TRADITIONALLY CAMPUS-BASED COURSES rely on student evaluations to provide instructors with feedback about their teaching effectiveness. However, current student evaluations of teaching instruments do not adequately assess many of the essential constructivist-based teaching practices recommended for quality online learning experiences. One of the best known summaries of research-based instructional practices is the widely disseminatedSeven Principles of Effective Teaching authored by Chickering and Gamson (1987). The majority of learner-centered instructional practices which comprise the Seven Principles framework are clearly focused on constructivist-based teaching practices. This study was an initial effort toward the development of a student evaluation of online teaching instrument based on the Seven Principles framework. Four hundred and eighty-nine students enrolled in WebCT courses at Montana State University completed the 26 item instrument. TheStudent Evaluation of Online Teaching Effectiveness (SEOTE) was found to be highly reliable and yielded four interpretable factors. The four factors were interpreted as Student-Faculty Interaction, Active Learning, Time on Task, and Cooperation Among Students.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Abrami, P.C., & d’Apollonia, S. (1991). Multidimensional students’ evaluation of teaching effectiveness-Generalizability of N=1" research: Comment on Marsh (1991).Journal of Educational Psychology, 30, 221–227.
Abrami, P.C., d’Apollonia, S., & Rosenfield, S. (1997). The dimensionality of student ratings of instruction: What we know and what we do not. In R.P. Perry & J.C. Smart (Eds.),Effective Teaching In Higher Education: Research and Practice (pp. 321–367). New York: Agathon.
Aleamoni, L.M. (1978). Development and factorial validation of the Arizona Course/Instructor Evaluation Questionnaire.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38, 1063–1067.
Aleamoni, L.M. (1999). Student rating myths versus research facts from 1924 to 1998. Journal ofPersonal Evaluation in Education, 13(2), 153–166.
American Psychological Association (1997, November).Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school design and reform. Retrieved April 21, 2005, from http://www.apa.org/ed/lcp.html#Background.
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997).Psychological testing (7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986).Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Billings, D.M. (2000). A framework for assessing outcomes and practices in Webbased courses in nursing.Journal of Nursing Education, 39(2), 60–67.
Bonk, C.J., & Cunningham, D.J. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C.J. Bonk & K.S. King (Eds.),Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 25–50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Boyer, E.L. (1990).Scholarship reconsidered. Priorities of the professorate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Cashin, W.E., & Downey, R.G. (1992). Using global student ratings items for summative evaluation.Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 563–572.
Cattell, R.B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276.
Centra, J.A. (1993).Reflective faculty evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A.W., & Erhmann, S.C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever.AAHE Bulletin, 49(2), 3–6.
Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (March 1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education.AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7.
Cohen, P.A. (1981). Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multisection validity studies.Research in Higher Education, 13, 321–341.
Cross, P.K. (1999). What do we know about students’ learning and how do we know it?Innovative Higher Education, 23(2), 255–270.
Donald, J.G. (1999). Motivation for higher-order learning.New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 7, 27–35.
Fabrigar, L.R., Wenger, D.T., MacCallum, R.C., & Strahan, E.J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research.Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299.
Feldman, K.A. (1988). Effective college teaching from the students’ and faculty’s view: Matched or mismatched priorities.Research in Higher Education, 28(4), 291–343.
Feldman, K.A. (1997). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching: Evidence from student ratings. In R.P. Perry & J.C. Smart (Eds.),Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 368–395). New York: Agathon Press.
Field, A. (2000).Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Giguere, P., & Minotti, J (2003). Developing high quality Internet-based training for adult learners.Educational Technology, 4, 57–58.
Graham, C., Caglitay, K., Lim, B., Craner, J., &, Duffy, T.M. (2001). Seven principles for effective teaching: A practical lens for evaluating online courses.The Technology Source. Retrieved February 19, 2004, from http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=839.
Hacker, D.J., & Niederhauser, D.S. (2000). Promoting deep and durable learning in the online classroom.New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 53–63.
