View Item 

Show simple item record

Student Evaluations of Teaching: Dental and Dental Hygiene Students’ and Faculty Members’ Perspectives
dc.contributor.authorGrillo, Andrew C.
dc.contributor.authorMurdoch-Kinch, Carol Anne
dc.contributor.authorRamaswamy, Vidya
dc.contributor.authorInglehart, Marita R.
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-05T15:05:58Z
dc.date.available2020-02-05T15:05:58Z
dc.date.issued2016-04
dc.identifier.citationGrillo, Andrew C.; Murdoch-Kinch, Carol Anne; Ramaswamy, Vidya; Inglehart, Marita R. (2016). "Student Evaluations of Teaching: Dental and Dental Hygiene Students’ and Faculty Members’ Perspectives." Journal of Dental Education 80(4): 439-451.
dc.identifier.issn0022-0337
dc.identifier.issn1930-7837
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/153635
dc.publisherAmerican Dental Education Association
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherdental hygiene students
dc.subject.otherteaching evaluation
dc.subject.otherdental hygiene faculty
dc.subject.otherdental faculty
dc.subject.otherdental students
dc.subject.otherdental education
dc.titleStudent Evaluations of Teaching: Dental and Dental Hygiene Students’ and Faculty Members’ Perspectives
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistry
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153635/1/jddj002203372016804tb06102x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/j.0022-0337.2016.80.4.tb06102.x
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Dental Education
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCrews T.B., Curtis D.F.. Online course evaluations: faculty perspective and strategies for improved response rates. Assess Eval Higher Educ 2011; 36 ( 7 ): 865 – 78.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHmieleski K.M., Champagne M.V.. Plugging in to course evaluation. The Technology Source, Sept./Oct. 2000. At: technologysource.org/article/plugging_in_to_course_evaluation/. Accessed 21 March 2015.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorris J., Conn C.. Investigating strategies for increasing student response rates to online‐delivered course evaluations. Q Rev Dist Educ 2005; 6 ( 1 ): 13 – 29.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKasiar J.B., Schroeder S.L., Holstad S.G.. Comparison of traditional and web‐based course evaluation processes in a required, team‐taught pharmacotherapy course. Am J Pharm Educ 2002; 66 ( 3 ): 268 – 70.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAvery R.J., Bryant W.K., Mathios A. et al. Electronic course evaluations: does an online delivery system influence student evaluations? J Econ Educ 2006; 37 ( 1 ): 21 – 37.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDonovan J., Mader C.E., Shinsky J.. Constructive student feedback: online vs. traditional course evaluations. J Interactive Online Learn 2006; 5 ( 3 ): 283 – 96.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnderson H.M., Cain J., Bird E.. Online student course evaluations: review of literature and a pilot study. Am J Pharm Educ 2005; 69 ( 1 ): 34 – 43.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOverall J.U., Marsh H.W.. Midterm feedback from students: its relationship to instructional improvement and students’ cognitive and affective outcomes. Educ Psychol 1979; 71 ( 6 ): 856 – 65.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeran T.N., Rokosh J.L.. Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction. Instr Sci 2009; 37 ( 2 ): 171 – 84.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNasser F., Fresko B.. Faculty views of student evaluation of college teaching. Assess Eval Higher Educ 2002; 27 ( 2 ): 187 – 98.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpencer K.J., Schmelkin L.P.. Student perspectives on teaching and its evaluation. Assess Eval Higher Educ 2002; 27 ( 5 ): 397 – 409.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHardigan P.C., Succar C.T., Fleisher J.M.. An analysis of response rate and economic costs between mail and web‐based surveys among practicing dentists: a randomized trial. J Community Health 2012; 37 ( 2 ): 383 – 94.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMarlin J.W.. Student perceptions of end‐of‐course evaluations. J Higher Educ 1987; 58 ( 6 ): 704 – 16.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLoveland K.A.. Student evaluations of teaching in web‐based classes: preliminary findings and a call for further research. J Educators Online 2007; 4 ( 2 ): 1 – 18.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKordts‐Freudinger R., Geithner E.. When mode does not matter: evaluation in class versus out of class. Educ Res Eval 2013; 19 ( 7 ): 605 – 14.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorrison R.. A comparison of online versus traditional student end‐of‐course critiques in resident courses. Assess Eval Higher Educ 2011; 36 ( 6 ): 627 – 41.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGuthrie E.R.. The evaluation of teaching. Educ Rec 1949; 30: 109 – 15.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMarsh H.W.. Students’ evaluations of university teaching: dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. J Educ Psychol 1984; 76 ( 5 ): 707 – 54.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCentra J.A.. Reflective faculty evaluation: enhancing teaching and determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass, 1993.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMarsh H.. Students’ evaluation of university teaching: research findings, methodological issues, and directions for future research. Int J Educ Res 1987; 11 ( 3 ): 253 – 388.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYao Y., Grady M.. How do faculty make formative use of student evaluation feedback? A multiple case study. J Pers Eval Educ 2005; 18 ( 2 ): 107 – 26.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJahangiri L., Mucciolo T.W., Choi M., Spielman A.I.. Assessment of teaching effectiveness in U.S. dental schools and the value of triangulation. J Dent Educ 2008; 72 ( 6 ): 707 – 18.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSproule R.. Student evaluation of teaching: a methodological critique of conventional practices. Educ Policy Analysis Arch 2000; 8 ( 50 ).
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKrautmann A.C., Sander W.. Grades and student evaluations of teachers. Econ Educ Rev 1999; 18 ( 1 ): 59 – 63.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdams M.D., Umbach P.D.. Nonresponse and online student evaluations of teaching: understanding the influence of salience, fatigue, and academic environments. Res Higher Educ 2012; 53 ( 5 ): 576 – 91.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuybers T.. Student evaluation of teaching: the use of best‐worst scaling. Assess Eval Higher Educ 2014; 39 ( 4 ): 496 – 513.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEdström K.. Doing course evaluation as if learning matters most. Higher Educ Res Dev 2009; 27 ( 2 ): 95 – 106.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrick T.W., Chadha R., Watson C., Zlatkovska E.. Improving course evaluations to improve instruction and complex learning in higher education. Educ Tech Res Dev 2010; 58 ( 2 ): 115 – 36.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceErdogan M., Tuncer G.. Evaluation of a course: education and awareness for sustainability. Int J Environ Sci Educ 2009; 4 ( 2 ): 133 – 46.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYoussef L.S.. Using student reflections in the formative evaluation of instruction: a course‐integrated approach. Refl Pract 2012; 13 ( 2 ): 237 – 54.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDommeyer C.J., Baum P., Hanna R.W., Chapman K.S.. Gathering faculty teaching evaluations by in‐class and online surveys: their effects on response rates and evaluations. Assess Eval Higher Educ 2004; 29 ( 5 ): 611 – 25.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
jddj002203372016804tb06102x.pdf
Size:
257.4KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.