College Students’ Views of Teaching Practices for Early Morning and Evening Classes: An Analysis of Ratemyprofessors.com
Keywords:
college, teaching, ratemyprofessorsAbstract
This study explored the ratemyprofessors.com (RMP) site for student comments about what is valued and not valued about teaching practices unique to early morning and evening classes. A total of 412 student comments regarding 153 instructors from a variety of academic disciplines were systematically retrieved from RMP and analyzed using thematic analysis. Five positive themes emerged from the data: (1) Interesting, (2) Humorous, (3) Easygoing, (4) Enthusiastic, and (5) Interactive. There were also two negative themes: (1) Boring, and (2) Attendance-oriented. The findings reflect previous studies and have several practical implications for instructors who teach classes early in the morning and in the evening.
Downloads
References
Addison, W. E., Stowell, J. R., & Reab, M. D. (2015). Attributes of introductory psychology and statistics teachers: Findings from comments on RateMyProfessors.com. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(3), 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000034
American College Health Association. (2024). American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment III: Reference Group Executive Summary Fall 2023. Silver Spring, MD: American College Health Association.
Arthur, L. (2009). From performativity to professionalism: Lecturers' responses to student feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(4), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510903050228
Arthurs, L. A., & Kreager, B. Z. (2017). An integrative review of in-class activities that enable active learning in college science classroom settings. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), 2073-2091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1363925
Banas, J. A., Dunbar, N., Rodriguez, D., & Liu, S. J. (2011). A review of humor in educational settings: Four decades of research. Communication Education, 60(1), 115-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2010.496867
Beran, T., Violato, C., Kline, D., & Frideres, J. (2005). The utility of student ratings of
instruction for students, faculty, and administrators: A “consequential validity” study. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 35(2), 49–70.
Beran, T. N., & Rokosh, J. L. (2009). Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction. Instructional Science, 37, 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-007-9045-2
Bleske-Rechek, A., & Michels, K. (2010). RateMyProfessors.com: Testing assumptions about student use and misuse. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 15, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.7275/ax6d-qa78
Borkan, J. (1999). Immersion/Crystallization. In B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Doing Qualitative Research (2nd Edition) (pp. 179-194). Sage Publications.
Boswell, S. S. (2016). Ratemyprofessors is hogwash (but I care): Effects of Ratemyprofessors and university-administered teaching evaluations on professors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 155-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.045
Boswell, S. S. (2020). Effects of Ratemyprofessors.com and university student evaluations of teaching on students’ course decision-making and self-efficacy. Higher Learning Research Communications, 10(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v10i2.1194
Brown, M. J., Baillie, M., & Fraser, S. (2009). Rating Ratemyprofessors.com: A comparison of online and official student evaluations of teaching. College Teaching, 57(2), 89-92. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.57.2.89-92
Burrus, R., Graham, J. E., Moffett, C. M., & Robinson, S. (2010). The finance professor teaching an early morning class. Journal of Instructional Techniques in Finance, 2(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.54155/jitf.v2i1.37
Chou, S. Y., Luo, J., & Ramser, C. (2021). High-quality vs low-quality teaching: A text-mining study to understand student sentiments in public online teaching reviews. Journal of International Education in Business, 14(1), 93-108.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JIEB-01-2020-0007
Coladarci, T., & Kornfield, I. (2007). Ratemyprofessors.com versus formal in-class student evaluations of teaching. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 12, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.7275/26ke-yz55
Cordis, A. S., & Pierce, B. G. (2017). The impact of class scheduling on academic performance in quantitative and qualitative business disciplines. Global Perspectives on Accounting Education, 14, 44-66.
Crumbley, L., Henry, B. K., & Kratchman, S. H. (2001). Students’ perceptions of the evaluation of college teaching. Quality Assurance in Education, 9(4), 197–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006158
Dahal, K., & Rafiq, R. I. (2023, May 10). What makes a good course and professor: Through the lens of ratemyprofessor website [Conference session]. 7th International Conference on Information System and Data Mining, Atlanta, GA.
