Why Good Teaching Evaluations May Reward Bad Teaching: On Grade Inflation and Other Unintended Consequences of Student Evaluations
Why Good Teaching Evaluations May Reward Bad Teaching: On Grade Inflation and Other Unintended Consequences of Student Evaluations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1745691616650284
复制
发表时间：
2016-11-01
影响因子：
12.6
通讯作者：
Stroebe, Wolfgang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Stroebe, Wolfgang
在这篇文章中，我讨论了一个悖论：几十年来，大学平均绩点一直在增加，而学生在学习上投入的时间却在减少。我认为，造成这一悖论的一个主要原因是，大学管理人员根据学生对教学的评价做出重要人事决定的做法，鼓励了对学生的宽大处理。宽松的评分制度为教师提供了强有力的激励，促使他们以能够给学生带来良好评价的方式授课。因为许多教师认为，普通学生更喜欢娱乐性强、工作量少、成绩高的课程，他们感到有压力去满足这些期望。有证据表明，学生成绩与他们对教学的评价之间的正相关反映了一种偏见，而不是教学效果。如果良好的教学评估反映了由于有效的教学而改善了学生的学习，那么它们应该与后续课程的成绩呈正相关，这些课程建立在前一门课程所学知识的基础上。研究发现，并行课程的教学评价虽然与并行成绩呈正相关，但与后续课程的学生表现呈负相关，这与并行评估是宽松评分的结果而不是有效教学的假设更一致。文中还讨论了政策含义。
In this article, I address the paradox that university grade point averages have increased for decades, whereas the time students invest in their studies has decreased. I argue that one major contributor to this paradox is grading leniency, encouraged by the practice of university administrators to base important personnel decisions on student evaluations of teaching. Grading leniency creates strong incentives for instructors to teach in ways that would result in good student evaluations. Because many instructors believe that the average student prefers courses that are entertaining, require little work, and result in high grades, they feel under pressure to conform to those expectations. Evidence is presented that the positive association between student grades and their evaluation of teaching reflects a bias rather than teaching effectiveness. If good teaching evaluations reflected improved student learning due to effective teaching, they should be positively related to the grades received in subsequent courses that build on knowledge gained in the previous course. Findings that teaching evaluations of concurrent courses, though positively correlated with concurrent grades, are negatively related to student performance in subsequent courses are more consistent with the assumption that concurrent evaluations are the result of lenient grading rather than effective teaching. Policy implications are discussed.