Research in Higher Education

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 367–374 | Cite as

The effects of different oral directions as to disposition of results on student ratings of college instruction

  • Willis M. FrankhouserJr.


A review of the literature is presented with particular reference to design flaws in previous studies of the effect of stated purpose of evaluation upon student ratings of instruction. Special attention in this study is paid to insuring the salience of the manipulated purpose-of-evaluation variable through using different oral instructions given to college students concerning the purposes of course evaluation. Students (N=516) within each of 18 classes were divided randomly into “faculty use” and “administrative use” conditions. Data were analyzed using global course and global instructor items as dependent variables on a standard short-form rating instrument. No statistically significant effect of the independent variable on either dependent variable was found. Recommendations regarding the design of this type of investigation are discussed as well as the implications of misconceptions about student ratings held by many college faculty.


College Student College Instruction Education Research College Faculty Student 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. Aleamoni, L. M., and Hexner, P. Z. The effect of different sets of instructions on student course and instructor evaluation. Research Report #339. Urbana, Ill.: Measurement and Research Division, Office of Instructional Resources, University of Illinois, 1973.Google Scholar
  2. Blount, H. P., Stallings, W. M., and Gupta, V. G. The effects of different instructions on student ratings of university courses and teachers.Journal of Educational Research 1978,71 149–152.Google Scholar
  3. Centra, J. A. The influence of different directions on students ratings of instruction.Journal of Educational Measurement 1976,13 277–282.Google Scholar
  4. Centra, J. A. The how and why of evaluating teaching.Engineering Education, 1980 (Dec.), 205–210.Google Scholar
  5. Derry, J. O. Can students' ratings of instruction serve rival purposes?Journal of Higher Education 1979,50 79–88.Google Scholar
  6. Driscoll, L. A., and Goodwin, W. L. The effects of varying information about use and disposition of results on university students' evaluations of faculty and courses.American Educational Research Journal 1979,16 25–37.Google Scholar
  7. Feldman, K. A. The significance of circumstances for college students' ratings of their teachers and courses.Research in Higher Education 1979,10 149–172.Google Scholar
  8. Frey, P. W. A two-dimensional analysis of student ratings in instruction.Research in Higher Education 1978,9 69–91.Google Scholar
  9. Meier, R. S., and Feldhusen, J. F. Another look at Dr. Fox: effect of stated purpose for evaluation, lecturer expressiveness, and density of lecture content on student ratings.Journal of Educational Psychology 1979,71 339–345.Google Scholar
  10. Sharon, A. T., and Bartlett, C. J. Effect of instructional conditions in producing leniency on two types of rating scales.Personnel Psychology 1969,22 251–263.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Agathon Press, Inc. 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Willis M. FrankhouserJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.The Pennsylvania State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations