As I am in an environment where I use something like a 'SET' at times and something like Concept Inventories at times (for fun I will call them CIs), I find myself wondering just what is a 'good' evaluation of 'teaching.' For instance, given Gary Fenstermacher's thoughtful analysis of teaching and studenting, it seems unlikely that a CI measures other than learning. Nonetheless, one might argue that a CI gives a perspective from the side of learning on teaching and one might argue that a SET gives a perspective on teaching from the side of studenting (which includes learning, by the way). The interesting question (and the vice versa) is, of course, what can/do SETs capture than CIs miss as, judging from my experience (and, yes, I'm opinionated - smile), the affective has a substantial impact on the cognitive (see, for instance, Fiumara).
Oddly, I'm reasonably okay with a statement such as "I know good teaching when I see it" versus a statement such as "I know good teaching when I see a CI score).
On Nov 27, 2012, at 12:37 PM, Richard Hake wrote:
> Some subscribers to Math-Learn might be interested in a recent post > "The Value of Student Evaluations of Teaching" [Hake (2012)]. The > abstract reads: > > ******************************************* > ABSTRACT: Bill Brescia of the DrEd list wrote: "We are looking for > best practices to solicit student feedback on the teaching quality of > individual faculty members where in some cases a fairly large number > of faculty are involved in a single course. What mechanism do you use > to survey the students?" > > The value of student evaluations is a hotly contested topic, witness > the 496,000 hits at <http://bit.ly/TqEilE> generated by a Google > search for "Student Evaluations" (with the quotes) on 26 Nov 2012 > 12:58-0800. > > Judging from my own experience, and after careful consideration of > the above hits, my opinion is that: > > a. Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET's) are useful for gauging > the *affective* impact of teaching, but are worse than useless for > gauging the *cognitive* impact - see e.g. "Student Evaluations of > Teaching Are Not Valid Gauges of Teaching Performance - Yet Again!" > [Hake (2012)] at <http://bit.ly/KGK687> > > b. The cognitive impact of teaching is best measured by average > normalized pre-to-post-test gains on "Concept Inventories" > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_inventory> - see e.g., "The > Impact of Concept Inventories On Physics Education and It's Relevance > For Engineering Education" [Hake (2011)] at <http://bit.ly/nmPY8F>. > ******************************************* > > To access the complete 6 kB post please click on <http://bit.ly/XX7OUX>. > > Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University > Links to Articles: <http://bit.ly/a6M5y0> > Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: <http://bit.ly/9nGd3M> > Academia: <http://bit.ly/a8ixxm> > Blog: <http://bit.ly/9yGsXh> > GooglePlus: <http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE> > Twitter: <http://bit.ly/juvd52> > > REFERENCES [URL shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 26 Nov 2012.] > Hake, R.R. 2012. "The Value of Student Evaluations of Teaching" > online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://bit.ly/XX7OUX>. Post > of 26 Nov 2012 13:35:35-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and > link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion > lists and are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at > <http://bit.ly/TqLDls> with a provision for comments. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >