R1: Journals

QA/Accountability

Blackmore, J. (2009). Academic pedagogies, quality logics and performative universities: evaluating teaching and what students want. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 857–872

Accountability/Use of SET/Dealing with feedback

Hendry, G. D. & Dean, S. J.(2001). Accountability, evaluation of teaching and expertise in higher education, International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1), 75 — 82

Developing a questionnaire

Lemos, M. S. , Queirós, C. , Teixeira, P. M. and Menezes, I.(2010) 'Development and validation of a theoretically based, multidimensional questionnaire of students' evaluation of university teaching', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, First published on: 26 July 2010 (iFirst)

Understanding how students complete SET surveys

Kalayci, N. (2009). The Underlying Student Reasons for Rating SET Questionnaire Items: How Student Solve the Problem of Filling Out Questionnaires. Educational Research Quarterly, 32(4), 36-60

Need for longitudinal surveys/cycle of review & development/online surveys

Harris, L., Driscoll, P., Lewis, M., Matthews, L., Russell, C., & Cumming, S. (2010). 'Implementing curriculum evaluation: Case study of a generic undergraduate degree in health sciences', Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 477-490

History of SET/need for SET/multi-method approach/confounding factors/summative & formative/concerns with SET

Algozzine, B., Beattie, J., Bray, M., Flowers, C., Gretes, J., Howley, L., Mohanty, G., & Spooner, F. (2004). Student evaluation of college teaching: A practice in search of principles. College Teaching, 52(4), 134-141

The development of the CEQ

Davies, M., Hirschberg, J., Lye, J., Johnston, C. (2010). A systematic analysis of quality of teaching surveys. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(1), 83-96

Negatively worded items/questionnaire construction

Roszkowski, M. J. & Soven, M. (2010). Shifting gears: consequences of including two negatively worded items in the middle of a positively worded questionnaire. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(1), 113 — 130

Pros and Cons of SET/Tutor Vs student attitudes to SET

Balam, E. M. & Shannon, D. M. (2010). Student ratings of college teaching: a comparison of faculty and their students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 209-221

Online SET

Barkhi, R. & Williams, P. (2010). The impact of electronic media on faculty evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(2), 241 – 262

Unofficial SET/online evaluation

Brown, M.J, Baillie, M., & Fraser, S. (2009). Rating ratemyprofessors.com: A comparison of online and official student evaluations of teaching. College Teaching, 57(2), 89-9

Method of collecting SET data

Huxham, M., Laybourn, P., Cairncross, S., Gray, M., Brown, N., Goldfinch, J. & Earl, S. (2008). Collecting student feedback: A comparison of questionnaire and other methods. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-12, iFirst

Purpose of SET/Focus of SET questionnaires/Using SET developmentally

Edström, K. (2008). Doing course evaluation as if learning matters most. Higher Education Research & Development, 27(2), 95–106

The SEEQ

Coffey, M. & Gibbs, G. (2001). The Evaluation of the Student Evaluation of Educational Quality Questionnaire (SEEQ) in UK Higher Education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(1), 89-93

Accountability/Changing role of lecturer/Managerialism/Responding to feedback

Arthur, L. (2009). From performativity to professionalism: Lecturers' responses to student feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(4), 441-454.

Role of SET/Irish Context/Pros & cons/reaction to feedback/responding to feedback/recommendations about SET

Moore, S. & Kuol, N. (2005). A punitive bureaucratic tool or a valuable resource? Using student evaluations to enhance your teaching. In Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching, G. O’Neill, S. Moore, & B. McMullin, (Eds). Dublin: AISHE, 2005, pp 141-148

Range of standardised surveys (SEEQ, SSS, CEQ)/what & when to collect/response rates/using feedback

Richardson, J. T. E. (2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 387–415

Quality/Accountability/Problem with SET survey/good teaching

Johnson, R. (2000). The Authority of the Student Evaluation Questionnaire. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(4), 419-434

History of SET/student perspective

Solis, M. (2003). Evaluation Vs. Assessment: The students perspective on the student evaluation process. Culture Society & Praxis, 2(1), 7-22

Concerns/pros & cons/using the info

Beran, T. N., & Rokosh, J. L. (2009). Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction. Instructional Science, 37(2), 171-184

CEQ/modifying the CEQ

Ginnsa, P., Prosserb, M., & Barriea, S. (2007). Students’ perceptions of teaching quality in higher education: the perspective of currently enrolled students. Studies in Higher Education, 32(5), 603-615

Online Vs paper based/online measurement issues/Pros and cons of online

Lalla, M. & Ferrari, D. (2011). Web-based versus paper-based data collection for the evaluation of teaching activity: empirical evidence from a case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(3), 347–365

Quality/grade inflation

Langbein, L. (2008). Management by results: Student evaluation of faculty teaching and the mis-measurement of performance. Economics of Education Review, 27, 417–428

Formative SET/reflection & development

Nsibande, R. & Garraway, J. (2011). Professional development through formative evaluation. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(2), 97-107

Uses of SET/response rates/interpreting scores

Palmer, S. (2011). The performance of a student evaluation of teaching system. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, iFirst

Developing the NSS

Richardson, J. T. E, Slater, J. B., & Wilson, J. (2007). The National Student Survey: development, findings and implications. Studies in Higher Education, 32(5), 557–580

Role of students/measurement issues

Spooren, P. Mortelmans, D., & Denekens, J. (2007). Student evaluation of teaching quality in higher education: development of an instrument based on 10 Likert-scales. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(6), 667–679

Open ended questions/interpreting comments

Wongsurawat, W. (2011). What’s a comment worth? How to better understand student evaluations of teaching. Quality Assurance in Education, 19(1), 67-83

Prevalence of Quantitative SET; confounding variables

Zabaleta, F. (2007). The use and misuse of student evaluations of teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(1), 55-76

Validity and bias

Marsh, H. W. & Roche, L. A. (1997). Making students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1187-1197.


Other suggestions:

Chen, Y. & Hoshower, L.B. 2003. Student evaluation of teaching effectiveness: an assessment of student perception and motivation. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 28(1): 71-88.


Sojka, J., Gupta, A.K. & Deeter-Schmetz, D.R. 2002. Student and faculty perception of student evaluations of teaching: a study of similarities and differences. College Teaching50(2): 44-49


Hobson, S. M. & Talbot, D. M. 2001. Understanding student evaluations: what all faculty should know. College Teaching 49(1): 26-31


Wagenaar, T. C. (1995). Student Evaluation of Teaching: Some Cautions and Suggestions, Teaching Sociology, 23(1), pp. 64-68


Loveland, K. A. (2007). Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) in Web-based Classes: Preliminary Findings and a Call for Further Research. The Journal of Educators Online, 4(2), 1-18 (www.thejeo.com/Volume4Number2/Loveland%20Final.pdf)


Evaluation Continue to Books Back to Resources

Page tools