Davison, E., & Price, J. (2009). How do we rate? An evaluation of online student evaluations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 51-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930801895695
Diaz, N. P., Walker, J. P., Rocconi, L. M., Morrow, J. A., Skolits, G. J., Osborne, J. D., &
Parlier, T. R. (2022). Faculty use of end-of-course evaluations. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 33(3), 285-297.
Dills, A., & Hernandez-Julian, R. (2008). Course scheduling and academic performance. Economics of Education Review, 27(6), 646–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2007.08.001
DuBrowa, M. (2013). Extroverts and introverts and 8am... Oh my! Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 30(1), 60-62. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42802421
Evans, M. D. R., Kelley, P., & Kelley, J. (2017). Identifying the best times for cognitive functioning using new methods: matching university times to undergraduate chronotypes. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 239492. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00188
Felton, J., Koper, P. T., Mitchell, J., & Stinson, M. (2008). Attractiveness, easiness and other issues: Student evaluations of professors on Ratemyprofessors.com. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930601122803
Finck, J. E. (2012). Be the first to arrive and the last to leave your class. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 9(1), 27-32.
Fischer, A. E. (2020). Engaging students daily in general chemistry. In A. F. Johnson & O. O. Odeleye (Eds.) Chemistry Student Success: A Field-Tested, Evidence-Based Guide (pp. 3-17). American Chemical Society Publications.
https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2020-1343.ch001
Golding, C., & Adam, L. (2016). Evaluate to improve: Useful approaches to student evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.976810
Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1992). Students' perceptions of teacher behaviors as motivating and demotivating factors in college classes. Communication Quarterly, 40(3), 239-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379209369839
Hartman, K. B., & Hunt, J. B. (2013). What Ratemyprofessors.com reveals about how and why students evaluate their professors: A glimpse into the student mind-set. Marketing Education Review, 23(2), 151-162. https://doi.org/10.2753/MER1052-8008230204
Hayes, M. W., & Prus, J. (2014). Student use of quantitative and qualitative information on Ratemyprofessors.com for course selection. College Student Journal, 48(4), 675-688.
Hershner, S. D., & Chervin, R. D. (2014). Causes and consequences of sleepiness among college students. Nature and Science of Sleep, 6, 73-84. https://doi.org/10.2147/NSS.S62907
Hinkin, T. R. (1991). The effects of time of day on student teaching evaluations: Perception versus reality. Journal of Management Education, 15(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256299101500104
Hurdle, Z. B., Akbuga, E., & Schrader, P. (2022). Exploring calculus I students’ performance between varying course times among other predictive variables. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(4), em0700. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12234
Jalbert, T. (2020). Evidence on relationships between teaching evaluations and Ratemyprofessors teaching tags. Research in Higher Education Journal, 38, 1-17.
Johnson, J., Hoover, D., Beck, J., & Toma, M. (2014). I feel like shooting myself in the face after taking this God-forsaken class: The effects of RateMyProfessors.com on university course registration. Advances in Management and Applied Economics, 4(4), 31-42.
Karm, M., Sarv, A., & Groccia, J. (2022). The relationship between students’ evaluations of teaching and academics professional development. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(8), 1161–1174. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2022.2057214
Kearney, P., Plax, T. G., Hays, E. R., & Ivey, M. J. (1991). College teacher misbehaviors: What students don’t like about what teachers say and do. Communication Quarterly, 39(4), 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379109369808
Keller, M. M., Hoy, A. W., Goetz, T., & Frenzel, A. C. (2016). Teacher enthusiasm: Reviewing and redefining a complex construct. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 743-769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9354-y
Kindred, J., & Mohammed, S. N. (2005). “He will crush you like an academic ninja!”: Exploring teacher ratings on Ratemyprofessors.com. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), JCMC10314.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00257.x
Lang, J. M. (Nov. 15, 2015). Small changes in teaching: The minutes before class. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Small-Changes-in-Teaching-The/234178.
Lumpkin, A., Achen, R. M., & Dodd, R. K. (2015). Student perceptions of active learning. College Student Journal, 49(1), 121-133.
MacQueen, K. M., McLellan, E., Kay, K., & Milstein, B. (1998). Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. CAM Journal, 10(2), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X980100020301
Malikow, M. (2007). Professors' irritating behavior study. College Student Journal, 41(1), 25-34.
McClelland, L. E., & Case, K. F. (2023). Is class worth their time? College student perspectives on class structure and attendance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 78, 101281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2023.101281
Miley, W. M., & Gonsalves, S. (2003). What you don't know can hurt you: Students' perceptions of professors' annoying teaching habits. College Student Journal, 37(3), 447-456.
Murray, H. G. (1997). Does evaluation of teaching lead to improvement of teaching?
International Journal for Academic Development, 2(1), 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144970020102
Murray, D., Boothby, C., Zhao, H., Minik, V., Bérubé, N., Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C. R.
(2020). Exploring the personal and professional factors associated with student evaluations of tenure-track faculty. PLoS One, 15(6), e0233515. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233515
Nasser, F., & Fresko, B. (2002). Faculty views of student evaluation of college teaching. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(2), 187–198. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/02602930220128751
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Witcher, A. E., Collins, K. M., Filer, J. D., Wiedmaier, C. D., & Moore, C. W. (2007). Students’ perceptions of characteristics of effective college teachers: A validity study of a teaching evaluation form using a mixed-methods analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 113-160. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831206298169
Otto, J., Sanford, D., & Wagner, W. (2005). Analysis of online student ratings of university faculty. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 2(6), 25-30. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v2i6.1833
Otto, J., Sanford, D. A., & Ross, D. N. (2008). Does ratemyprofessor.com really rate my
professor? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(4), 355-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701293405
Patton, C. M. (2015). Employing active learning strategies to become the facilitator, not the authoritarian: A literature review. Journal of Instructional Research, 4, 134-141.
Perlman, B., & McCann, L. I. (1998). Students' pet peeves about teaching. Teaching of
Psychology, 25, 201-202. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2503_9
Reid, L. D. (2010). The role of perceived race and gender in the evaluation of college teaching on RateMyProfessors.com. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 3(3), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019865
Sanders, S., Walia, B., Potter, J., & Linna, K. W. (2011). Do more online instructional ratings lead to better prediction of instructor quality? Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 16(2), 1-6. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/pare/vol16/iss1/2
Sheehan, D. S. (1999). Student evaluation of university teaching. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26, 188–193.
Silva, K. M., Silva, F. J., Quinn, M. A., Draper, J. N., Cover, K. R., & Munoff, A. A. (2008).
Rate my professor: Online evaluations of psychology instructors. Teaching of Psychology, 35(2), 71-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986280801978434
Slate, J. R., LaPrairie, K., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A mixed analysis of college students' best and poorest college professors. Issues in Educational Research, 19(1).
Smith, S. W., Medendorp, C. L., Ranck, S., Morrison, K., & Kopfman J. (1994). The
prototypical features of the ideal professor from the female and male undergraduate perspective: The role of verbal and nonverbal communication. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 5, 5-22.
Sonntag, M. E., Bassett, J. F., & Snyder, T. (2009). An empirical test of the validity of student evaluations of teaching made on RateMyProfessors.com. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(5), 499-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802079463
Stein, S. J., Spiller, D., Terry, S., Harris, T., Deaker, L., & Kennedy, J. (2013). Tertiary teachers and student evaluations: Never the twain shall meet? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(7), 892–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.767876
Stone, B. B. (2012, August 8-10). Flip your classroom to increase active learning and student engagement [Paper presentation]. The 28th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, Madison, WI.
Stonebraker, R. J., & Stone, G. S. (2015). Too old to teach? The effect of age on college and university professors. Research in Higher Education, 56(8), 793–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-0159374-y
Stork, E., & Hartley, N. T. (2009). Classroom incivilities: Students perceptions about professors behaviors. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 2(4), 13-24. https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v2i4.1066
Su, F., & Wood, M. (2012), What makes a good university lecturer? Students’ perceptions of teaching excellence. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 4(2), 142-155. https://doi.org/10.1108/17581181211273110
Subtirelu, N. C. (2015). “She does have an accent but…”: Race and language ideology in students’ evaluations of mathematics instructors on RateMyProfessors.com. Language in Society, 44(1), 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404514000736
Symbaluk, D. G., & Howell, A. J. (2018). Character strengths of teaching and research award-winning professors. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 29(1), 5-26.
