Copy igh © 2025 Zanjan Uni e si y o Medical Sciences. Published by Zanjan Uni e si y o Medical Sciences.
This wo k is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A ibu ion-NonComme cial 4.0 In e na ional license (h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/). Noncomme cial uses o he wo k a e pe mi ed, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness
e alua ions: A c oss-sec ional desc ip i e s udy
Maliheh Poo kiani 1 , Nasse Al Salmi 1 , Aisha Alshde a 2 Zah a Sheikhalipou 3*
1Depa men o Adul Heal h and C i ical Ca e, College o Nu sing, Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y. Musca , Oman
2Depa men o Ma e nal and Child Heal h, College o Nu sing, Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y. Musca , Oman
3Depa men o Medical and Su gical Nu sing, Nu sing and Midwi e y School, Tab iz Uni e si y o Medical Sciences, Tab iz, I an
A icle in o Abs ac
In oduc ion
A common app oach o ensu e s uden success and
sa is ac ion wi h hei educa ion is o allow hem o sha e
hei pe spec i es on hei lea ning expe iences [1]. The
p ima y goal o s uden a ings is o imp o e he cou se
expe ience o s uden s and expand he quali y o
eaching [2].
The S uden E alua ion o Teaching E ec i eness
(SETE) is an ins umen used o measu e s uden s'
pe spec i es when e alua ing eaching ou comes. Fo
se e al easons, p oponen s o SETE hink ha s uden
e alua ion o ins uc ion is c ucial. These assessmen s
gua an ee he calibe o ins uc ion a uni e si ies, o e
a sepa a e way o measu e he e icacy o ins uc o s,
di ec choices abou signi ican cu iculum
modi ica ions, suppo acul y p o essional
de elopmen , and aid in c ea ing a amewo k o measu e
and incen i ize success ul eaching ou comes [3] mo e
accu a ely.
As a esul , in many uni e si ies, hese e alua ions a e
he mos impo an and, in many cases, he only measu e
o quali y assu ance, e alua ing acul y pe o mance,
and judging me i pay, enu e, and p omo ion [1, 4].
A icle his o y:
Recei ed 24 Jul. 2024
Accep ed 5 Feb. 2025
Published 14 Ap . 2025
Poo kiani e al. J Med Edu De . 2025; 18(1): 115-122 Jou nal o Medical Educa ion
De elopmen
Backg ound & Objec i e: While s uden s' pe cep ions a e a ely discussed in s udies on
s uden e alua ions o eaching e ec i eness, he majo i y concen a e on he ea u es, alidi y,
and eliabili y o he ques ionnai e used, he a iables a ec ing s uden s' a ings, and he p ope
assessmen o eaching quali y. The e o e, his s udy aims o look in o how s uden s a Sul an
Qaboos Uni e si y's College o Nu sing pe cei e and beha e when e alua ing he acul y.
Ma e ials & Me hods: This c oss-sec ional desc ip i e s udy was ca ied ou in he academic
yea 2023–2024 du ing he summe and all semes e s. Two hund ed hi y unde g adua e
s uden s om Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y's College o Nu sing pa icipa ed in he s udy.
Con enience sampling was employed o ga he da a. A sel -adminis e ed ques ionnai e was
used o lea n mo e abou he s uden s' opinions o Teaching E ec i eness (SETE). SPSS e sion
29 was used o analyze he da a. The sample's demog aphics and he i ems abou eaching
e ec i eness we e desc ibed using equency analysis. Fu he mo e, a co ela ional es was
used o ind ela ionships be ween SETE le els and demog aphic cha ac e is ics.
