Note: The following recommendations were taken from the University of Washington 网站, with only slight modifications. 这些建议仍然是教师和管理人员考虑学生教学意见(从)的最佳方式。.

学生课程评分有很多用途，特别是在跨时间和跨课程查看时. 学生评分提供信息，教师可以使用这些信息来确定他们教学中的优势和需要改进的地方. 此外, 院系和教学单位可以综合使用学生评分来评估多课程、多讲师单元的整体表现, as well as to evaluate individual instructors for personnel reasons, such as decisions regarding retention, 促销活动, tenure and merit pay.

下面列出的建议可以为在人事决策中使用学生课程评分提供有用的指导.

  1. 学生评分必须与其他与教师教学质量相关的数据一起使用, rather than as a sole indicator of teaching quality. Other sources such as peer reviews of classroom sessions, peer reviews of curricular materials, 除了学生的评价外，教师的自我反思也应该得到评估，以真正了解教师的教学技能和表现. 考虑这些其他来源的证据是特别重要的，因为学生评分本身并不能提供足够的证据来证明学生在一门课程中的学习程度.
  2. 在做出有关教学质量的任何决定时，应使用多个部分的评估. 研究表明，至少五个课程的评分是保证足够可靠性的必要条件. 衡量教学质量的评级的有效性增加了，因为决策所依据的数据中包含了更多种类的课程格式. Trends in ratings across years may also be important in assessing teaching.
  3. 教学效果的综合评分最适合用于人事决策. 教师和课程的总体评分往往比其他项目与学生成绩的关系更密切. 教师应该使用更具体的项目来评估具体的技能和需要改进的领域.
  4. Small differences in individual evaluations should 不 be used as a basis for differential decisions. Because student ratings yield numerical averages, 人们容易高估所提供的平均值的精度. Small differences in ratings may 不 be meaningful. It is better to deal with much broader classifications, 例如优秀/良好/可接受/不可接受或明显超出预期/符合预期/达不到预期/明显达不到预期.
  5. 在解释学生平均评分时，我们应该意识到，学生倾向于给教师的评分处于或接近于评分的高端. 因此，使用中位数(或第50百分位)作为强教师和弱教师之间的推定分界线是不合适的. More appropriate would be to assume that the majority of teachers are strong. It is also appropriate, when evaluating average ratings of individual instructors, 考虑相关的比较(见建议6)和所教课程的具体特点(见建议7).
  6. Comparative data should be used with caution. Department-wide comparison data might be reported on the summary report. 然而, for comparisons to be useful, the normative group should be based on more than a narrow population of instructors. 较小的部门可能不希望依赖部门规范，而是使用为许多类似部门计算的规范.
  7. Course characteristics should be considered when interpreting results. 例如, large lecture courses typically receive lower ratings than smaller courses, 首次开设的新课程获得的评分低于已有的课程, 非专业入门课程的评分低于专业高级课程. 为了更公平地了解教师的教学技能，应调整课程类型. 调整课程类型的一种方法是选择类似的课程进行规范比较.
  8. Faculty members should be given an opportunity to respond to evaluation results. Faculty should have an opportunity to discuss the objectives of the course, how the teaching methods were used to meet those objectives, and how circumstances in the course might have affected evaluations. 此外, 从给定课程中获得的其他评价信息(见建议1)可以帮助解释评分结果. (bet365亚洲官网, 教师有机会在他们的年度教师活动报告和行动计划中做出回应).
  9. 课程评分的管理应该安排到最大限度地增加应答者的数量. 一般, 学生填写评价表的比例越高，评价的效度越高. 当回答的学生比例较小时，评分可能不能准确反映整个班级的情况. This problem can be particularly acute in small classes. 建议至少三分之二的入学学生必须包括在结果中，才能对结果有任何信心. As proportions decrease, particularly in small classes, 一个或几个学生的评分更有可能不成比例地影响结果.

Similar advice is offered in Angela Linse’s article, 解释和使用学生评分数据:为担任管理人员和评估委员会的教师提供的指导,发表于 Studies in Educational Evaluation in September 2017 (available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X16300232).

This article recommends the following best practices:

  1. Student ratings should be only one of multiple measures of teaching.
  2. In personnel decisions, a faculty member’s complete history of student ratings should be considered, rather than a single composite score.
  3. 平均评分的小差异很常见，但不一定有意义.
  4. 将异常评分视为其本身，而不是作为教师教学的代表.
  5. Examine the distribution of scores across the entire scale, as well as the mean.
  6. Evaluate each faculty member individually. Evaluations and decisions should stand alone without reference to other faculty members; avoid comparing faculty to each other or to a unit average in personnel decisions.
  7. 关注最常见的评分和评论，而不是强调一个或几个异常的评分或评论.
  8. Contradictory written comments are 不 unusual.

SOI资源