MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W42893497

Harnessing Information Technology to Improve the Process of Students' Evaluations of Teaching: An Exploration of Students' Critical Success Factors of Online Evaluations.

2010· article· en· W42893497 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Dorit Nevo, Ron McClean, Saggi Nevo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsFormative assessmentImmediacySummative assessmentSet (abstract data type)Mechanism (biology)Promotion (chess)Peer feedbackMathematics educationPsychologyComputer scienceProcess (computing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the relative advantage offered by online Students’ Evaluations of Teaching (SET) and describes a study conducted at a Canadian university to identify critical success factors of online evaluations from students’ point of view. Factors identified as important by the students include anonymity, ease of use (of both SET survey and system), accessibility, publication of results, subsequent adjustments to the course, SET survey redesign, system reliability, incentives, reminders, and conveying the importance of the SET survey to students. We discuss key implications of the factors identified to faculty and survey administrators.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.416 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207