[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-596991-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-596991-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","bias-in-student-ratings-of-instruction-a-systematic-review-of-research-from-2012-to-2021","Bias in Student Ratings of Instruction - A Systematic Review of Research from 2012 to 2021","","Student ratings of instruction (SRI) are widely used in higher education to evaluate courses and teaching, yet substantial debate persists about their validity because results can reflect bias from factors unrelated to instruction quality. A systematic review of 63 peer-reviewed English-language studies published between January 1, 2012, and March 10, 2021 identified robust evidence of gender bias favoring male instructors, along with bias against faculty from minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds. The review also highlights practices to reduce bias and to avoid using SRIs as a sole measure for high-stakes decisions.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/bias-in-student-ratings-of-instruction-a-systematic-review-of-research-from-2012-to-2021/596991/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/bias-in-student-ratings-of-instruction-a-systematic-review-of-research-from-2012-to-2021/596991.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Danger Angel","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-08","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main focus of the systematic review on student ratings of instruction (SRI)?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The review identifies the most recent peer-reviewed original research on potential sources of bias in SRI processes and provides an updated, comprehensive assessment of bias in SRIs.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which biases did the review find strong evidence for?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The review found strong support for continued gender bias, favoring male instructors, as well as bias against faculty with minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why should bias concerns be considered when using SRIs?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Because SRIs can be influenced by student perceptions tied to factors unrelated to teaching quality, which affects both the interpretation of results and decisions made using those ratings.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},596991,1792172240,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":55,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":99,"preview_page_count":4},962090769052,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Bias in Student Ratings of Instruction:  \nA Systematic Review of Research from 2012 to 2021  \nBrenda M. Stoesz, Amy E. De Jaeger, Matthew Quesnel, Dimple Bhojwani, & Ryan Los  \nCentre for the Advancement of Teaching and Learning, University of Manitoba  \nAbstract  \nStudent ratings of instruction (SRI) are commonly used to evaluate courses and teaching in higher education. Much debate about their validity in evaluating teaching exists, which is due to concerns of bias by factors unrelated to teaching quality (Spooren et al., 2013). Our objective was to identify peer-reviewed original research published in English from January 1, 2012, to March 10, 2021, on potential sources of bias in SRIs. Our systematic review of 63 articles demonstrated strong support for the continued existence of gender bias, favoring male instructors and bias against faculty with minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds. These and other biases must be considered when implementing SRIs and reviewing results. Critical practices for reducing bias when using SRIs include implementing bias awareness training and avoiding use of SRIs as a singular measure of teaching quality when making decisions for teaching development or hiring and promotion.  \nKeywords: gender bias, postsecondary education, student evaluation of teaching (SET), teacher evaluations  \nBias in Student Ratings of Instruction: A Systematic Review of Research from 2012 to 2021  \nStudent ratings of instruction (SRI) are commonly used to evaluate courses and instructors’ teaching in higher education. Students are asked to provide feedback, usually near course end dates, on their experiences in particular courses with particular instructors (Linse, 2017). SRI questionnaires typically contain a combination of questions that require students to respond to items using Likert or other rating scales and open-ended questions that allow students to articulate their perceptions and opinions in their own words. The primary purpose of SRIs is to provide instructors with formative feedback that can be used to develop teaching skills and make course improvements over time. There are instances, however, in which results have been used for hiring and promotion decisions (Becker & Watts, 1999; Centra, 1976; Medina et al., 2019). The validity and usefulness of SRIs to evaluate teaching practices for hiring and promotional purposes has been debated (Benton & Cashin, 2014; Clayson, 2009; Marsh, 2007; Spooren et al., 2013) due to concerns that SRIs may be biased by factors unrelated to teaching quality (Spooren et al., 2013). The objective of this systematic review was to identify the most recent peer-reviewed original research on potential sources of bias in SRI processes and to provide an updated and comprehensive review of bias in SRIs.  \nBackground  \nBias in SRIs has been defined as an instance “when a student, teacher, or course characteristic affects the evaluations made, either positively or negatively, but is unrelated to any criteria of good teaching, such as increased student learning”(Centra, 2003, p. 7) and is often based on uncontrollable factors such as gender, ethnicity, and physical attractiveness. For example, gender bias in SRIs has been studied extensively, and much of this research has revealed that students rate female instructors lower than male instructors (Al-Maamari, 2015; Arrona-Palacios et al., 2020; Chávez, 2020; Fan et al., 2019; Fassiotto et al., 2018; Flegl & Andrade Rosas, 2019; Martin, 2016; Mitchell & Martin, 2018; Radchenko, 2020; Wagner et al., 2016). Gender bias has been argued to reflect gender differences in teaching assignments and conditions (Arreola, 2007; Centra, 2009; Gravestock & Gregor-Greenleaf, 2008; Wright & Jenkins-Guarnieri, 2012), such as the tendency to assign more introductory course teaching assignments to women than to men (Theall & Franklin, 2001).  \nRacial and cultural bias may also be apparent when students rate non-white (vs white) instructors (McPherson & Je","cbCaiskoxg8MOcSc","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiskoxg8MOcSc","pdf",846645,24,"English","# Abstract\n# Background\n# Objective","[{\"question\":\"What is the main focus of the systematic review on student ratings of instruction (SRI)?\",\"answer\":\"The review identifies the most recent peer-reviewed original research on potential sources of bias in SRI processes and provides an updated, comprehensive assessment of bias in SRIs.\"},{\"question\":\"Which biases did the review find strong evidence for?\",\"answer\":\"The review found strong support for continued gender bias, favoring male instructors, as well as bias against faculty with minority ethnic and cultural backgrounds.\"},{\"question\":\"Why should bias concerns be considered when using SRIs?\",\"answer\":\"Because SRIs can be influenced by student perceptions tied to factors unrelated to teaching quality, which affects both the interpretation of results and decisions made using those ratings.\"}]","Bias in Student Ratings of Instruction - A Systematic Review of Research from 2012 to 2021 | PDF",1792084156]