ArticleThe British journal of educational psychology2025
The situatedness of instructional quality-How situated are college students' ratings?
Article in The British journal of educational psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reliability of Difference Scores Obtained From Nested Data Within a Multivariate Generalizability Theory Framework.Educational and psychological measurement · 2026Article
- The situatedness of instructional quality-How situated are college students' ratings?The British journal of educational psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudent ratings are commonly used to evaluate classroom processes. Research suggests that these ratings are not solely based on objective situational characteristics but also reflect rater characteristics. Although research has been conducted in K-12 settings, little is known about how person-specific and situation-specific factors affect student ratings in higher education.
aimsThis study investigates to what extent students' ratings on instructional quality (INQ) vary in response to various data collection across teaching situations. In this way, we also investigate the role of motivational beliefs in these ratings. SAMPLE: The study uses data from 1,745 undergraduates (26.5% self-identified as male students) from a university in California, U.S.A.
methodsWe employed single trait-multistate models (STMS) to decompose INQ variance (classroom management, student support, cognitive activation). We estimate the consistency and situation specificity of ratings across courses, time, and course type. Also, we estimated correlations between motivational beliefs and the consistent component across ratings, i.e., the person effect.
resultsHigh consistency in student ratings of INQ was found within the same course over time. This consistency was lower when INQ was rated across different courses. The consistency was higher in courses that students perceived as difficult than to courses that were perceived as important. Students who reported higher expectancies for success and interest value in these courses also rated INQ more positive across teaching situations.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that student ratings of INQ are situated and shaped by course characteristics but also rater characteristics. Motivational beliefs contribute uniquely to students' INQ ratings beyond situational characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.