The Results of Student Ratings: Paper vs.Online

「學生評鑑教師教學」之結果：紙筆與網路調查的比較

10.29882/JTNUE.200404.0010

張德勝(Te-Sheng Chang)

學生評鑑教師教學 ； 紙筆調查 ； 網路調查 ； Student Rating of Instruction ； Paper Survey ； Online Survey

師大學報：教育類

49卷1期（2004 / 04 / 01）

171 - 185

英文

本研究主要是比較紙筆調查與網路調查對於「學生評鑑教師教學」結果的差異性。研究對象為九十學年度第一學期國立花蓮師範學院大學部所開設的624門課，包含一年級198（31.73%）門、二年級161（25.80%）、三年級146（23.40%）以及四年級119（19.07%）門。研究工具為「國立花蓮師範學院教學意見反映調查表」共包含四個層面：「準備與計畫」、「教材與內容」、「教法與技巧」、「作業與評鑑」。研究結果顯示在學生評鑑教師教學所有四個層面及總分，紙筆調查所得的結果都顯著的高於網路調查的結果。在所有的班級中，有573（91.8%）門課，紙筆調查的平均分數高於網路調查的結果。相對的，只有51（8.2%）門課，網路調查的結果高於紙筆調查的結果。研究結果顯示紙筆調查的方式比網路調查的方式，更容易讓學生給任課教師較高的評鑑分數。

The purpose of this study was to compare the results of student ratings of their instructors via paper and online surveys. The sample consisted of students at 624 undergraduate courses at National Hualien Teachers College in the fall semester of 2001: 198 (31.73%) freshman courses, 161 (25.80%) sophomore courses, 146 (23.40%) junior courses, and 119 (19.07%) senior courses. The instrument was the Students' Rating of Instructors (SRI) form developed in 1995 at this college. The SRI form was composed of 13 questions rated on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from ”strongly agree” (5 points) to ”strongly disagree” (1 point). These 13 items were clustered around four teaching factors: Preparation/Planning, Material/Content, Method/Skill, and Assignments/Examination. The scores on these four factors were added to give the total score (rating) for a faculty member.The paper scores are significantly higher than the online scores for all of the evaluation items. There are 573 (91.8%) courses for which the average total paper evaluation score is higher than the average total online evaluation score, but only 51 (8.2%) courses for which the average total online score is higher than the average total paper score. These results indicate that the majority of students in all courses give the instructors a higher score when they evaluate them using the more traditional method: sitting in the classroom and using paper forms.

1. Arreola, R. A,Aleamoni, L. M.(1990).Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice.
2. Berk, R. A.(1979).The construction of rating instruments for faculty evaluation.Journal of Higher Education,50(5)
3. Centra, J. A.(1979).Determining faculty effectiveness.
4. Centra, J. A.,Gaubatz, N. B.(2000).Is there gender bias in student evaluations of teaching?.Journal of Higher Education,70(1)
5. Chang, T.(2001).The comparison between web-based and paper-and-pencil surveys of student ratings of instruction.
6. Chang, T.(2000).the meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
7. Cohen, P. A.(1981).Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multisection validity studies.Review of Educational Research,51
8. Costin, F.(1968).A graduate course in the teaching of psychology: Description and evaluation.The Journal of Teacher Education,19(4)
9. Couch, A.,Keniston, K.(1960).Yeasayers and naysayers: Agreeing response set as a personality variable..Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,60
10. DeCristoforo, J. R.(1992).doctoral dissertation.
11. Doherty, L.,Thomas, M. D.(1986).Human factors in organizational design management-II.
12. Erdman, H.,Klein, M.,Greist, J.(1983).The reliability of a computer interview for drug use/abuse information.Behavior Research Methods and Instrumenation,15
13. Evan, W. M.,Miller, J. R.(1969).Differential effects on response bias of computer versus conventional administration of a social science questionnaire: An exploratory methodological experiment.Behavioral Science,14
14. Feldman, K. A.(1979).The significance of circumstances for college students' ratings of their teachers and courses.Research in Higher Education,10(2)
15. Feldman, K. A.(1993).College students' views of male and female college teachers: Part II-Evldence from students' evaluations of their classroom teachers..Research in Higher Education,34
16. Feldman, K. A.(1977).Consistency and variability among college students in their ratings among courses: A review and analysis.Research in Higher Education,6
17. Hardy, N.(2002).the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association.
18. Hmieleski, K.(2000).Barriers to online evaluation:Surveying the nation's top 200 most wired colleges ..
19. Johnson, T.(2002).the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association.
20. Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L.(1986).Response effects in the electronic survey.Public Option Quarterly,50
21. Layne, B. H.,DeCristoforo, J. R.,McGinty, D.(1999).Electronic versus traditional student ratings of instruction.Research in Higher Education,40(2)
22. Llewellyn, D. C.(2002).the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association.
23. Marsh, H. W.(1987).Students' evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research.International Journal of Educational Research,11
24. Marsh, H. W.,Roche, L.(1993).The use of students' evaluations and an individually structured intervention to enhance university teaching effectiveness.American Educational Research Journal,30
25. Martin, C.,Nagao, H.(1989).Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses..Journal of Applied Psychology,74(1)
26. Miller, D. C.(1991).Handbook or research design and social measurement.
27. Nimmer, J. G.,Stone, E. F.(1991).Effects of grading practices and time of ratings on student ratings of faculty performance and student learning.Research in Higher Education,32
28. Ory, J.(1990).Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice.
29. Phillips, D. L.,Clancy, K. J.(1970).Some effects of social desirability in survey studies.American Journal of Sociology,77(5)
30. Rosenfeld, P.,Booth-Kewley, S.(1993).Computer-administered surveys in organizational settings: Alternatives, advantages, and applications.American Behavioral Scientist,36(4)
31. Seldin, P.(1999).Changing practices in evaluating teaching: A practical guide to improved faculty performance and promotion/tenure decisions.
32. Sproull, L.,,Kiesler, S.(1991).Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization.
33. Wachtel, H. K.(1998).Student evaluation of college teaching effectiveness: A brief review.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education,23(2)
34. Wagenaar, T. C.(1995).Student evaluation of teaching: Some cautions and suggestions.Teaching and Sociology,64
35. Williams W. M.,Ceci, S.(1997).“ How’m I doing?” Problems with student ratings of instructors and courses.Change,29(5)
36. Wilson, R.(1998).New research casts doubt of student evaluation of professors.The Chronicle of Higher Education,44(19)

1. 曾正宜、陳舜芬(2008)。綱路彈性化學生評鑑教師教學系統對評鑑行為與結果的影響。課程與教學，11(4)，213-236。
2. 廖婉伶、岳修平(2013)。大學服務學習課程教學型態與學生評量教學之研究。人文社會學報，9(2)，85-106。
3. 潘世尊(2010)。學生評量教師教學問卷之修訂─一所私立科技大學的自我探究。教育理論與實踐學刊，21，111-142。
4. 施佩芳(2010)。網路調查方法在教育研究上可行性之探究：以國小學童人際關係與學校壓力之研究為例。中正教育研究，9(1)，31-76。
5. 湯誌龍(2006)。屏東科技大學學生評鑑敎師敎學之工具修訂。臺東大學教育學報，17(1)，1-33。