IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/ijhe11/v8y2019i3p83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Teaching Students to Think - Faculty Recommendations for Teaching Evaluations Employing Automated Content Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Nitza Davidovitch
  • Eyal Eckhaus

Abstract

Many studies have been conducted on teaching evaluations completed by students and on myths and facts concerning these evaluations performed by students at academic institutions. The current study is unique in examining the meaning of teaching evaluations as perceived by academic faculty members in Israel through direct questions, with an emphasis on faculty's recommendations for improving the evaluations to make students' comments meaningful for enhancing and advancing their teaching. The perception of evaluations is unique too. Evaluations are part of faculty's learning outputs in their courses, with the aim being for graduates of academic systems to have the ability to provide objective and fair assessments.One hundred seventy seven questionnaires were gathered from senior faculty at several academic institutions. Qualitative and statistical research tools were used in order to form a model that expresses the negative implications as seen by faculty members and alternatives for measuring the performance of faculty in academic teaching. The research findings indicate that lecturers note "professional" alternatives and see teaching evaluations as a populist rather than a professional tool. Moreover, although the lecturers gauge the damage caused to them as a result of student evaluations, where the enormous damage caused to them is disproportionate to the number of respondents, and although faculty members believe that student evaluations are untrustworthy, students' opinions on the courses are important. Their recommendation is that the evaluation should be a tool for teaching how to perform evaluations and convey criticism – and in this field not much has been done in academic institutions, if at all. Academia sees evaluations as a technical matter, a means of satisfying students by letting them express their opinions and of giving students a feeling that the system is attentive to their voice, to their views.Indeed, students' voice is important to the lecturers – their opinions of teaching are important – and that is precisely why action should be taken to render these evaluations fair. Students should understand the power of the words that express their evaluation of the lecturers. This point of view is a first of its kind, where academic faculty members support students' opinions and provide recommendations aimed at their improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Nitza Davidovitch & Eyal Eckhaus, 2019. "Teaching Students to Think - Faculty Recommendations for Teaching Evaluations Employing Automated Content Analysis," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 8(3), pages 1-83, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:8:y:2019:i:3:p:83
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/download/15475/9600
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/view/15475
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eyal Eckhaus & Zachary Sheaffer, 2018. "Managerial hubris detection: the case of Enron," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(4), pages 304-325, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vita Akstinaite & Graham Robinson & Eugene Sadler-Smith, 2020. "Linguistic Markers of CEO Hubris," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(4), pages 687-705, December.
    2. Janina Sundermeier & Tyge-F. Kummer, 2022. "Does personality still matter in e-commerce? How perceived hubris influences the assessment of founders’ trustworthiness using the example of reward-based crowdfunding," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1127-1144, September.
    3. Eyal Eckhaus & Nitza Davidovitch, 2023. "What Do Academic Faculty Members Think of Performance Measures of Academic Teaching? A Case Study From a 10-Year Perspective," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(2), pages 21582440231, June.
    4. Dorit Zimand-Sheiner & Shalom Levy & Eyal Eckhaus, 2021. "Exploring Negative Spillover Effects on Stakeholders: A Case Study on Social Media Talk about Crisis in the Food Industry Using Data Mining," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Eyal Eckhaus & Nitza Davidovitch, 2019. "How do Academic Faculty Members Perceive the Effect of Teaching Surveys Completed by Students on Appointment and Promotion Processes at Academic Institutions? A Case Study," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 8(1), pages 171-171, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jfr:ijhe11:v:8:y:2019:i:3:p:83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sciedu Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.