中国大学学生评教系统的稳定性和相关性分析  

The Stability and Correlativity of Student Evaluations of Teaching in Universities

作　　者：陈国海[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东外语外贸大学,广州510420

出　　处：《广东外语外贸大学学报》2009年第5期100-104,共5页Journal of Guangdong University of Foreign Studies

基　　金：广东省教育科研"十五"规划第三批研究项目(编号:05TGJZ002);广东外语外贸大学人力资源管理教学团队项目

摘　　要：本文探讨了中国大学管理部门采用的学生评教系统之稳定性和有效性。作者收集了广东外语外贸大学435名教师连续两个学期中的学生评教得分。其中的388名教师(男170名,女218名)还填写了60题的大五人格特质量表和人口统计信息问卷。结果表明,学生评教系统的内部一致性系数较高,同时验证性因子分析支持单因子的结论。234名教师在第二学期执教相同课程,与201名教师教授不同课程,两个学期的学生评教得分的相关系数均为0.62。语言学科教师的学生评教得分比社会科学学科、人文学科和科学技术学科教师的学生评教得分普遍要高。而学生评教得分与教师的情绪稳定性和外向性显著相关。回归分析结果表明,大五人格特征只能解释2.6%的学生评教得分差异,而学科则能解释12.7%的学生评教得分差异。总的来说,结果支持学生评教系统的稳定性和有效性,本文最后讨论了学生评教结果在中国大学的应用问题。This paper examines the stability and validity of student evaluation of teaching （SET） instrument used by the higher education administration in China. The SET scores were collected for two semesters of courses delivered by 435 teachers. 388 of them （170 males and 218 females） were also invited to fill out a questionnaire. It is found that the SET responses had very high internal consistency and that the confirmatory factor analysis supported a one-factor solution. The SET re-test correlations were 0.62 for both the teachers who taught the same course and those who delivered different courses. There were no significant differences in SET scores according to the gender, age, academic degree, and rank. However, language teachers received higher SET scores than teachers of social science, humanities and natural science and technology. The student ratings were significantly related to Neuroticism and Extraversion. Overall it is suggested that the SET tends to be stable and valid. Also, the paper discusses the issue of how to put these SET scores into further application.

关 键 词：学生评教 教学效应 稳定性 

分 类 号：G451.1[文化科学—教育学]