Talk:Course evaluation

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

One-sidedness of the Article

The current article is pretty one-sided about the validity and benefits of course evaluation. It says nothing about the criticisms many have made against student course evaluations in particular. For anyone who wants to follow this up, the following links might be of interest.

http://www.isu.edu/ctl/facultydev/extras/student-evals.html

http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/sef.htm

http://faculty.fullerton.edu/senatenews/page2.html

http://chronicle.com/colloquy/98/evaluation/background.htm

http://jbao.atu.edu/Fall2002/mason_edwards_roach.pdf

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Fall1998/TroutArt.html

http://mtprof.msun.edu/Fall1995/platt.html

http://www.cra.org/CRN/articles/may03/fich.html

http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2000/JA/Feat/trou.htm

http://www.tes.co.uk/search/story/?story_id=2142732

http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/AssessTheRem1.pdf

See this too: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/29/evaluate TruthPolice (talk) 20:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And this: http://www.ctu.edu.vn/centers/cfl/teaching/ebooks/26.pdf TruthPolice (talk) 15:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a Criticism section to the article, actually using some of the sources you mention. Hopefully this "rounds" the article out a little better. Poluphemos (talk) 02:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Criticism section, there is a note about online course evaluations and the example used as a criticism is a PDF about RateMyProfessor.com. Why does RateMyProfessor.com have any kind of merit in this section or this topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayhawksean (talk • contribs) 17:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Course evaluations

Is there anyone opposed to merging this article with Course evaluations and turning one into a redirect to the other? NBS525 13:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm for merging the (practically identical) two into "Course evaluation," to have a parallel naming structure with other evaluation articles. Rfrisbie^talk 18:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After a month without further comment, I will perform the proposed merger. As far as I can tell from Category:Evaluation, the name seems fine in the singular. Jlittlet 19:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Course Experience Questionnaire

This does not mention the Course Experience Questionnaire, nor the Student Course Experience Questionnaire, which have been administered to students in Australia. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC) The Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) was devised by Ramsden (1991), but I have not read his original paper, I have only read works in which Ramsden is cited, such as Hounsell, Tait and Day (1997). ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC) A reference to the Course Experience Questionnaire, and its sister-project, the Student Course Experience Questionnaire (SCEQ), both of which have been used extensively in Australia, is given in Prosser, M. & Barrie, S. (2003). Using a student-focussed learning perspective to align academic development with institutional quality assurance. In Blackwell, R. & Blackmore, P. (eds.) (2003).[reply]

Towards Strategic Development of Staff in Higher Education. (Chapter 16, pp191-202). Maidenhead, Berkshire: Open University Press.

ISBN: 0-335-21209-3. This chapter gives examples of questions from either scale. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC) The other reference I gave is to Hounsell, D., Tait and Day (1997). Feedback on Courses and Programmes of Study. I think it is published in Edinburgh but I shall need to check this. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More coverage of empirical studies needed

This article needs a lot more thorough review of the empirical studies that have been done into course evaluation. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:18, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some stuff with references to the empirical studies outside of social psychology on course evaluations. Someone else should likely add some references from the social psychology literature that argues in favour of course evaluations. I personally don’t take that work seriously enough to be able to bother. However, it should likely be included to round things out. Derek Pyne2 (talk) 02:03, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Course evaluation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121028075300/https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/files/?whdmsaction=public:main.file&fileID=3459 to https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/files/?whdmsaction=public:main.file&fileID=3459

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Course evaluation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:31, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]