Resul s: Acco ding o he s udy, he es ima ed p esence o alse in o ma ion was 47.24%, and
he mean pe cei ed accu acy o e alua ions was 50.78. A sizable pe cen age acknowledged
p o iding o being awa e o assessmen s ha we e ei he highe o lowe han app op ia e. The e
we e di e en opinions abou he e alua ion p ocess; 84.6% o esponden s suppo ed s uden
e alua ions, while 55.1% hough eache s ead commen s. Wi h 76.1% o esponden s
conside ing alse in o ma ion o be chea ing, e hical issues we e aised. S a is ical analyses
e ealed no signi ican ela ionships be ween sex and ques ionnai e esponses, no be ween
e alua ion pe cep ions, demog aphic cha ac e is ics, and G ade Poin A e age (GPA).
Conclusion: The esul s show how complica ed s uden opinions a e ega ding eache
assessmen s, pa icula ly when i comes o u h and mo ali y. The s udy calls o imp o emen s
in SETE p ocesses o p omo e mo e eliable and easonable e alua ions.
Keywo ds: eaching e alua ion, s uden e alua ion o eaching e ec i eness, nu sing s uden s
*Co esponding au ho :
Zah a Sheikhalipou , Depa men o
Medical and Su gical Nu sing,
Nu sing and Midwi e y School,
Tab iz Uni e si y o Medical
Sciences, Tab iz, I an
Email: sheikhalipou [email protected]
O iginal A icle
How o ci e his a icle:
Poo kiani M, Al Salmi N, Alshde a
A, Sheikhalipou Z. Nu sing
s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching
e ec i eness e alua ions: A c oss-
sec ional desc ip i e s udy. J Med
Edu De . 2025; 18(1): 115-122.
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
1 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
116 Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ 2025
Howe e , a li e a u e e iew has shown ha SETEs may
need o be mo e balanced and ully e lec i e o eaching
e ec i eness. Biases ha may a ec how s uden s assess
ins uc ion ha e been ound in empi ical esea ch, which
could p oduce un eliable indings [5]. As a esul , SETEs
un he isk o measu ing hings o he han how well
s uden s lea n. Fu he mo e, some esea ch indica es ha
many eache s belie e ha a numbe o uncon ollable
elemen s, like he cou se's s uc u e and sec ion size, may
impac how well hey each, which may a ec s uden
assessmen s [6]. The e o e, he e alua ions comple ed by
s uden s add ess only a ew aspec s o he cou se and
eaching quali y [7]. Acco ding o a limi ed numbe o
s udies ha ha e su eyed s uden s, he li e a u e
suppo s he signi icance o p o esso e alua ions. I
indica es ha s uden s a e capable o assessing hei
p o esso s. Howe e , hese s udies also demons a e ha
s uden s a e no o e ly hope ul abou he o e all
impo ance ha acul y and adminis a o s place on
s uden opinions [8]. Wi hou se ious wo ies abou
possible epe cussions, s uden s a e gene ally willing o
pa icipa e in assessmen s and p o ide eedback [9].
This pa adox demons a es ha while s uden s egula ly
engage wi h hei ins uc o s, making hei opinions and
e alua ions signi ican and applicable [8], i s uden s a e
unawa e o he impo ance o hei assessmen and ill
ou he o ms ca elessly and wi hou conside a ion, his
may a ec he alidi y o he SETE [9]. The e o e, i 's
c i ical o comp ehend how s uden s iew he assessmen
o ins uc ional e ec i eness.
SETE s udies a ely discuss s uden s' pe cep ions, which
ypically concen a e on he ea u es, alidi y, and
eliabili y o he ques ionnai e used, ac o s in luencing
s uden a ings, and app op ia e assessmen o eaching
quali y. Thus, his s udy in es iga es how Sul an Qaboos
Uni e si y's College o Nu sing s uden s iew eache
e alua ions.
Ma e ials & Me hods
Design and se ing(s)
This c oss-sec ional desc ip i e s udy was conduc ed
du ing he summe and all semes e s o he 2023-2024
academic yea . Unde g adua e s uden s om Sul an
Qaboos Uni e si y's College o Nu sing pa icipa ed in
he s udy. To mee he inclusion equi emen s,
pa icipan s had o be cu en ly en olled unde g adua e
s uden s who had inished a leas one semes e o
nu sing school a Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y. The s udy
did no include o icially pos poned o en olled s uden s
in he ounda ion p og am.
