Social Psychology of Education

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 319–330 | Cite as

Effect of syllabus tone: students’ perceptions of instructor and course

  • Richard J. HarnishEmail author
  • K. Robert Bridges


It is not uncommon for students to complain that faculty are unapproachable, while faculty complain that students are not engaged. Such perceptions, especially when formed at the start of a semester, can impact what students learn and how instructors teach; therefore, it is critical that these perceptions are prevented if a course is to be successful. A good starting point is the syllabus, which not only informs students about a course and its requirements, but creates a first impression about the instructor and his or her attitudes toward teaching. We conducted an experiment in which the course syllabus was manipulated to reflect a friendly or an unfriendly tone so that we could explore the perceptions students formed of the instructor and class. Results supported the hypothesis that a syllabus written in a friendly, rather than unfriendly, tone evoked perceptions of the instructor being more warm, more approachable, and more motivated to teach the course.


Syllabus Tone Classroom climate Person perception 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abelson, R. P., Aronson, E., McGuire, W. J., Newcomb, T. M., Rosenberg, M. J., Tannenbaum, P. H. (eds) (1968) Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook. Rand McNally, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambady N., Rosenthal R. (1992) Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 111: 256–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ambady N., Rosenthal R. (1993) Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64: 431–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asch S. E. (1946) Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 41: 258–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Babad E., Avni-Babad D., Rosenthal R. (2004) Prediction of students; evaluations from brief instances of professors’ nonverbal behavior in defined instructional situations. Social Psychology of Education 7: 3–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Babad E., Kaplowitz H., Darley J. (1999) A “classic” revisited: Students’ immediate and delayed evaluations of a warm/cold instructor. Social Psychology of Education 3: 81–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Basow S. (1995) Student evaluations of college professors: When gender matters. Journal of Educational Psychology 87: 656–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Basow S. (2000) Best and worst professors: Gender patterns in students’ choices. Sex Roles 43: 407–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Best J. B., Addison W. E. (2000) A preliminary study of perceived warmth of professor and student evaluations. Teaching of Psychology 27: 60–62Google Scholar
  10. Buchert S., Laws E. L., Apperson J. M., Bregman N. J. (2008) First impressions and professor reputation: Influence on student evaluations of instruction. Social Psychology of Education 11: 397–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carnes L. W., Awang F., Marlow J. (2003) Can instructors ensure the integrity and quality of online courses?. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal 43(3): 162–172Google Scholar
  12. Centra J. A., Gaubatz N. B. (2000) Is there gender bias in student evaluations of teaching?. The Journal of Higher Education 70: 17–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cuddy A. J. C., Fiske S. T., Glick P. (2004) When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn’t cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues 60: 701–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cuddy A. J. C., Norton M., Fiske S. T. (2005) This old stereotype: The stubbornness and pervasiveness of the elderly stereotype. Journal of Social Issues 61: 267–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DiClementi J. D., Handelsman M. M. (2005) Empowering students: Class-generated course rules. Teaching of Psychology 32: 18–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feldman K. A. (1993) College students’ views of male and female college teachers: Part II—evidence from students’ evaluation of their classroom teachers. Research in Higher Education 34: 151–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frymier A. B. (1994) The use of affinity-seeking in producing liking and learning in the classroom. Journal of Applied Communication Research 22: 87–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Griffin B. W. (2001) Instructor reputation and student ratings of instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology 26: 534–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grunert J. (1997) The course syllabus: A learning centered approach. Anker Publishing Company Inc, Bolton, MAGoogle Scholar
  20. Gurung R. E. R., Vespia K. M. (2007) Looking good, teaching well? Linking liking, looks, and learning. Teaching of Psychology 34: 5–10Google Scholar
  21. Harnish, R. J., O’Brien McElwee, R., Slattery, J. M., Frantz, S., Haney, M. R., Shore, C. M., & Penley, J. (2011). Creating the foundation for a warm classroom climate: Best practices in syllabus tone. APS Observer, 24, 23–27.Google Scholar
  22. Judd C. M., James-Hawkins L., Yzerbyt V. T., Kashima Y. (2005) Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89: 899–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kelley H. H. (1950) The warm-cold variable in first impressions of persons. Journal of Personality 18: 431–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kervyn N., Yzerbyt V. Y., Judd C. M., Nunes A. (2009) A question of compensation: The social life of the fundamental dimensions of social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96: 828–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kilbourne, J. (2003). Deadly persuasion: The advertising of alcohol and tobacco [DVD]. Available from Media Education Foundation.Google Scholar
  26. McClleland J. N. (1970) The effect of student evaluations of college instruction upon subsequent evaluations. California Journal of Educational Research 21: 88–95Google Scholar
  27. McKeachie W. J. (1986) Teaching tips: A guidebook for the beginning college teacher (8th ed.). D. C. Heath, Lexington, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Murray H. G., Rushton J. P., Paunonen S. V. (1990) Teacher personality traits and student instructional ratings in six types of university courses. Journal of Educational Psychology 82: 250–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006–2007. Retrieved from
  30. Nisbett R. E., Wilson T. D. (1977) The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35: 250–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ory J. C. (2001) Faculty thoughts and concerns about student ratings. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 87: 3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rosenberg S., Sidlak A. (1972) Structural representations of implicit personality theory. In: Berkowitz L. (eds) Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 6. Academic Press, New York, pp 235–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rubin, S. (1985). Professors, students, and the syllabus. The Chronicle of Higher Education 56.Google Scholar
  34. Suddreth A., Galloway A. T. (2006) Options for planning a course and developing a syllabus. In: Buskist W., Davis S. F. (eds) Handbook of the teaching of psychology. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA, pp 31–35Google Scholar
  35. Taylor S. E., Fiske S. T. (1978) Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. In: Berkowitz L. (eds) Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 1. Academic Press, New York, pp 249–288Google Scholar
  36. Thorndike E. L. (1920) A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology 4: 25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Waters M., Kemp E., Pucci A. (1988) High and low faculty evaluations: Descriptions by students. Teaching of Psychology 15: 203–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Widmeyer W. N., Loy J. W. (1988) When you’re hot, you’re hot! Warm-cold effects in first impressions of persons and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Educational Psychology 80: 118–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUpper BurrellUSA

Personalised recommendations