How does using technology affect student attitudes about teachers?

Computers in the Schools

Volumn 13, Issue 1-2, 1997, Pages 53-60

  Forman, David W ^a  

^a GEORGETOWN COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85010613702     PISSN: 07380569     EISSN: 15287033     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J025v13n01_06     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Archer, A. C., 1994. The measurement of charismatic teaching in the college, New Orleans, LA:American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374 758)
2. Cochran, T. R., and Gravely, A., Measurement issues in student evaluations of instruction and their impact on decision making. Annual Conference of the Southern Association for Institutional Research (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 290 395). New Orleans, LA
3. Marsh, H. W., and Roche, L., 1993. The use of students' evaluations and an individually structured intervention to enhance university teaching cffcclive-ness. American Educational Research Journal, 30(1):217–251.
4. Ogden, Darlene H., Characteristics of good/effective teachers:Gender differences in student descriptors. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. November1994. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 383 657)
5. Ornstein, Allan C., 1995. The new paradigm in research on teaching. The Educational Forum, 59:124–129.
6. Sax, G., 1974. Principles of educational measurement and evaluation, Belmont, CA:Wadsworth Publishing.
7. Sherman, B. R., and Blackburn, R. T., 1975. Personal characteristics and teaching effectiveness of college faculty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67:124–131.
8. Shrock, S. A., 1981. Instructional evaluation techniques:Ends dictate the means. Annual Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. 1981, Philadelphia, PA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 207 596)
9. Snider, J. G., and Osgood, C. E., eds. 1969. Semantic differential technique:A sourcebook, Chicago, IL:Aldine Publishing.
10. Tagomori, H. T., and Bishop, L. A., 1995. Student evaluation of teaching:Flaws in the instruments. Thought and Action, II:63–78.
11. Tuckman, B. W., 1976a. The Tuckman Teacher Feedback Form (TTFF). Journal of Educational Measurement, 13:233–37.
12. Tuckman, B. W., 1976b. Feedback and the change process. Phi Delta Kappan, 57:341–344.
13. Tuckman, B. W., 1977. Teacher behavior is in the eye of the beholder:The perceptions of principals, New York:American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 137 928)
14. Tuckman, B. W., 1995. Assessing effective teaching. Peabodv Journal of Education, 70(2):127–138.
15. Turley, Steve. 1994. “The way teachers teach is, like, totally whacked.”:The student voice on classroom practice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. 1994. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 376 164)
16. Wilson, R. C., and Gaff, J. G., 1975. College professors and their impact on students, New York:Wiley & Sons.