Pa icipan s and sampling
The sample included cu en unde g adua e nu sing
s uden s a Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y's College o
Nu sing in Oman. The s uden s we e chosen using
con enience sampling echniques. Slo in's o mula (n =
N / (1 + Ne2)), whe e (N) is he popula ion size and (e) is
he ma gin o e o , was used o de e mine he sample
size.
Based on he college's annual ac i e s uden eco ds, he
popula ion was es ima ed a 450 s uden s. Using a 5%
ma gin o e o and a 95% con idence le el, he equi ed
sample size was de e mined o be 208 s uden s. To
accoun o po en ial a i ion (es ima ed a 10%), he
adjus ed a ge sample size was inc eased o 230
pa icipan s. Gi en an an icipa ed esponse a e o 50%,
all eligible s uden s we e in i ed o pa icipa e in he
s udy by comple ing he ques ionnai e.
Tools/Ins umen s
Pa 1. Demog aphic da a: Demog aphic da a collec ed
included age, gende , yea o s udy, G ade Poin A e age
(GPA) ange, s udy p og am, and pa icipa ion in
ex acu icula ac i i ies.
Pa 2. E alua ion o eaching e ec i eness: The p ima y
ool was in ended o cap u e s uden s' opinions o S uden
E alua ion o Teaching E ec i eness. The ques ionnai e
had wen y i ems, including hi een Yes/No ques ions,
wo i ems wi h a linea scale om 10% o 100%, and i e
mul iple-choice ques ions.
Al hough sel - epo ques ionnai es a e s anda d ools o
da a collec ion, hey a e subjec o esponse bias. To
mi iga e his, esponses we e anonymized, and
pa icipan s we e assu ed ha hei e alua ions would
no a ec hei academic s anding o g ades.
The alidi y and eliabili y o he ques ionnai e we e
ho oughly e alua ed. Ten knowledgeable acul y
membe s wi h expe ise in educa ional esea ch we e
asked o hei opinions o assess he alidi y o he
quali a i e con en . The expe s' le el o ag eemen was
measu ed using he Con en Validi y Index (CVI). Since
he Kude -Richa dson-20 (KR-20) o mula is sui able
o ins umen s wi h dicho omous i ems, i was used o
eliabili y assessmen . Reliabili y was es ed wi h a
sample o 30 pa icipan s. The CVI and KR-20 eliabili y
esul s a e as ollows:
Impo ance
The CVI alues o indi idual i em impo ance mee he
accep able c i e ion o 0.80, indica ing ha he expe s
conside each i em necessa y.
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
2 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1¦ 2025 117
Cla i y
E e y i em's CVI alue o cla i y likewise sa is ies he
accep able s anda d o 0.80, indica ing ha he i ems a e
in elligible and clea .
Sui abili y
Simila ly, e e y i em's sui abili y CVI alue alls wi hin
he accep able ange o 0.80, sugges ing ha he i ems
a e app op ia e o hei in ended use.
The Kude -Richa dson-20 (KR-20) o mula assesses he
in e nal consis ency eliabili y o scales wi h
dicho omous i ems. Ou scale's KR-20 coe icien alue
is 0.99.
Da a collec ion me hods
The ques ionnai e was dis ibu ed online. Cou se
coo dina o s o he co e cou ses we e con ac ed o
ob ain a lis o egis e ed s uden s' email add esses. The
ques ionnai e and an in o med consen o m we e sen o
he s uden 's emails. The P incipal In es iga o (PI) also
eminded s uden s o comple e he su ey du ing class.
Da a analysis
Da a we e analyzed using SPSS/ 29 so wa e (SPSS
Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The demog aphic ea u es o
he sample and he i ems abou eaching e ec i eness
we e desc ibed using equency analysis (means,
median, pe cen iles, and s anda d de ia ions).
Co ela ional analysis was pe o med o ind co ela ions
be ween demog aphic cha ac e is ics and SETE le els.
Resul s
The s udy disclosed key indings ega ding pa icipan s'
demog aphics and hei opinions ega ding eache
e alua ions. The a e age age o pa icipan s was 21.58
yea s (SD = 2.82), and hei GPA was 3.03 (SD = 0.42).
Mos pa icipan s (72.3%) we e emale, and 80.2% had
o dina y academic s anding. Addi ionally, 17.5% o
pa icipan s we e in hei se en h semes e (Table 1).
Table 1. Sociodemog aphic cha ac e is ics o he pa icipan s (n = 234).
Va iable
Ca ego ies
Mean ± SD
Age (yea )
21.58 ± 2.82
Academic GPA (ou o 4 poin s)
3.03 ± 0.42
Gende
%
n
Male
27.7
64
Female
72.3
167
Academic s a us
On p oba ion
1.4
3
No mal
80.2
170
Ex ended
18.4
39
Academic semes e
Semes e 2
11.6
27
Semes e 3
11.6
27
Semes e 4
12.8
30
Semes e 5
12.4
29
Semes e 6
11.5
27
Semes e 7
10.7
25
Semes e 8
11.5
27
Semes e 9
17.5
41
Abb e ia ions: n, numbe o pa icipan s; SD, s anda d de ia ion; GPA, g ade poin a e age; %, pe cen age.
The su ey esponses shed ligh on easons o w i ing
un ue commen s in e alua ions (Table 2). A small
pe cen age o esponden s (0.4% and 0.9%) epo ed
knowing someone who w o e alse commen s o ha m o
because hey disliked a eache . In con as , 22.7% and
20.5% indica ed knowing someone who w o e alse
commen s o p o ec a eache o because o pe sonal
liking. Rega ding he equency o eache e alua ions,
17.5% o esponden s p e e ed e alua ions o e e y
class each semes e , whe eas 67.9% p e e ed
e alua ions once pe semes e . Jus 9.0% o esponden s
suppo ed less equen e alua ions, like annual ones. In
compa ison, smalle pe cen ages sugges ed e alua ions
only when issues a ise (3.4%) o ne e (2.1%). No ably,
none o he pa icipan s a o ed h ee-yea e alua ions.
Addi ionally, pa icipan s alked abou hei pe sonal
expe iences o pos ing alse commen s (Table 2). A
sizable po ion acknowledged ha hey had made alse
ema ks because hey liked he eache (50.9%) o o
de end he eache (42.3%). Fewe esponden s belie ed
hey had w i en de oga o y commen s abou a eache
because hey didn' like hem (50.9%) o o hu he
eache (9.8%).
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
3 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
118 Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ 2025
Table 2. S uden s' pe spec i es and beha io s ela ed o w i ing un ue commen s in e alua ions and hei opinions on eache
e alua ion equency
I ems
Choices
%
n
1
Do you pe sonally know o a s uden who w o e some hing
un ue in he w i en commen s because:
They wan ed o hu a eache
0.4
1
They disliked a eache
7.7
18
Bo h
66.2
155
No
25.2
59
2
Do you pe sonally know o a s uden who w o e some hing
un ue in he w i en commen s because:
They wan ed o p o ec a
eache
0.9
2
They liked a eache
22.7
53
Bo h
48.5
113
No
27.5
64
3
How o en do you hink ha eache s should be e alua ed?
E e y class, e e y semes e
17.5
41
In one class e e y semes e
67.9
159
Once a yea
9.0
21
Once e e y h ee yea s
0
0
Only i he e is a p oblem
3.4
8
Ne e
2.1
5
4
Ha e you w i en some hing un ue in he w i en commen s
because:
You wan ed o p o ec a
eache
20.5
48
You liked a eache
42.3
99
Bo h
0
0
No
37.2
87
5
Ha e you w i en some hing un ue in he w i en commen s
because:
You wan ed o hu a eache
9.8
23
You disliked a eache
50.9
119
Bo h
0
0
No
38.9
91
Abb e ia ions: n, numbe o pa icipan s; SD, s anda d de ia ion; GPA, g ade poin a e age; %, pe cen age.
Table 3 summa izes opinions ega ding he in eg i y and
co ec ness o assessmen s. On a scale o 0 o 100,
esponden s ga e assessmen s an a e age pe cei ed
accu acy o 50.78 (SD = 27.33), indica ing a mode a e
con idence le el in hei dependabili y.
They es ima ed ha , on a e age, 47.24% o e alua ions
con ained alse in o ma ion (SD = 23.05). A no able
p opo ion o pa icipan s epo ed knowing s uden s
who ga e e alua ions highe han dese ed (37.2%) o
lowe han dese ed (35.6%). Addi ionally, 21.8%
admi ed o in la ing e alua ion sco es, while 19.2%
admi ed o gi ing undese edly low sco es.
The assessmen p ocedu e i sel unco e ed con lic ing
opinions. While 48.3% o esponden s hough
adminis a o s e iewed e alua ion commen s, he
majo i y (55.1%) hough eache s ead hem. Mos
esponden s (84.6%) a o ed s uden assessmen s o
eache s, and 69.8% belie ed hese assessmen s could
aid in eache s' de elopmen . The e appea s o be a gap
be ween he adminis a i e use o e alua ions and hei
pe cei ed alue, as only 39.7% o esponden s a o ed
using hem o decide on eaching assignmen s. The
esul s show he po en ial o su ey design imp o emen
o be e cap u e s uden eedback, e en hough 52.6% o
esponden s el he e alua ion ques ions allowed hem
o exp ess hei genuine opinions.
The e we e also appa en e hical issues. Jus 13.7% o
esponden s said hey knew o a eache who was i ed
o ecei ing subpa e iews. Meanwhile, 76.1% o
esponden s hough i was chea ing o w i e alse
in o ma ion in e alua ions, and 69.7% hough i was
chea ing o gi e unjus ly high o low sco es. These
indings highligh he e hical implica ions o inaccu a e
eedback and i s po en ial consequences o eache s.
S a is ical analyses (Table 3) showed no signi ican
co ela ions be ween demog aphic ac o s—such as
GPA, academic s a us, and class s anding—and
pe cep ions o e alua ion accu acy o alse in o ma ion.
Fo ins ance, GPA had a weak nega i e co ela ion wi h
e alua ion accu acy ( = - 0.031, p = 0.749) and a weak
posi i e co ela ion wi h alse in o ma ion ( = 0.013, p
= 0.891). Simila ly, chi-squa e es s ound no signi ican
associa ion be ween sex and esponses o ques ionnai e
i ems (p > 0.05).
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
4 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1¦ 2025 119
Table 3: The s uden s’ insigh s in o he pe cei ed accu acy o e alua ions in assessing ins uc o eaching pe o mance
I ems
Minimum
Maximum
Mean (SD)
6
I you had o gi e a sco e om 0 o 100 exp essing how accu a e hese
e alua ions a e in exp essing how well an ins uc o eaches, wha sco e would
you gi e?
0.00
100.00
50.78 (27.33)
7
I you had o guess wha pe cen o all e alua ions submi ed by s uden s
con ained sco es o in o ma ion ha he s uden knew was un ue, wha pe cen
o all e alua ions do you belie e ha would be?
0.00
100.00
47.24 (23.05)
I ems
%
n
8
Do you pe sonally know a s uden who has gi en a eache a highe - han-
dese ed e alua ion o any eason?
No
62.8
147
Yes
37.2
87
9
Do you pe sonally know a s uden who has gi en a eache a lowe - han-
dese ed e alua ion o any eason?
