Showing posts with label anchors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anchors. Show all posts

Sunday, May 23, 2010

A BerksNotes® GUIDE TO INTERPRETING STUDENT RATING RESULTS: Item Level—Part 1

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

WHAT ARE ITEM SCORES?
The next level is the item, where a statistic such as a mean or median is reported. Since most anchor distributions are usually negatively skewed and answers are on a ranked, or ordinal, scale, the median is the most appropriate measure of central tendency. However, given the range of distributions that can occur, you may see both the mean and median on your report form.

“WAIT!! Back up. How did you get from responses of SD, D, etc. to means and medians?” Great question! Glad you’re on the ball. First, you have to convert the “verbal” anchors into “numbers.”

(MEASUREMENT ALERT: Keep in mind that we started with a “qualitative scale” of verbal expressions of how students feel about each behavior and now we’re converting the words into a “quantitative scale” for the convenience of performing analysis of those feelings. Actually, this conversion involves an arbitrary numerical coding scheme.)

CREATE A ZERO-BASED NUMERICAL SCORE SCALE: For simplicity and interpretability, a zero-based scale is recommended, so that the most negative anchor, such as SD, would be coded as “0.” Zero-based scoring was originally recommended by Likert (1932), who created this scaling method. Then the other anchors would be coded in 1-point increments above 0.

Higher values weight more desirable or positive ratings higher than negative ones. SA or Strongly Agreeing with a desirable teaching behavior or course characteristic is weighted with the highest value of 3. An example of this coding for a 4-point, agree–disagree scale is shown below:

SD    D    A    SA
 0     1    2     3

The score range for this single item is 0 to 3. (Note: These score points will vary with the number of anchors and the base number on different scales. Yours may be one of these. Sometimes the number 1 is used as the base instead of 0. Although the number scale may be different, the final interpretation will be the similar.)

COMPUTATION OF ITEM MEANS AND MEDIANS: If you hate stat, this section may make you hurl. Skip it. (SIDEBAR: Over 30 years of teaching stat, I had lots of student hurlers.) For you interested nonhurlers, here are the simple computational definitions:

MEAN = the sum of all students’ scores to each item, divided by the number of students or N. This is the average score for an item, within the range of 0–3 for this example.

MEDIAN = the middle score, after all students’ scores are ranked from high to low.

An example report, based on the anchor data shown in the previous blog, is shown below:

                      SD       D         A        SA       N    Mean   Median
Statement 1   1.0%   3.1%   37.5%   58.6%   96    2.52    3.00
Statement 2   1.0     3.1     24.0     71.9     96    2.65    3.00
Statement 3   1.1     1.1     28.9     68.9     90    2.57    3.00

The median score of 3 means the typical student in the middle of the distribution rated those behaviors as SA. The means were slightly lower with ratings between A and SA. Those are very respectable scores. Of course, they are consistent with the anchor percentage distribution, where the highest percentages are concentrated on the A and SA anchors.

So which index should you use? Mean? Median? Or both? Ah ha! The statistical plot thickens. Stay tuned…

COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

Thursday, May 20, 2010

A BerksNotes® GUIDE TO STUDENT RATING SCORE INTERPRETATION: Anchor Level—Part 2

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

How do you interpret the percentage distribution across the anchors? Is a skewed distribution a good or bad sign for teaching performance? How do any of these results relate to your teaching? Keep perusing, dear colleague.

SKEWED DISTRIBUTION: The overall response pattern shown in the previous blog indicates a negatively skewed distribution of responses, which is the most common outcome and typically a desirable one as well. It occurs when the majority of the responses are A and SA, but there is also a sprinkling of a few Ds and SDs. The extreme SD responses, or outliers, create the skew. Realistically, a few students might mark SD to every statement to express their desire to see you whacked, while the majority of satisfied customers will choose the two “Agree” anchors. These distributions occur in more than 90% of the courses I’ve reviewed at different institutions. It’s rare to receive ratings without any Ds or SDs. Other anchors may yield a different pattern of responses.

DIAGNOSTIC PROFILE: This anchor distribution information provides you with the most detailed profile of responses to a single item. The percentages reveal the degrees of agreement and disagreement with each statement. It is diagnostic of how the class felt about each behavior or characteristic. Examine each distribution carefully to pinpoint your strength behaviors (high percentage of SAs and As) and your weakness behaviors (relatively high percentages of SDs and Ds). You can then consider specific changes in your teaching, evaluation, or course behaviors to shift the distribution farther to the right, in the A–SA zone, the next time the class is taught.

The next blog will examine responses at the item level. Is that info of any value after reviewing the anchor distributions? I will solve that mystery!

COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

Monday, May 17, 2010

A BerksNotes® GUIDE TO STUDENT RATING SCORE INTERPRETATION: Overview

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

APPLICATION TO DIFFERENT FORMS
Although each of you is using a different rating form with different numbers of items and scores, those differences do not matter in score interpretation. Whether you’re using a commercial package, such as IDEA, SIR II, PICES, or CIEQ DU SOLEIL, or a “homegrown scale,” there are only so many score reporting possibilities for any form in Likert-type format. So my suggestions are generic and should be applicable to your form. I encourage you to consult the guidelines or manual for your reporting system for more specific information.

FIVE BASIC CATEGORIES OF RESULTS
There are 5 possible categories of results reported for most student rating forms:

1. anchor distribution of percentages
2. item statistics (mean and/or median)
3. subscale statistics (mean and/or median)
4. total scale statistics (mean and/or median)
5. summary of comments to open-ended questions

Your report form may not provide all of the above, but it should certainly give you at least 2 and 4.

WHAT DO FACULTY NEED?
That's a lot of information. You could use all of those results, however, 1 and 2, in particular, provide the most valuable diagnostic info to revise teaching or course materials that will benefit your next course-load of students. These are called formative decisions about teaching. Category 5 can explain the reasons for the ratings to 1 and 2.

WHAT DO ADMINISTRATORS NEED?
Summative decisions about annual contract renewal, merit pay, or promotion and tenure review by department chairs, associate deans, etc. can be based on 3 and 4 and possibly the global item scores.

This blog series will focus primarily on the faculty needs. My next blog will examine the 1st level of interpretation: ANCHOR-WORLD!

COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

Sunday, May 16, 2010

A BerksNotes® GUIDE TO STUDENT RATING SCORE INTERPRETATION: Anchor Level—Part 1

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

RESPONSE RATE WARNING: As you begin to analyze the results from your class evaluations, please consider the response rate in your interpretations:

1. For class sizes of 30 to Super Bowl attendance, it is desirable to have at least 70% response, preferably 80 or 90%, to assure reasonably representative ratings. Anything less may be biased (aka "evil") in some unknown direction. Since all responses are anonymous, there is no way to assess the degree and direction of response bias. Just be cautious in your inferences about your teaching behaviors.
2. For classes less than 30, especially seminars of 5 to 10 students, be particularly careful in your interpretations based on both a less than desirable response rate and inadequate number of responses.

BOTTOM LINE: When your results are used to guide teaching improvement, view your ratings as suggestive of possible areas for change rather than as conclusive.

WHAT’S THE 1ST LEVEL OF INTERPRETATION?

IT’S ANCHOR-WORLD! The first level of score reporting is anchor results for each item. The anchors are the response options on the scale, such as STRONGLY DISAGREE or DISAGREE. Usually the percentage of students picking each anchor is reported, item by item. An example is shown below for student rating scale items with agree–disagree anchors:

                     SD       D         A          SA        N
Statement 1  1.0%   3.1%   37.5%    58.6%    96
Statement 2  1.0     3.1     24.0       71.9      96
Statement 3  1.1     1.1     28.9       68.9      90

ANCHOR SCALE: These results can be reported for any word, phrase, or statement stimuli and any response anchors. The anchor abbreviations for "Strongly Disagree" (SD), "Disagree" (D), "Agree" (A), and "Strongly Agree" (SA) are listed horizontally, left to right, from unfavorable to favorable ratings. This is the same order as the original scale. These anchors measure the degree or intensity of your feeling toward each statement. The N is the number of students that responded to the statement.

Other anchors may ask you evaluate the quality of a behavior, how frequently a behavior occurs, the quantity or the extent to which a behavior occurs, or how a behavior in one course compares to a behavior in another course. There are a variety of possible anchors and number of anchors on the scales now in use.

PERCENTAGE RESPONSES: The percentages for the four anchors indicate the percentage distribution based on the actual N. When the statements are positive teaching behaviors or course characteristics, you would expect low percentages for the first two “Disagree” anchors and high percentages for the second two “Agree” anchors, with the highest for SA. The percentages taper off drastically from right to left, with tiny percentages for D and SD for all three items. (NOTE: The percentages are slightly different for statement 3 compared to statements 1 and 2, particularly the 1.1% to SD and D. This was due, in part, to the six fewer students who responded to that item [N = 90].)

The next blog will examine the meaning of these distributions in terms of a diagnostic profile of your teaching strengths and weaknesses. Stay on board.

COPYRIGHT © 2010 Ronald A. Berk, LLC