Educational, academic, and institutional implications of the unbalanced interpretation of student evaluation results for faculty members in some Arab universities
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
This analytical-critical study examines student evaluation of teaching (SET) systems in selected Arab universities, focusing on the consequences of unbalanced interpretations of SET results by some direct supervisors (e.g., department chairs and program directors). Based on a selective systematic review of international and Arab research, the study synthesizes evidence on validity limits and contextual biases affecting SET (e.g., grade expectations, course difficulty, and gender/cultural effects) and links them to recurring classroom practices. The study argues that the most damaging risk is not only bias in student responses, but the administrative use of SET as a sole or near-sole high-stakes indicator. It then outlines key educational and institutional implications, and calls for a balanced, multi-source evaluation framework and clearer policies to prevent misuse of evaluation and complaint mechanisms
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
SET; faculty performance; institutional justice; academic integrity; Arab universities. Century Gothic
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
AJQAHE publishes Open Access articles under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. If author (s) submit their article for consideration by AJQAHE, they agree to have the CC BY license applied to their work, which means that it may be reused in any form provided that the author (s) and the journal are properly cited. Under this license, author(s) also preserve the right of reusing the content of their article provided that they cite the AJQAHE.