Torok, S. E., McMorris, R. F., & Lin, W. C. (2004). Is humor an appreciated teaching tool? Perceptions of professors' teaching styles and use of humor. College Teaching, 52(1), 14-20. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.52.1.14-20
Waller, A. (2020). Ghost peppers: Using ensemble models to detect professor attractiveness commentary on ratemyprofessors.com [Master’s thesis, City University of New York]. CUNY Academic Works. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3642
Wenze, S. J., & Charles, T. K. (2022). Earlier start time for an undergraduate introductory psychology course is associated with worse academic and sleep-related outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 0(0), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283221103473
Williams, K. M., & Shapiro, T. M. (2018). Academic achievement across the day: Evidence from randomized class schedules. Economics of Education Review, 67, 158-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.10.007
Wolfson, A. R., & Carskadon, M. A. (2003). Understanding adolescents' sleep patterns and school performance: A critical appraisal. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 7(6), 491–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1087-0792(03)90003-7
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
Data available on request from the authors
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Access Agreement Journal on Excellence in College Teaching
Before proceeding you must agree to the terms and conditions of usage as outlined below by clicking on the Accept button and/or by both parties’ signatures below. You will have to do this only once. After agreement, you will be redirected back to the main Journal page. A pdf copy of the terms is available for download.
This Access Agreement (the "Agreement") is effective upon processing of payment ("Effective Date") and is entered into by and between the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching (“JECT”) and the Customer (“Customer").
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes and voids all prior communications, understandings, and agreements relating to the Product(s), including any terms of use displayed to Authorized Users via the online site of the Product(s). Alterations to the Agreement and to any Addendum to the Agreement are only valid and binding if they are recorded in writing and signed by both parties
. I. Definitions
"Authorized Users" shall mean individuals who are authorized by the Customer (which shall include those individuals authorized by the Institutions hereunder) to access the Customer's information services whether on-site or off-site via secure authentication and who are affiliated with the Customer as a student (undergraduates and postgraduates), employee (whether on a permanent or temporary basis), or a contractor of the Customer. Individuals who are not a current student, employee, or a contractor of the Customer, but who are permitted to access the Customer's information services from computer terminals within the physical premises of the Customer ("Walk-In Users"), are also deemed to be Authorized Users, but only for the time they are within the physical premises of the Customer. Walk-In Users may not be given means to access the Product(s) when they are not within the physical premises of the Customer.
"Commercial Use" shall mean use for the purpose of monetary reward (whether by or for the Customer or an Authorized User) by means of the sale, resale, loan, transfer, hire, or other form of exploitation of the Product(s). For the avoidance of doubt, neither recovery of direct cost by the Customer from Authorized Users, nor use by the Customer or Authorized Users of the Product(s) in the course of research funded by a commercial organization, shall be deemed to constitute Commercial Use.
"Educational Purposes" shall mean for the purpose of education, teaching, distance learning, private study and/or research as described in Section II below.
"Institutions" shall mean the Customer's participating institutions, if applicable.
"License" shall mean the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and use the Product(s) pursuant to the specific terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
"Product(s)" shall mean the products, materials and/or information contained therein that are subject to this Agreement. Product(s) include the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching and the archive of the Learning Communities Journal.
"Reasonable Amount" shall be determined based on guidelines set forth by 17 U.S. Code § 107 (Limitations on exclusive rights, Fair use).
"Secure Authentication" shall mean access to the Product(s) by Internet Protocol ("IP") ranges or by another means of authentication agreed between the Publisher and Customer or Institutions (if applicable) from time to time.
II. Authorized Use of Product(s)
Customer, the Institutions (if applicable), and Authorized Users may use the Product(s) for Educational Purposes as follows:
Analysis. Authorized Users shall be permitted to extract or use information contained in the Product(s) for Educational Purposes, including, but not limited to, text and data mining, extraction and manipulation of information for the purposes of illustration, explanation, example, comment, criticism, teaching, research, or analysis.
Course Packs. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s) in the preparation of course packs or other educational materials.
Digital Copy. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may download and digitally copy a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).
Display. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users shall have the right to electronically display the Product(s) to the extent necessary to further the intent and purpose of this Agreement.
