Validation studies of the Course-Faculty Evaluation
Instrument (CFI) are described. Seven dimensions
were constructed which characterize each
class and predict student rating of the instructor,
course, and text. Different measurement scales and
methods were analyzed, using a
MTMM) strategy. The MTMM matrix for
the CFI and a similar MTMM matrix for the
Course-Evaluation Instrument (CEI) reported by
Schwab (1974) were analyzed and compared. The
same method of scaling was found to be superior in
both studies. Using an analysis of variance framework
to summarize MTMM matrices, the CFI
demonstrated greater discriminant validity using
more dimensions (traits) and had a lower error
component than the CEI. The benefits of comparing
instruments and implications for future course-faculty
evaluation research are discussed.
Freedman, Richard D & Stumpf, Stephen A. (1978). Student evaluations of courses and faculty based on a perceived learning criterion: Scale construction, validation, and comparison of results. Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 189-202. doi:10.1177/014662167800200203
Freedman, Richard D.; Stumpf, Stephen A..
Student evaluations of courses and faculty based on a perceived learning criterion: Scale construction, validation, and comparison of results.
Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy,
Content distributed via the University of Minnesota's Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor.