Research in Higher Education

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 135–145 | Cite as

Filipino and American student perceptions of teacher effectiveness

  • Frederick T. Bail
  • Soledad S. Mina


Filipino and American undergraduate students rated college instructor characteristics according to their perceived importance for effective teaching. Items were selected to reflect relevant value orientations in Filipino and American cultures. Factor analysis of the ratings revealed six underlying dimensions. MANOVA results showed that the group ratings on the six corresponding subscales were significantly different. Discriminant function analysis revealed that Filipino students rated items pertaining to authoritarianism and personal appearance of the instructor as significantly more important for effective teaching than did American students. This suggests that cross-cultural differences in perceptions of effective teaching may be predictable from a knowledge of both similar and conflicting value orientations in the specific cultures. Implications for the academic adjustment of students from different cultures were discussed.


Function Analysis Undergraduate Student Discriminant Function Education Research Group Rating 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bail, F. T., Dunn-Rankin, P., & Norton, R. E. Student evaluation of college teaching. Unpublished manuscript, 1975.Google Scholar
  2. Bulatao, J. Personal preferences of Filipino students.Philippine Sociological Review 1963,2 168–178.Google Scholar
  3. Cattell, R. B.Factor analysis. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1952.Google Scholar
  4. Chunnual, N.Psycho-social adaptations of international exchange students in American university. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1976.Google Scholar
  5. Cooley, W. W., & Lohnes, P. R.Multivariate procedures for the behavioral sciences. New York: Wiley, 1962.Google Scholar
  6. Coombs, C. H.A theory of data. New York: Wiley, 1964.Google Scholar
  7. Crittenden, K. S., & Norr, J. L. Student values and student evaluation: A problem in person perception.Sociometry 1973,36 143–151.Google Scholar
  8. Cronbach, L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.Psychometrika 1951,16 297–334.Google Scholar
  9. Flores, P. M.Socio-psychological development of Filipino children. Manila, Philippines: P. M. Flores, 1969.Google Scholar
  10. Guthrie, G., & Azores, F. Philippine interpersonal behavior patterns. In W. Bello and A. de Guzman (Eds.),Modernization: Its impact in the Philippines (IPC Papers No. 6). Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
  11. Guthrie, G., & Jacobs, P. J.Child-rearing and personality development in the Philippines. University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
  12. Harris, R. J.A primer of multivariate statistics. New York: Academic, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. Hildebrand, M., Wilson, R., & Dienst, E.Evaluating university teaching. Berkeley, Calif.: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education, 1971.Google Scholar
  14. Homyen, D.Students' perception of the effective college teachers. Unpublished master's thesis, University of the Philippines, 1972.Google Scholar
  15. Katz, J. Personality and interpersonal relations in the college classroom. In W. Sanford (Ed.),The American College. New York: Wiley, 1962.Google Scholar
  16. Klenfield, J.Effective teachers of Indian and Eskimo high school students. Fairbanks: Center for Northern Educational Research, University of Alaska, 1972.Google Scholar
  17. McKeachie, R., Lin, Y., Milholland, J., & Isaacson, R. Students' affiliations, motives, teacher warmth, and academic achievement.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1966,5 457–461.Google Scholar
  18. Mendez, P. P., & Jocano, F. L.The Filipino family in its urban and rural orientation: Two case studies. Manila: Regal Printing, 1974.Google Scholar
  19. Montenegro, X. Ideal and actual student perception of college instructors as predictors of teacher effectiveness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1978.Google Scholar
  20. Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. Equivalence in cross-cultural research.Public Opinion Quarterly 1966,30 34–43.Google Scholar
  21. Rayder, N. F. College student ratings of instructors.Journal of Experimental Education 1968,37 76–81.Google Scholar
  22. Solomon, D., Rosenberg, L., & Bezdek, W. E. Teacher behavior and student learning.Journal of Educational Psychology 1964,55 23–30.Google Scholar
  23. Tang, K.The development and validation of an instrument to measure teaching effectiveness. Unpublished manuscript. Manila, Philippines: De La Salle College, 1973.Google Scholar
  24. Tetembaum, T. J. The role of student needs and teacher orientation in student rating of teachers.American Educational Research Journal 1975,12 417–433.Google Scholar
  25. Varias-de Guzman, J., & Varias, R. R.Psychology of Filipinos (rev. ed.). Manila, Philippines: J. Varias-de Guzman & R. R. Varias, 1967.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Agathon Press, Inc. 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frederick T. Bail
    • 1
  • Soledad S. Mina
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational PsychologyUniversity of Hawaii at ManoaUSA

Personalised recommendations