Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Educational Research Journal
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marsh, H. W
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Section on Teaching, Learning, and Human Development

Distinguishing Between Good (Useful) and Bad Workloads on Students’ Evaluations of Teaching

Herbert W Marsh

University of Western Sydney, Macarthur

Multidimensional students’ evaluations of teaching (SETs), Workload, Grades, Perceived Learning, and background variables were evaluated with confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) of previously published data (Greenwald, A. G., & Gillmore, G. M., Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 743751, 1997b). Competing CFA models demonstrated multiple SET dimensions like those identified in previous research (Marsh, H. W., International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 253 (3), 1987) and two nearly uncorrelated Workload factors: Good Workload (valuable in advancing education) had substantial positive effects on SETs and Perceived Learning, whereas the effects of Bad Workload were negative. SETs had nonlinear relations with Good Workload (the positive Good Workload-SET correlation became smaller for higher Workloads) and Grades (the positive grade-SET correlation became smaller for higher grades). The positive grade-SET correlation was completely eliminated by controlling for Good and Bad Workloads and other background variables. In contrast to misguided suggestions that teachers can improve SETs by decreasing Workload (at the likely expense of effective teaching), these results show that SETs and teaching effectiveness can both be improved by increasing Good Workload and decreasing Bad Workload.

American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, 183-212 (2001)
DOI: 10.3102/00028312038001183


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
International Journal of Comparative SociologyHome page
M. Darmody, E. Smyth, and M. Unger
Field of Study and Students' Workload in Higher Education: Ireland and Austria in Comparative Perspective
International Journal of Comparative Sociology, August 1, 2008; 49(4-5): 329 - 346.
[Abstract] [PDF]



AER home page RER home page EPA home page JEB home page RRE home page