Electronic Reserve. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of each of the Product(s) in connection with specific courses of instruction offered by Customer.
Interlibrary Loan. The Customer and the Institutions shall be permitted to use Reasonable Amounts of the Content to fulfill occasional requests from other, non-participating institutions, a practice commonly called Interlibrary Loan ("ILL"). Customer and the Institutions shall fulfill such requests in compliance with Section 108 of the United States Copyright Law (17 USC S108, "Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives") and the Guidelines for the Proviso of Subsection 108(2g)(2) prepared by the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU).
The electronic form of the Product(s) may be used as a source for ILL. Customer and the Institutions shall include copyright notices on all ILL transmissions. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in no event shall any non-secure electronic transmission of files be permitted.
Print Copy. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may print a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).
Recover Copying Costs. Customer and the Institutions may charge a reasonable fee to cover costs of copying or printing portions of Product(s) for Authorized Users.
Scholarly Sharing. Authorized Users may transmit to a third party colleague in hard copy or electronically, Reasonable Amounts of the Product(s) for personal use, professional use, or Educational Purposes but in no event for Commercial Use. In addition, Authorized Users have the right to use, with appropriate credit, figures, tables, and brief excerpts from the Product(s) in the Authorized User's own scientific, scholarly, and educational works.
Text Mining. Authorized Users may use the licensed material to perform and engage in text mining/data mining activities for legitimate academic research and other Educational Purposes. Those uses beyond educational use shall require permission from the Publisher.
III. Restrictions
Except as provided herein, the institution shall make reasonable efforts to inform its authorized users not to use, alter, decompile, modify, display, or distribute the Product(s) as follows:
Alter Identification. Remove, obscure, or modify copyright notices, text acknowledging, attributions, or other means of identification or disclaimers as they appear. Alter Product(s).
Alter, decompile, adapt, or modify the Product(s), except to the extent necessary to make it perceptible on a computer screen, or as otherwise permitted in this Agreement. Alteration of words or their order is strictly prohibited.
Commercial Use. No Commercial Use of the Product(s) shall be permitted unless the Customer or an Authorized User has been granted prior written consent by an authorized representative of the Product(s). Use of all or any part of the Product(s) for any Commercial Use or for any purpose other than Educational Purposes.
Distribution. Display or distribute any part of the Product(s) on any electronic network, including without limitation, the Internet, and any other distribution medium now in existence or hereinafter created, other than by a Secure Authentication; print and distribute any portion(s) of the Product(s)s to persons or entities other than the Customer or Authorized Users, except as provided in Section II.
JECT acknowledges that the Customer cannot police or control the actions of its students, faculty, and other Authorized Users with respect to their use of the Product(s). In the event of abuse, the institution shall make prompt and reasonable efforts to heal the breach and notify the publisher.
IV. Term and Termination
This agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall remain in effect unless and until terminated as permitted herein (the "Term"). There is no perpetual electronic access to content made available during the term of the agreement.
JECT may terminate this Agreement if Customer violates any of the terms and conditions set forth herein. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer of the basis for termination.
The Customer may terminate this Agreement if sufficient funds are not provided or allotted in future government-approved budgets of the Customer (or reasonably available or expected to become available from other sources at the time the Customer’s payment obligation attaches) to permit the Subscriber, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue this Agreement.
In the event of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) by an Authorized User, Customer shall cooperate with JECT in the investigation of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) of which it is made aware and shall use reasonable efforts to remedy such unauthorized use and prevent its recurrence. JECT may terminate such Authorized User's access to the Product(s) after first providing reasonable notice to the Customer (in no event less than two (2) weeks) and cooperating with the Customer to avoid recurrence of any unauthorized use. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer
. V. Refunds
In the event that a subscription is canceled by the Customer prior to the subscription end date, the following will be used as guidelines for refunds.
Electronic subscriptions. The Customer shall be entitled to a full refund within 14 days of the start of the most recent subscription term. Refunds requested after 14 days but no later than 60 days from the start of the most recent subscription term will be allowed, minus a 30% processing fee. Refunds will not be granted if requested more than 60 days after the start of the most recent subscription term.
