Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design, Implementation and Validation of a Questionnaire for University Teaching Evaluation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Statistical Methods and Applications from a Historical Perspective

Part of the book series: Studies in Theoretical and Applied Statistics ((STASSPSS))

Abstract

This paper summarizes the results of a research project supported by CNVSU in 2010. The aim of the project was, firstly, to review the questionnaire used in Italy for university teaching evaluation and, secondly, to propose a guideline for implementing this survey on the web.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Research Group of the CNVSU Project was coordinated by Luigi D’Ambra and composed by Maurizio Carpita and Eugenio Brentari (University of Brescia), Sergio Scippacercola (University of Naples—Federico II), Pietro Amenta and Biagio Simonetti (University of Sannio), Rosaria Lombardo and Antonello D’Ambra (University of Naples II), Pasquale Sarnacchiaro (University Telma Sapienza). The final report of the Project in downloadable from the CNVSU web site:www.cnvsu.it/_library/downloadfile.asp?id=11775.

  2. 2.

    At UniBS, data were collected for all the 4 questionnaires with paper and pencil; students have answered to the questions of the standard questionnaire using both the 4- and 10-point scales. At UniSN, data were collected with a web survey for two versions of the questionnaires (standard version A with 4-point scale, experimental with 10-point scale) (for non-attending students too).

  3. 3.

    In order to facilitate reading, Table 1 reports correlations multiplied by 100. In addition, we considered the structure of the items, by means of the polychoric correlation indices (not reported here), obtaining similar results.

  4. 4.

    Some different results were obtained for UniSN and the 4-point scale (CNVSU 2010).

  5. 5.

    Results of the bootstrap factor analysis are available on request to the authors.

  6. 6.

    For a sake of brevity, in this section only UniBS data analysis is presented, but with UniSN data we obtained roughly the same results (CNVSU 2010, Sect. 1.4).

  7. 7.

    These percentage distributions for the standard questionnaire are roughly the same as the experimental questionnaire version B (CNVSU 2010, Sect. 1.3.4).

  8. 8.

    We have reasonably assumed that students perceive the items of the questionnaire to share the same rating (4 or 10 points) scale: in this case the Rating Scale Model is strongly to prefer with respect to others (for example the Partial Credit Model), as it is more parsimonious in the number of parameters, has higher estimate stability, and the communication of results is more easy (Linacre 2000).

  9. 9.

    We assumed that this “principal dimension” is defined by the sub-dimensions identified with the factor analysis in the previous paragraph.

  10. 10.

    We have used the correlation ratio for the 4-point scale and the linear correlation coefficient for the 10-point scale.

  11. 11.

    As we used the parsimonious Rating scale model, the category probability curve is unique for all items of the same questionnaire.

  12. 12.

    Note that the 4- and 6-category scales use symmetric merging of the 10 votes with respect to negative (less than 5) and positive (more than 5) evaluations.

    Furthermore, with these three new scales we could use the following

    4-point scale: 1.5, 4, 7, 9.5

    6-point scale: 1, 2.5, 4.5, 6.5, 8.5, 10

    7-point scale: 1, 2.5, 4.5, 6.5, 8, 9, 10.

References

  • Bond, T.G., Fox, C.M.: Applying the Rasch Model, 2nd edn. LEA, London (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • CNVSU: Questionario di base da utilizzare per l'attuazione di un programma per la valutazione della didattica da parte degli studenti, Rapporto di Ricerca, RdR 1/00 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • CNVSU: Progettazione, implementazione e validazione di un questionario per la valutazione della didattica erogata a studenti universitari. Rapporto di Ricerca, RdR 2/10. www.cnvsu.it/_library/downloadfile.asp?id=11775 (2010)

  • Bacci, S.: I modelli di Rasch nella valutazione della didattica universitaria. Statistica Applicata 18(1), 5–49 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • De Battisti, F., Nicolini, G., Salini, S.: The Rasch model to measure the service quality. ICFAI J. Serv. Mark. III(3), 58–80 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, H.H.: Modern Factor Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1960)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, J.L.: A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 30, 179–185 (1965)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K.G.: Factor Analysis by Minres. Scientific Software, Chicago (2003). www.ssicentral.com/lisrel/techdocs/minres.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H.F.: The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20, 141–151 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, J.A., Bond, T.G.: Measuring client satisfaction with public education I: meeting competing demands in establishing state-wide benchmarks. J. Appl. Meas. 4(2), 111–123 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Linacre, J.M.: Comparing “partial credit” and “rating scale” models. Rasch Meas. Trans. 14(3), 768 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H.: Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagani, L., Zanarotti, C.: Some uses of Rasch models parameters in customer satisfaction data analysis. Qual. Technol. Quant. Manag. 7(1), 83–95 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S.: Using Multivariate Statistics, 4th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, B.: Program FACSTRAP A program that computes bootstrap estimates of factor structure. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 61, 681–686 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velicer, W.F.: Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika 41, 321–327 (1976)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, B.D., Masters, G.N.: Rating Scale Analysis. MESA, Chicago (1982)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

    Luigi D’Ambra

  2. University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy

    Maurizio Carpita

Authors
  1. Luigi D’Ambra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maurizio Carpita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maurizio Carpita .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Statistics, Istat Head of Office for Census Methods, Rome, Italy

    Fabio Crescenzi

  2. University of Bologna Department of Statistical Sciences, Bologna, Italy

    Stefania Mignani

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

D’Ambra, L., Carpita, M. (2014). Design, Implementation and Validation of a Questionnaire for University Teaching Evaluation. In: Crescenzi, F., Mignani, S. (eds) Statistical Methods and Applications from a Historical Perspective. Studies in Theoretical and Applied Statistics(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05552-7_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation