Degree Name

EdD (Doctor of Education)


Educational Leadership

Date of Award

May 1983


The purpose of this study was to determine whether students' evaluation of faculty was affected by their perception of the utilization of the evaluation results. Three other variables were also investigated: faculty status, subject area of the class, and sex of the instructor. Data for this study were collected from twenty classes taught by ten instructors at a private post-secondary institution in East Tennessee. Both instructors and their classes were randomly selected. The total number of students surveyed was 303. Two classes for each of the ten instructors were administered the evaluation instrument by the investigator. The control group was given oral instructions and information to the effect that the results of the evaluation survey would be used for the improvement of instruction. The experimental group was given the same oral instructions and information with additional treatment that the results would have input for personnel decisions. The Student Instructional Report (SIR) was used as the instrument for collection of the student data. Data from the thirty-nine items on the SIR instrument were grouped by class into six factor categories: Factor 1, Teacher-Student Relationship; Factor 2, Course Objectives and Goals; Factor 3, Lectures; Factor 4, Reading Assignments; Factor 5, Course Workload; and Factor 6, Examinations. Means for the thirty-nine items for each of the twenty classes were computed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Grouped means in the six factor categories were used to perform t-tests for (1) control and experimental classes by factor one to factor six, (2) classes taught by male and female instructors by Factor 1 to Factor 6, (3) classes taught by full-time and part-time faculty by Factor 1 to Factor 6, and (4) business or vocational classes and general studies classes by Factor 1 to Factor 6. Classes were used as the unit of analysis for the study. Differences in student ratings due to different instructions on the intended uses of the results were not statistically significant at the .05 level of significance. Data were analyzed for experimental and control classes for each of the factor categories as well as for global rating items 38 and 39. No consistent pattern emerged in the data analysis. . . . (Author's abstract exceeds stipulated maximum length. Discontinued here with permission of author.) UMI

Document Type

Dissertation - unrestricted

Included in

Education Commons