ratings
- Myth 07: The Gender of the Student and the Gender of the Instructor Affect Student Ratings
- Myth 08: The Time of Day the Course is Offered Affects Student Ratings
- Myth 09: Whether Students take the Course as a Requirement or as an Elective Affects their Ratings
- Myth 10: Whether Students are Majors or Nonmajors affects their Ratings
- Myth 11: The Level of the Course (Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, Senior, Graduate) Affects Student Ratings
- Myth 12: The Rank of the Instructor (Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) affects Student Ratings
- Myth 13: The Grades or Marks Students Receive in the Course are Highly Correlated with their Ratings of the Course and the Instructor
- Myth 14: There are no Disciplinary Differences in Student Ratings
- Myth 15: Student Ratings on Single General Items are Accurate Measures of Instructional Effectiveness
- Myth 16: Student Ratings Cannot Meaningfully be used to Improve Instruction