Jonassen, D.H. (2000).Computers as mindtools for schools. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Jonassen, D.H., Peck, K.L., & Wilson, B.G. (1999).Learning with technology, Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Kaiser, H.F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151.
Koch, L.C., Holland, L.A., Price, D., Gonzalez, G.L., Lieske, P., Butler, A., Wilson, K., & Holly, M.L. (2002). Engaging new faculty in the scholarship of teaching.Innovative Higher Education, 27(2), 83–94.
Lent, R.W., Brown, S.D., & Larkin, K.C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 356–362.
Magnani, L, Nersessian, N.J., & Thagard, P. (1999).Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery. New York: Kluwer Acdemic/Plenum.
Marsh, H.W. (1982). SEEQ:A reliable, valid, and useful instrument for collecting students’ evaluations of university teaching.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 77–95.
Marsh, H.W. (1987). Student evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research.International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253–388.
Marsh, H.W. (1991). A multidimensional perspective on students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness: Reply to Abrami and d’Apollinia.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 416–421.
Marsh, H.W. (1997). Making students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility.American Psychologist, 52(11), 1187–97.
Marsh, H.W., & Bailey, M. (1993). Multidimensional students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness. A profile analysis.The Journal of Higher Education, 64(1), 1–18.
Marsh, H.W., & Roche, L.A. (1993). The use of students’ evaluations and an individually structured intervention to enhance university teaching effectiveness. AmericanEducational Research Journal, 30, 217–251.
Millis, B.J., & Cottrell, P.G. (1998).Cooperative learning for higher education faculty. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
Moskal, P.D., & Dziuban, C.D. (2001). Present and future directions for assessing cyber education: The changing research paradigm. In L.R. Vandervert, L.V. Shavinina & R.A. Cornell (Eds.)Cybereducation: The future of long-Distance Learning. (pp. 157–184). Larchmont, NY: Mary Ann Liebert.
Pajares, F. (2002). Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning.Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 118–125.
Partlow, K.M., & Gibbs, W.J. (2003). Indicators of constructivist principles in Internet-based courses.Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(2), 68–97.
Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (1991).How college affects students. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.
Phipps, R.A., & Merisotis, J.P. (2000).Quality on the line: Benchmarks for success in Internet-based distance education. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.
Pintrich, P.R., & DeGroot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 41–50.
Reeves, T.C., & Reeves, P.M. (1997).Effective dimensions of interactive learning on the World Wide Web. In Bradual H. Kahn (Ed.),Internet-based instruction (pp. 59–66). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Relan, A., & Gillani, B.B. (1997). Internet-based instruction and the traditional classroom: Similarities and differences. In B.H. Kahn (Ed.),Internet-based instruction (pp. 41–46). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Schunk, D. (1983). Developing children’s self-efficacy and skills: The roles of social comparative information and goal setting.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 76–86.
Stevens, J.P. (2002).Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Svinicki, M.D. (1999). New directions in learning and motivation.New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 80, 5–27.
Vye, N.J., Schwartz, D.L., Bransford, J.D., Barron, B.J., Zech, L., & Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1998). SMART environments that support monitoring, reflection, and revision. In D.J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A.C. Graesser, (Eds.),Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 305–346). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Watchtel, H.K. (1998). Student evaluation of college teaching effectiveness: A brief overview.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(2). 191–211.
ABOUT THE AUTHORArthur W. Bangert is an Assistant Professor in the Adult and Higher Education Program at Montana State University (MSU) where he teachers courses in educational statistics, research methods, and educational assessment. Prior to his work at MSU, Dr. Bangert was a school psychologist, guidance counselor, and test consultant for a major publishing company. Dr. Bangert’s research interests include designing, teaching, and evaluating online learning environments and the use of Teacher Work Sample Methodology for training pre-service teachers in the design of quality classroom assessments.
About this article
Cite this article
Bangert, A.W. Identifying factors underlying the quality of online teaching effectiveness: An exploratory study. J. Comput. High. Educ. 17, 79–99 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03032699
- online teaching effectiveness
- Internet-based statistics
- student evaluations of teaching