No
64.4
150
Yes
35.6
83
10
Ha e you gi en a eache a highe - han-dese ed e alua ion o any eason?
No
78.2
183
Yes
21.8
51
11
Ha e you gi en a eache a lowe - han-dese ed e alua ion o any eason?
No
80.8
189
Yes
19.2
45
12
Do you hink ha he commen s w i en on he e alua ions a e ead by he
eache ?
No
44.9
105
Yes
55.1
129
13
Do you hink ha he commen s w i en on he e alua ions a e ead by
adminis a o s?
No
51.7
121
Yes
48.3
113
14
Do you hink ha s uden s should e alua e hei eache s?
No
15.4
36
Yes
84.6
198
15
Do you hink ha eache s who a e e alua ed become be e eache s?
No
30.2
70
Yes
69.8
162
16
Do you hink ha adminis a o s use e alua ions when making eaching
assignmen s?
No
60.3
141
Yes
39.7
93
17
Do you hink ha he ques ions on he e alua ion allow you o exp ess wha you
wan o say on he e alua ions?
No
52.6
123
Yes
47.4
111
18
Do you pe sonally know o a eache who was le go because o bad e alua ions?
No
86.3
202
Yes
13.7
32
19
Do you hink ha gi ing an e alua ion highe o lowe han wha a eache
dese es is a o m o chea ing?
No
30.3
71
Yes
69.7
163
20
Do you hink ha w i ing some hing un ue on an e alua ion abou a eache is
a o m o chea ing?
No
23.9
56
Yes
76.1
178
Abb e ia ions: n, numbe o pa icipan s; SD, s anda d de ia ion; GPA, g ade poin a e age; %, pe cen age.
Discussion
This s udy examines a ious aspec s o s uden
e alua ions o ins uc o s, ocusing on pa icipan s'
pe cep ions, beha io s, and p e e ences. The GPA o he
s uden s in ol ed sheds ligh on hei academic
pe o mance. Addi ionally, wi h an a e age age o 21.58
yea s, a p edominance o emale s uden s, and a
signi ican ep esen a ion o s uden s om Semes e 7,
he pa icipan p o ile e lec s di e se academic
backg ounds.
The su ey indings e eal di e ing mo i a ions behind
submi ing inaccu a e commen s in e alua ions. While a
small numbe o esponden s epo ed malicious in en , a
la ge g oup indica ed hei main mo i a ions we e o
p o ec o show app ecia ion o hei ins uc o s. These
esul s highligh he complexi y o s uden pe cep ions
and demons a e how pe sonal biases and ela ionships
can impac e alua ion eedback. Acco ding o a s udy by
Ca less and Wins one, s uden s may gi e mo e a o able
eedback because hey wan o p o ec hei ins uc o s o
exp ess hei g a i ude a he han p o ide accu a e
assessmen s [10]. Fu he mo e, he s udy o Esa ey and
Valdes showed ha hese biases can lead o bo h o e ly
op imis ic and pessimis ic eedback, ul ima ely a ec ing
he o e all alidi y o e alua ions [11].
Mos esponden s p e e ed e alua ions o ake place
once pe semes e , indica ing a desi e o mo e consis en
eedback mechanisms. This inclina ion implies ha mo e
equen assessmen s suppo ongoing enhancemen s o
he calibe o s uden ins uc ion and lea ning ou comes.
None heless, a mino i y o pa icipan s ad oca ed o less
equen assessmen s, indica ing he ange o iewpoin s
on his ma e . E hical ques ions conce ning he in eg i y
and au hen ici y o e alua ion eedback a e aised by he
admission o making alse commen s, especially o
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
5 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
120 Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ 2025
de end o suppo p e e ed ins uc o s. The equency o
his beha io emphasizes he necessi y o obus
e alua ion p ocedu es ha minimize biases and con lic s
o in e es while p omo ing since e eedback.
