Timeline for What is a healthy and effective way for a math educator to evaluate his or her performance?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2023 at 19:32 | history | edited | Jim Belk | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixed broken link
|
| Mar 26, 2014 at 19:20 | comment | added | Jim Belk | @ChrisCunningham I also find it interesting that this correlation (.45) is so much higher than the correlation (.29) for overall teaching effectiveness. If you trust instructors' opinions, this means that the students are better at comparing different courses by the same instructor than they are at comparing different instructors. (Or you might trust students' opinions more, in which case this says that instructors are better at comparing their own courses than they are at comparing themselves with other instructors.) | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 19:17 | comment | added | Jim Belk | @ChrisCunningham The idea is that professors and students in general tend to agree on whether a course turned out well. So if you're trying to figure out whether a course turned out well, it makes sense to listen to the students. | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 19:00 | comment | added | Chris Cunningham | I found the correlation between an instructor's own ratings of their own classes to be compelling at first, but then highly suspect -- essentially, aren't you arguing that I should believe student evaluations because they correlate with my own self-evaluation? If this is the basis for deciding if ratings are "accurate," why not just use a self-evaluation to begin with? Or, instead, are you saying that student evaluations' correlation with all the other evaluations makes it likely that it does have intrinsic meaning? | |
| Mar 26, 2014 at 18:22 | history | edited | Jim Belk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added information on who graded the exams
|
| Mar 26, 2014 at 16:31 | history | answered | Jim Belk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |