Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PERSONALITY ON THEIR
PERCEPTION ABOUT THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF TEACHER
EVALUATION PROCESS
Junaid Hameed
Fall, 2013
Introduction
Course
Evaluation
Justification
Types
Big
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Emotional Stability
Intellect
Literature Review
Course
Evaluation
(Brennan 2004).
Qualitative tools difficult to analyze (Abrami, 2001).
Student
Perception
Literature Review
Student
Personality
Problem Statement
Indifferent
Inflated
Bias
Grading
Rapid
is Pakistani students
perception about the efficiency of
Teacher evaluation/course feedback
process?
Is
Research Framework
Impact
Beliefs
and
Perceptio
n
Personalit
y
Research Framework
Impact
Beliefs and
Perception
Actions taken
Research Framework
Factors
attributing to student
responses during a course
evaluation process.
Experien
ce
during a
course
Perceptions
and Beliefs
Other
situation
al
Factors
Student
Responses
Research Framework
Dependent
Variable:
Evaluation Process.
Independent
variable:
Student Personality
Hypothesis
H 1:
Methodology
Research
Design
respect to:
Teaching and teacher personality (Arif et
al, 2012)
Academic dishonesty and student
personality (Aslam and Nazir, 2011).
Methodology
Dimensions
Higher End
Emotional
Stability
Openness to
Experience
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Consciousness
Methodology
Variables
Methodology
Sample
Selection
carried out.
252 respondents out of 400 (62%
response rate) .
Public sectors not included due to
irregularity in process.
N of Items
24
Cases
Valid
N
252
%
100.0
Excluded a
.0
Total
252
100.0
Female
Statistics
Gender
Overall perception
about CEP.
Efficiency
perception of CEP.
CEP ability to
improve
Overall perception
about CEP.
Efficiency
perception of CEP.
CEP ability to
improve
Minimu Maximu
Std.
m
m
Mean Deviation
1.65
4.68
3.073
.51873
6
1.20
4.60
3.093
.54094
0
1.00
4.75
3.048
.72396
6
1.58
4.10
2.937
.55003
6
1.40
4.20
3.009
.57885
0
1.25
4.25
2.861
.74147
9
Statistics
Minimu Maximu
Std.
Mean
m
m
Deviation
1.33
5.00 3.1728
.67008
1.33
5.00 3.3711
.70463
1.00
5.00 3.0429
.72255
1.00
1.67
1.00
2.00
5.00
5.00
4.67
4.67
2.7710
3.3027
3.1842
3.4227
.75743
.62809
.85317
.67576
1.67
5.00 3.2185
.71853
1.33
4.67 2.5076
.71660
Analysis
Squar
e
.012
.012
.000
.009
Agreeableness
.111a
Consciousness
.111a
Emotional Stability .009a
Extraversion
.094a
Openness
to
.074a .005
Experience
Adjusted
R Square
Std.
Error Significa
of
the nce
.008
.008
-.004
.005
Estimate
.54903
.54905
.55243
.55003
Value
.078
.079
.882
.138
.001
.55095
.243
Analysis
R
.016a
.017a
.083a
.177a
Adjusted
of the
nce
-.004
-.004
.003
.027
Estimate
.73322
.73321
.73079
.72174
Value
.796
.786
.190
.005
.005
.72999
.132
Square R Square
.000
.000
.007
.031
.095a .009
Analysis
R
.047a
.046a
.063a
.171a
.104a
Adjusted
Square R Square
.002
.002
.004
.029
.011
-.002
-.002
.000
.025
.007
Std.
of
Error Significa
the nce
Estimate
.53003
.53005
.52956
.52277
.52772
Value
.46
.469
.321
.006
.099
perception
about CEP.
Extraversion
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
Extravers
ion
-.171**
.006
-.171**
.006
Conclusion
Male
Rejecte
d
Accepte
d
Accepte
d.
References
Alkahtani, A. H., Jarad, I. A., Suleman, M., & Nikbin, D. (2011). THE
IMPACT OF PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIP STYLES ON LEADING
CHANGE CAPABILITY OF MALAYSIAN MANAGERS. Australian
Journal of Business and Management Research , 70-99.
Arif, I.M., Rashid, A., Tahira, S.S., & Akhter, M. (2012). Personality
and Teaching: An Investigation into Prospective Teachers
Personality.
International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science, 2( 17),161-171.
References
Brennan. J., & Williams. R. (2004). Collecting and using student feedback, Learning
and Teaching Support Network, York Science Park, York.
Felder, R.M., Felder, G.M., & Dietz, E.J. (2002). The Effects of Personality Type on
Engineering Student Performance and Attitudes. Journal of Engineering Education,
91(1), 1-30.
Ferguson, M.J., & Bargh, J.A. (2004). How social perception can automatically
influence behavior. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1),33-39.
Ferguson, M.J., & Bargh, J.A. (2004). How social perception can automatically
influence behavior. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1),33-39.
References
Gerber, A.S., Huber, G.A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., & Ha, S. E. (2010). Personality
and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts.
American Political Science Review, (104)1, 111-112.
Maier, C., Laumer, S., Ekchardt, A., & Wietzel, T.(2012). Using user Personality to
explain the Intention-Behaviour Gap and changes in Beliefs, A longitudinal analysis.
Paper presented at Thirty Third International Conference on Information Systems,
Orlando 2012.
Onoyase, D., & Onoyase, A.(2009) The Relationship between Personality Types and
Career Choice of Secondary School Students in Federal GovernmentColleges in
Nigeria. The Anthropologist,11(2),109-115.
Saad, R.G., Kira, D., & Nebebe, N.(2012).Understanding the Role of Personality Traits
on Beliefs in Online Learning. Paper presented at Proceedings of Informing Science &
IT Education Conference (InSITE) 2012.