Cargando…

Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis

We examined the associations between the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning (SET/learning) correlations and presence of several conflicts of interest (COIs) including corporate, administrative, evaluation unit, SET author, and funder interests. Our meta-analyses of SET/learning corr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Uttl, Bob, Cnudde, Kelsey, White, Carmela A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611447/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31304067
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7225
_version_ 1783432700270477312
author Uttl, Bob
Cnudde, Kelsey
White, Carmela A.
author_facet Uttl, Bob
Cnudde, Kelsey
White, Carmela A.
author_sort Uttl, Bob
collection PubMed
description We examined the associations between the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning (SET/learning) correlations and presence of several conflicts of interest (COIs) including corporate, administrative, evaluation unit, SET author, and funder interests. Our meta-analyses of SET/learning correlations reported by multisection studies show that researchers with a vested interest in finding large positive SET/learning correlations found, on average, large positive SET/learning correlations. In contrast, researchers with no identifiable COIs found that SET/learning correlations were zero or nearly zero. The largest SET/learning correlations were reported by authors with ties to SET selling corporations. Smaller but still substantial SET/learning correlations were reported by researchers with administrative assignments and by researchers in evaluation units/departments responsible for the administration of SET. Moreover, authors with the most significant COIs were publishing their studies primarily prior to 1981 whereas authors with no or less significant COIs were publishing their studies in 1981 or afterwards. Studies published prior to 1981 reported small but significant (r = .31) SET/learning correlations whereas studies published in 1981 and after reported near zero, non-significant SET/learning correlations (r = .06). The presence of COIs was associated with earlier publication date but also with smaller samples. Finally, whereas corporate, administrative, and evaluation unit authors nearly ceased publishing multisection studies on SET/learning correlations, authors from business and economics departments are now responsible for the substantial portion of newer, larger, and higher quality studies published in 1981 and after.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6611447
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66114472019-07-14 Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis Uttl, Bob Cnudde, Kelsey White, Carmela A. PeerJ Psychiatry and Psychology We examined the associations between the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning (SET/learning) correlations and presence of several conflicts of interest (COIs) including corporate, administrative, evaluation unit, SET author, and funder interests. Our meta-analyses of SET/learning correlations reported by multisection studies show that researchers with a vested interest in finding large positive SET/learning correlations found, on average, large positive SET/learning correlations. In contrast, researchers with no identifiable COIs found that SET/learning correlations were zero or nearly zero. The largest SET/learning correlations were reported by authors with ties to SET selling corporations. Smaller but still substantial SET/learning correlations were reported by researchers with administrative assignments and by researchers in evaluation units/departments responsible for the administration of SET. Moreover, authors with the most significant COIs were publishing their studies primarily prior to 1981 whereas authors with no or less significant COIs were publishing their studies in 1981 or afterwards. Studies published prior to 1981 reported small but significant (r = .31) SET/learning correlations whereas studies published in 1981 and after reported near zero, non-significant SET/learning correlations (r = .06). The presence of COIs was associated with earlier publication date but also with smaller samples. Finally, whereas corporate, administrative, and evaluation unit authors nearly ceased publishing multisection studies on SET/learning correlations, authors from business and economics departments are now responsible for the substantial portion of newer, larger, and higher quality studies published in 1981 and after. PeerJ Inc. 2019-07-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6611447/ /pubmed/31304067 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7225 Text en ©2019 Uttl et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Psychiatry and Psychology
Uttl, Bob
Cnudde, Kelsey
White, Carmela A.
Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
title Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
title_full Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
title_short Conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
title_sort conflict of interest explains the size of student evaluation of teaching and learning correlations in multisection studies: a meta-analysis
topic Psychiatry and Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611447/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31304067
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7225
work_keys_str_mv AT uttlbob conflictofinterestexplainsthesizeofstudentevaluationofteachingandlearningcorrelationsinmultisectionstudiesametaanalysis
AT cnuddekelsey conflictofinterestexplainsthesizeofstudentevaluationofteachingandlearningcorrelationsinmultisectionstudiesametaanalysis
AT whitecarmelaa conflictofinterestexplainsthesizeofstudentevaluationofteachingandlearningcorrelationsinmultisectionstudiesametaanalysis