B. Stoesz, Amy E. De Jaeger, Matthew S. Quesnel, Dimple Bhojwani, Ryan Los
{"title":"学生对教学评价的偏见:2012年至2021年研究的系统回顾","authors":"B. Stoesz, Amy E. De Jaeger, Matthew S. Quesnel, Dimple Bhojwani, Ryan Los","doi":"10.7202/1095482ar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Student ratings of instruction (SRI) are commonly used to evaluate courses and teaching in higher education. Much debate about their validity in evaluating teaching exists, which is due to concerns of bias by factors unrelated to teaching quality (Spooren et al., 2013). Our objective was to identify peer-reviewed original research published in English from January 1, 2012, to March 10, 2021, on potential sources of bias in SRIs. Our systematic review of 63 articles demonstrated strong support for the continued existence of gender bias, favoring male instructors and bias against faculty with minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds. These and other biases must be considered when implementing SRIs and reviewing results. Critical practices for reducing bias when using SRIs include implementing bias awareness training and avoiding use of SRIs as a singular measure of teaching quality when making decisions for teaching development or hiring and promotion.","PeriodicalId":43834,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bias in Student Ratings of Instruction: A Systematic Review of Research from 2012 to 2021\",\"authors\":\"B. Stoesz, Amy E. De Jaeger, Matthew S. Quesnel, Dimple Bhojwani, Ryan Los\",\"doi\":\"10.7202/1095482ar\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Student ratings of instruction (SRI) are commonly used to evaluate courses and teaching in higher education. Much debate about their validity in evaluating teaching exists, which is due to concerns of bias by factors unrelated to teaching quality (Spooren et al., 2013). Our objective was to identify peer-reviewed original research published in English from January 1, 2012, to March 10, 2021, on potential sources of bias in SRIs. Our systematic review of 63 articles demonstrated strong support for the continued existence of gender bias, favoring male instructors and bias against faculty with minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds. These and other biases must be considered when implementing SRIs and reviewing results. Critical practices for reducing bias when using SRIs include implementing bias awareness training and avoiding use of SRIs as a singular measure of teaching quality when making decisions for teaching development or hiring and promotion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43834,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7202/1095482ar\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1095482ar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
学生教学评分(SRI)通常用于评估高等教育中的课程和教学。关于它们在评估教学中的有效性存在很多争论,这是由于担心与教学质量无关的因素会产生偏见(sporen et al., 2013)。我们的目标是确定2012年1月1日至2021年3月10日发表的同行评议的英文原创研究,这些研究涉及sri的潜在偏倚来源。我们对63篇文章的系统回顾有力地支持了性别偏见的持续存在,偏袒男性教师和对少数民族和文化背景的教师的偏见。在实施sri和审查结果时,必须考虑到这些和其他偏差。在使用sri时减少偏见的关键做法包括实施偏见意识培训,以及在制定教学发展或招聘和晋升决策时避免将sri作为教学质量的单一衡量标准。
Bias in Student Ratings of Instruction: A Systematic Review of Research from 2012 to 2021
Student ratings of instruction (SRI) are commonly used to evaluate courses and teaching in higher education. Much debate about their validity in evaluating teaching exists, which is due to concerns of bias by factors unrelated to teaching quality (Spooren et al., 2013). Our objective was to identify peer-reviewed original research published in English from January 1, 2012, to March 10, 2021, on potential sources of bias in SRIs. Our systematic review of 63 articles demonstrated strong support for the continued existence of gender bias, favoring male instructors and bias against faculty with minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds. These and other biases must be considered when implementing SRIs and reviewing results. Critical practices for reducing bias when using SRIs include implementing bias awareness training and avoiding use of SRIs as a singular measure of teaching quality when making decisions for teaching development or hiring and promotion.