Quinn [12] examined he impac o a ing biases, such as
pe sonal ela ionships and a o i ism, on he accu acy o
ins uc o e alua ions. The esea che s emphasized he
need o mechanisms o add ess hese biases.
Fu he mo e, K ei ze and Swee -Cushman's esea ch
om 2021 looked a how s uden s' pe sonal biases and
ins uc o s' ac ions can a ec he au hen ici y and calibe
o eedback in assessmen s. This s udy emphasized he
signi icance o p ese ing objec i i y in he assessmen
p ocedu e [13].
Responden s exp essed a e age con idence in he
e alua ions' capaci y o accu a ely e lec ins uc o
pe o mance, indica ing a mode a e le el o pe cei ed
accu acy. The signi ican s anda d de ia ion, howe e ,
sugges s a g ea deal o a ia ion in pe cep ions, which
a e p obably impac ed by pe sonal expe iences o
e alua ion biases. Addi ionally, he s udy disco e ed ha
pa icipan s hough a signi ican pe cen age o
assessmen s migh include alse o decep i e
in o ma ion. To gua an ee he alidi y and dependabili y
o eedback, his s udy emphasizes he necessi y o
obus quali y assu ance p ocedu es in he assessmen .
The subjec i e na u e o e alua ions and he possibili y
o bias esul ing om in e pe sonal ela ionships o
mo i a ions a e made clea by looking a indi idual
expe iences and beha io s ela ed o e alua ion
eedback. This highligh s how c ucial i is o encou age
accoun abili y and openness in he assessmen p ocedu e
o educe po en ial biases.
Themes abou eache e alua ions ha e been s udied in
ea lie s udies. Acco ding o U l e al., s uden s ypically
p e e mo e equen assessmen s, indica ing a s ong
desi e o consis en eedback [14]. On he o he hand,
Boysen no ed a no able lack o con idence in he alidi y
o assessmen s, sugges ing ha opinions may a y
depending on he educa ional se ing [15]. Di e en
indings abou he equency o inaccu a e in o ma ion in
assessmen s we e epo ed by Baniasadi e al.,
highligh ing he need o mo e s udies o iden i y he
causes o dispa i ies in s uden eedback [16].
Fu he mo e, Clayson es ima ed ha abou 30 pe cen o
e alua ions con ained alse in o ma ion and ound ha
mos s uden s we e awa e o ins ances whe e
assessmen s had been ab ica ed [17]. The alidi y o
s uden e alua ions in enhancing he pe o mance o
indi idual ins uc o s, changing cu icula, and c ea ing
compa a i e scales o acul y assessmen is called in o
ques ion by hese indings.
Co ela ion analyses we e pe o med o in es iga e
possible ela ionships be ween a iables like GPA,
ques ionnai e answe s, and demog aphic cha ac e is ics.
The absence o s a is ically signi ican co ela ions
indica es ha he e may no be many linea ela ionships
be ween hese a iables. The complexi y o e alua ion
esul s, which a e impac ed by a numbe o a iables
beyond s aigh o wa d linea co ela ions, mus be aken
in o accoun .
Nume ous s udies ha e examined he connec ion
be ween s uden g ades and SETE. Acco ding o mos o
hese s udies, highe expec ed g ades and e alua ion
a ings a e posi i ely co ela ed; s uden s wi h highe
GPAs also ypically a e hei eache s highe . Howe e ,
S oebe e al. disco e ed ha s uden e alua ions we e
no subs an ially impac ed by eache s' g ading p ac ices
[18]. Fu he mo e, o he esea che s ound ha s uden s'
pe cep ions o hei eache s we e no signi ican ly
a ec ed by hei knowledge o hei g ades [19, 20].
Acco ding o Be ez ai e al., an inc ease o one poin in
a s uden 's GPA was linked o an inc ease o 0.2 o 0.4 in
he ins uc o 's e alua ion sco e. They also disco e ed a
co ela ion be ween GPA and he a e age S uden
E alua ion o Teaching (SET) sco e o ins uc o s [21].
