Related Literature Evaluation System

Only available on StudyMode
  • Topic: Response rate, Course evaluation, Jason Alexander
  • Pages : 1 (569 words )
  • Download(s) : 1489
  • Published : January 9, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
Related Literature
The
paper
presents
a
short
literature
review
comparing
online
evaluations
with
paper.
The
Eco nomics
department
at
University
of
Belgrade,
Serbia
conducted
a
small
pilot
in
a
course
of
800students
in
May
of
2006.
Half
the
students
received
paper
evaluations
in
class
and
half
were
directed
to
complete
an
identical
online
evaluation.
The
paper
evaluation
received
a
92.5%
response
rate
and
the
online
received
a
52%
response
rate
after
an
incentive
was
introduced.
They
found
thatnearly
twice
as
many
students
filled
out
the
open‐ended
question
online
when
compared
to
the
paper
group.
On
the
instructor‐related
questions
they
found
a
variation
of
0.09
to0.22
on
a
10‐point
scale.
No
statistical
analysis
was
done
for
significance. Lovric,
M.
(2006).
Traditional
and
web‐based
course
evaluations‐comparison
of
their
response
 rates
and
efficiency.
Paper
presented
at
1st
Balkan
Summer
School
on
Survey
Methodology. Site viewed December 2012.

http://www.balkanprojectoffice.scb.se/Paper%20Miodrag%20Lovrich_University%20of%20Belg rade.pdf

Georgia
State
University
College
of
Business
ran
a
voluntary
pilot
from
2002
to
2003
using
an identical
online
version
of
their
paper
course
evaluation
form
in
the
Department
of
Computer information
Systems.
Faculty
feared
an
online
form
would
yield
lower
scores
and
lower
response rates.
In
particular, the
fear
was
that
few
students
would
submit
online
evaluations,
poor
students
would
“take
revenge”
on
the
faculty
and
good
students
wouldn’t
bother.
The
paper
form
had
a
67%
response rate
and
the
online
form
had
an
82%
response
rate.
This
likely
due
to
the
fact
that
the
CIS
department
had
easy
access
to
computer
labs
for
students
to
take
the
evaluations
online.
Using
a
question
on
teacher
effectiveness,
the
study
found
no
significant
difference
between
the
methods.
Good
students
participated
in
the
same
numbers
and
weaker
students
did
fewer
online
evaluations.

Liegle,
J
O
and
D
S
McDonald....
tracking img