-

Öz

The main purpose of this study was to determine the predictive value of course and instructor characteristics which have not been linked to student evaluations yet or expected to show a different pattern in Turkish higher education context for students’ perception of instructors’ effectiveness. These included class size, academic rank, instructors’ workload and total number of students, gender and students’ disciplines. According to the regression analysis, class size, instructors’ total number of students, work load, year of experience and students’ disciplines were predictive of students’ perceptions of instructors’ effectiveness. The higher workload, experience, class size or total number of students the instructors have, the lower ratings they had. However, these effects were not consistent across disciplines and instructors’ gender. That is, the better understanding of the predictive value of course and instructor characteristics for student evaluations requires more detailed studies wherein teaching context is taken into consideration.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• student evaluations, effective teaching, instructor and course characteristics.

Öğretim Elemanları ve Ders Özelliklerinin Öğretim Elemanlarının Performanslarına İlişkin Değerlendirmelerle İlişkileri

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı; cinsiyet, ünvan, toplam öğrenci sayısı, sınıf mevcudu, akademik disiplin ve ders yükü gibi öğretim elemanı ve ders özelliklerinin öğretim elemanının performansına ilişkin öğrenci algıları üzerindeki etkilerinin Türk yüksek öğretim bağlamı içinde incelenmesidir. Bu amaçla toplam 15834 öğrenciden alınan veriler üzerinde yapılan regresyon analizi sonuçları, sınıf mevcudu, öğretim elemanının toplam öğrenci sayısı, ders yükü, deneyim ve öğrencilerin akademik birimlerinin öğretim elemanının performansına ilişkin algıları manidar olarak yordadığını ortaya koymuştur. Ders yükü, deneyim, öğretim elemanının toplam öğrenci sayısı ve dersteki öğrenci sayısı arttıkça öğretim elemanına yönelik algılarda olumsuzlaşmaktadır. Ancak, bu etkiler cinsiyet ve akademik disipline göre farklılıklar göstermektedir. Bu sonuçlar, öğretim elemanı ve ders özelliklerinin etkilerinin daha iyi anlaşılabilmesi için öğrenme ortamının dikkate alındığı detaylı çalışmalara ihtiyaç duyulduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• öğrenci değerlendirmeleri, etkili öğretim, öğretim elemanı ve ders özellikleri

Kaynakça

1. Acker, J. R. (2003). Class acts: Outstanding college teachers and the difference they make. Criminal Justice Review, 28, 215-231.
2. Bedard, K, & Kuhn, P. (2008). Where class size really matters: Class size and student ratings of instructor effectiveness. Economics of Education Review, 27, 253–265.
3. Beran, T. & Violato, C. (2005). Rating of university teacher instruction: How much do student and course characteristics really matter? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 593-601.
4. Bianchini, S., Lissoni, F., & Pezzoni, M. (2013) Instructor characteristics and students’ evaluation of teaching effectiveness: Evidence from an Italian engineering school. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38 (1), 38-57, DOI: 10.1080/03043797.2012.742868
5. Cashin, W. E. (1990) Students do rate different academic fields differently. In M. Theall & J. Franklin, (Eds.) Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice, (113-122), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Centra, A. J., & Gaubatz, B. N. (2000). Is there gender bias in student evaluations of teaching? Journal of Higher Education, 71(1), 17-33.
7. Cheng, D. A. (2011). Effects of class size on alternative educational outcomes across disciplines. Economics of Education Review, 30, 980–990.
8. Cranton P., & Carusetta, E. (2002) Reflecting on teaching: The influence of context. The International Journal for Academic Development, 7, (2), 167-176.

9. Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings. In R. Perry & J. Smart (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: An evidence-based perspective (pp. 93-129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
10. Fernandez-Balboa, J., & Stiehl, J. (1995).The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1, 293–306.
11. Greenwald, A. G. (1997). Validity concerns and usefulness of student ratings of instruction. American Psychologist, 52 (11), 1182-1186.
12. Hanushek, E.A. (2002). Evidence, politics, Oxford and the class size debate. In L. Mishel & R. Rothstein (Eds.) The class size debate (37-65), Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
13. Hattie, J. & H. W. Marsh (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 507-542.
14. Johnson,M., D., Narayanan, A. & Sawaya, W. J. (2013). Effects of course and instructor characteristics on student evaluation of teaching across a college of engineering. Journal of Engineering Education , 102 (2), 289-318. DOI 1002/jee.20013
15. Kalender, İ. (2011). Üniversite öğrencilerinin öğretim elemanlarını değerlendirmesinde etkili olan faktörler, Eğitim ve Bilim, 36 (162), 56-65.
16. Kulik, J. A. (2001). Student ratings: Validity, utility, and controversy. New Directions for Institutional Research, 109, 9–
17. Major. C. & Palmer, B. (2006). Reshaping teaching and learning: The transformation of faculty pedagogical content knowledge. Higher Education, 51, 619–647.
18. Marsh, H. W. (1980). The influence of student, course and instructor characteristics on evaluations of university teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 17, 219-237.
19. Marsh, H. W. (1983). Multidimensional ratings of teaching effectiveness by students from different academic settings and their relation to student/course/instructor characteristics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75 (1), 1501
20. Marsh, H. W. (1984). Students’ evaluations of university teaching: Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 707–754.
21. Marsh, H.W. (1987). Students' evaluation of university teaching: research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253-388.
22. Marsh, H. W., & Roche, L. A. (1997). Making students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective. American Psychologist, 52 (11), 1187-1197.
23. Nargundkar, S. & Shrikhande, M. (2014). Norming of student evaluations of instruction: Impact of noninstructional factors. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 12 (1), 55-72. DOI: 10.1111/dsji.12023
24. Nasser, F., & Hagtvet, K. (2006). Multilevel analysis of the effects of student and instructor/course characteristics on student ratings. Research in Higher Education, 47 (5), 559-590.
25. Obenchain, K. M., Abernathy, T. V., & Wiest, L. R. (2001). The reliability of students’ ratings on faculty teaching effectiveness. College Teaching, 49 (3), 100-105.
26. Özgüngör, S. (2010). Identifying dimensions of students' ratings that best predict students' self efficacy, course value and satisfaction. European Journal of Educational Psychology, 146-163 .
27. Petchers, M. K., & Chow, J. (1988). Interpreting students' course evaluations. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 2 (2), 51-61.
28. Shulman, L. S. (1998). Theory, practice, and the education of professionals. The Elementary School Journal, 98, 5115