[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-597255-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-597255-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","the-utility-of-student-ratings-of-instruction-for-students-faculty-and-administrators-a-consequential-validity-study","The Utility of Student Ratings of Instruction for Students, Faculty, and Administrators: A “Consequential Validity” Study","","Students, faculty, and administrators at a Canadian university were surveyed to assess the utility and “consequential validity” of student ratings of instruction. Among 1,229 students and alumni, 52% had never used the ratings, while 47% of users reported repeated use for selecting courses and/or instructors. Most faculty (84%) viewed the ratings as useful for improving teaching quality, yet faculty seldom used them for teaching changes. Administrators mainly used the ratings for decisions. Overall, course instruction information ranked highest in usefulness.",{"@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/the-utility-of-student-ratings-of-instruction-for-students-faculty-and-administrators-a-consequential-validity-study/597255/",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/the-utility-of-student-ratings-of-instruction-for-students-faculty-and-administrators-a-consequential-validity-study/597255.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Blue Pony","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the main purpose of the study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To examine how students, faculty, and administrators use the results of an institution-wide (“universal”) instrument measuring student ratings of instruction at a major Canadian university.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How did students use the ratings for course or instructor selection?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"About half (52%) said they had never used the ratings; among those who did use them, many (47%) reported using them several times to select courses and/or instructors.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How did faculty and administrators differ in using the ratings?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Faculty were generally positive about the ratings’ usefulness (84%) but rarely used them to change teaching, whereas administrators reported using the ratings for purposes such as decisions about merit and tenure.","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},597255,1792165133,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"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":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"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":111,"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":145,"preview_page_count":4},962090760266,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","The Canadian Journal of Higher Education La revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur Volume XXXV, No. 2, 2005 pages 49-70  \nThe Utility of Student Ratings of Instruction for Students, Faculty, and Administrators: A “Consequential Validity”Study  \nTANYA BERAN, CLAUDIO VIOLATO, DON KLINE & JIM FRIDERES  \nUniversity of Calgary  \nABSTRACT  \nStudents, faculty and administrators at a major Canadian university were surveyed to investigate the utility or “consequential validity” of student ratings of instructors. Of the 1,229 (approximately equal number of males and females) students and alumni, about half (52%) indicated that they had never used the ratings, but of those who did use it, many (47%) reported using it several times to select courses and/or instructors. The majority (84%) of faculty members (n = 357) gave favorable responses about the usefulness of student ratings for improving quality of teaching. Paradoxically, even though faculty members were positive about the student ratings, they did not generally use them to make changes in their teaching. The majority (87%) of administrators (n = 52) stated that they use the student ratings for various purposes including decisions about faculty merit and tenure. Students, faculty and administrators considered the overall course instruction to be the most useful type of information derived from the student ratings. The results of the present study indicate that while the utility of data from student ratings of instructors is quite variable, there is evidence of “consequential validity” particularly from administrators.  \n| 03 Beran 49-70 FINAL.indd 49 | | 11/9/2005 4:23:05 PM |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n\n50 T. Beran, C. Violato, D. Kline & J. Frideres  \nRÉSUMÉ  \nEtudiants, professeurs, et administrateurs d’une université canadienne furent interrogés pour enqueter sur l’utilité ou “consequential validity”des évaluations des professeurs par les étudiants. Sur les 1,229 étudiants, environ la moitié (52%) ont répondu qu’ils n’avaient jamais utilisé ces évaluations, mais pour ceux qui les ont utilisées, beaucoup (47%) ont rapporté les avoir utilisées plusieurs fois pour choisir cours et professeurs. La majorité des professeurs (n = 357) ont donné des réponses favorables sur l’utilité des évaluations faites par les étudiants pour ameliorer la qualité de l’enseignement. Aussi, la majorité des administrateurs (n = 52) ont répondu qu’ils utilisaient ces évaluations a des fins diverses, ycompris la qualité et la promotion des professeurs. Etudiants, professeurs, et administrateurs considèrent le jugement global sur le cours être le typed’information le plus utile derivé de ces évaluations d’étudiants. Les résultats démontrent l’existence de “consequential validity” en particulier des administrateurs.  \nStudent ratings of instruction are widely employed in colleges and universities across Canada and the United States (e.g., Greenwald, 2002) . Ali and Sell (1998) have noted that student ratings of instruction are oneof the most thoroughly studied forms of personnel evaluation, and some aspects of their validity have been studied. Nonetheless, the extent to which such rating information is useful for university students, faculty or administrators remains unclear.  \nMost previous research has focused on psychometric properties such as reliability and validity of the student ratings instrument as indicators ofthe quality of teaching and the overall effectiveness of instruction by individual instructors. Reliability is generally adequate but evidence regarding the validity of student ratings has varied (see Arreola, 1995; Kulik, 2001; e.g., Trinkhaus, 2002). While the continued study of the validity and reliability of student ratings of instruction as measures of teaching effectiveness is laudable, a major issue that remains is the utility of the results for students, faculty and administrators. To what extent do students use the results from  \nThe Canadian Journal of Higher Education Volume XXXV, No. ","cbCaie0h0PtfusLN","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaie0h0PtfusLN","pdf",120294,22,"English","# Abstract\n# Utility of Student Ratings\n# Validity as a Conceptual Framework","[{\"question\":\"What was the main purpose of the study?\",\"answer\":\"To examine how students, faculty, and administrators use the results of an institution-wide (“universal”) instrument measuring student ratings of instruction at a major Canadian university.\"},{\"question\":\"How did students use the ratings for course or instructor selection?\",\"answer\":\"About half (52%) said they had never used the ratings; among those who did use them, many (47%) reported using them several times to select courses and/or instructors.\"},{\"question\":\"How did faculty and administrators differ in using the ratings?\",\"answer\":\"Faculty were generally positive about the ratings’ usefulness (84%) but rarely used them to change teaching, whereas administrators reported using the ratings for purposes such as decisions about merit and tenure.\"}]","The Utility of Student Ratings of Instruction for Students, Faculty, and Administrators: A “Consequential Validity” Study | PDF",1792084686,55]