Abstract
The applicability paradigm developed by Marsh (1981) was used to investigate the validity of a U.S.-developed model of teaching effectiveness and two related questionnaires at campuses in six different countries representing very different cultural, economic, and philosophical traditions. The data supported the reliability, appropriateness, and to some extent the convergent and discriminant validity of the instruments. Similar patterns of item salience and differentiation between “good” and “poor” lecturers were also identified. Thus, the results generally supported the cross-cultural validity of these two instruments and their underlying model of teaching.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adesola, A. O. (1991). The Nigerian university system: Meeting the challenges of growth in a depressed economy.Higher Education 21: 121–133.
Altbach, P. G., and Selvaratnam, V. C. (1989).From Dependence to Autonomy: The Development of Asian Universities. London: Kluwer.
Association of Indian Universities (1990).Handbook of Indian Universities. New Delhi.
Basu, A. (1988). Indian higher education: Colonialism and beyond. In P. Altbach and V. Selvaratnam (eds.),From Dependence to Autonomy: The Development of Asian Universities. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer.
Berry, J. (1989). Imposed-etics, derived-emics: The operationalization of a compelling idea.International Journal of Psychology 24: 721–735.
Clarkson, P. C. (1984). Papua New Guinea students' perceptions of mathematics lecturers.Journal of Educational Psychology 76: 1386–1395.
Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (ed.),Educational Measurement Washington, DC: American Council of Education.
Enriquez, V. G. (1977). Filipino psychology in the third world.Philippine Journal of Psychology 10: 3–17.
Frey, P. W. (1973). A two-dimensional analysis of student ratings of instruction.Research in Higher Education 9: 69–91.
Frey, P. W., Leonard, D. W., and Beatty, W. W. (1975) Student ratings of instruction: Validation research.American Educational Research Journal 12: 327–336.
Gonzalez, A. (1989). The Western impact on Philippine higher education In P. G. Altbach and V. Selvaratnam (eds.),From Dependence to Autonomy: The Development of Asian Universities. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Hayton, G. E. (1983). An investigation of the applicability in technical and further education of a student evaluation of teaching instrument. Unpublished thesis, Faculty of Education, University of Sydney.
Hui, C. H., and Triandis, H. (1985). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: A review and comparison of strategies.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 16: 131–152.
Marsh, H. W. (1981). Students' evaluations of tertiary instruction: Testing the applicability of American surveys in an Australian setting.Australian Journal of Education 25: 177–192.
Marsh, H. W. (1986). Applicability paradigm: Students' evaluation of teaching effectiveness in different countries.Journal of Educational Psychology 78: 465–473.
Marsh, H. W. (1987). Students' evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues and directions for future research.International Journal of Educational Research 11: 253–388.
Marsh, H. W. (1991a). Multidimensional students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness: A test of alternative higher-order structures.Journal of Educational Psychology 83: 285–296.
Marsh, H. W. (1991b). A multidimensional perspective on students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness: Reply to Abrami and d'Apollonia (1991).Journal of Educational Psychology 83: 416–421.
Marsh, H. W., and Dunkin, M. J. (1992). Students' evaluations of university teaching: A multidimensional perspective. In J. Smart (ed.),Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, vol. 9. New York: Agathon.
Marsh, H. W., and Roche, L. A. (1991). The use of student evaluations of university teaching in different settings: The applicability paradigm. Unpublished paper, University of Western Sydney.
Marsh, H. W., Touron, J., and Wheeler, B. (1985). Students' evaluation of university instructors: The applicability of American instruments in a Spanish setting.Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies 1: 123–138.
Postiglione, G. (1992).Education and Society in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Pratap, R. (1985). Performance appraisal of university academic staff—An approach.Journal of Higher Education 10: 111–114.
Thomas, B. (1989). Performance appraisal of management teaching.Quarterly Journal of International Institute of Management Sciences 6: 9–13.
Triandis, H. C. (1972).The Analysis of Subjective Culture. New York: Wiley.
Watkins, D. (1992). Evaluating the effectiveness of tertiary teaching: A Hong Kong perspective.Education Research Journal 7: 60–67.
Watkins, D. and Akande, A. (1992). Student evaluations of teaching effectiveness: A Nigerian investigation.Higher Education 24: 453–463.
Watkins D., and Gerong, A. (1992). Evaluating tertiary teaching: A Filipino investigation.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52: 727–734.
Watkins, D., Marsh, H. W., and Young, D. (1987). Evaluating tertiary teaching: A New Zealand perspective.Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies 2: 41–53.
Watkins, D., and Regmi, M. (1992). Student evaluations of tertiary teaching: A Nepalese investigation.Educational Psychology 12: 131–142.
Watkins, D., and Thomas, B. (1991). Assessing teaching effectiveness: An Indian perspective.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 16: 185–198.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by funding from the Committee on Research and Conference Grants, University of Hong Kong.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Watkins, D. Student evaluations of university teaching: A cross-cultural perspective. Res High Educ 35, 251–266 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02496704
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02496704