Examining ques ionnai e esponses and gende p o ides
in o ma ion abou possible e alua ion- ela ed a i udes
and ac ion a ia ions. The absence o signi ican
co ela ions aises he possibili y ha a i udes owa d
e alua ion eedback and p e e ences o e alua ion
equency a e no p ima ily in luenced by gende .
Chá ez and Mi chell ound ha s uden s' language when
e alua ing male p o esso s di e ed signi ican ly om
ha used o emale p o esso s [22]. Addi ionally, a male
ins uc o who augh he same cou se ecei ed highe
o dinal sco es han a emale ins uc o , e en o
ques ions ha we e no speci ic o he ins uc o .
The cu en s udy has a ious es ic ions. Fi s , Sul an
Qaboos Uni e si y nu sing s uden s a e he only ones
included. Second, s uden s om o he disciplines should
be su eyed o he s udy. Finally, he esul s may no
ep esen s uden s' opinions in di e en uni e si y
colleges because hey a e unique o nu sing s uden s a
Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y's College o Nu sing in Oman.
Conclusion
The s udy's conclusions help us be e unde s and how
s uden s iew eache e alua ions and poin ou
impo an a eas whe e hese p ocedu es need o be
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
6 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1¦ 2025 121
imp o ed. Add essing e hical issues, enhancing he
genuineness o eedback, and adap ing assessmen
echniques o s uden s' a ied p e e ences a e all c ucial.
These ac ions a e essen ial o maximize he e iciency
and equi y o eache e alua ion sys ems. Fu u e s udies
should examine wha in luences s uden s' a i udes and
ac ions, how e alua ion eedback a ec s ins uc ional
s a egies, and how well in e en ions ha enhance
e alua ion p ocedu es wo k. Fu he mo e, longi udinal
s udies ha moni o how s uden s' a i udes and
beha io s change o e ime may p o ide impo an new
in o ma ion abou how eache -s uden eedback
in e ac ions a e changing.
E hical conside a ions
The College o Nu sing's e hics commi ee app o ed his
s udy (e hical code: Re . No. CON/DF/2023/8).
Fu he mo e, he Assis an Dean o he College o
Nu sing's Unde g adua e O ice app o ed he da a
collec ion. The s udy's goals we e explained in de ail o
he pa icipan s, who we e also in o med o hei
eedom o discon inue pa icipa ion wi hou incu ing
ees. They we e assu ed ha hei decision o pa icipa e
would no a ec hei academic s anding o g ades. The
s udy main ained pa icipan anonymi y by e aining
om collec ing pe sonally iden i iable in o ma ion, such
as names o iden i ica ion numbe s. This p ocedu e was
clea ly ou lined in he in o med consen o m. Su eys
we e conduc ed using secu e, passwo d-p o ec ed
elec onic pla o ms and only accessible o he P incipal
In es iga o (PI).
A i icial in elligence u iliza ion o a icle
w i ing
The au ho s s a e ha a i icial in elligence was u ilized
o pa aph ase he pa ag aphs and edi he a icle's inal
e sion, pa icula ly o English w i ing.
Acknowledgmen
The au ho s hank he pa icipan s o pa icipa ing
since ely du ing he esea ch p ocess.
Con lic o in e es s a emen
The au ho s decla e ha no inancial o o he ypes o
con lic s o in e es exis .
Au ho con ibu ions
MPK concei ed he s udy. AA pa icipa ed in da a
acquisi ion and sampling. NAS and ZSh pa icipa ed in
he s udy's design and pe o med he s a is ical analysis.
ZSh in e p e ed he da a. MPK ob ained e hical clea ance
and pe mission o conduc he s udy. AA pe o med he
es s. ZSh and MPK d a ed o e ised he a icle
c i ically o impo an in ellec ual con en . All au ho s
ead and app o ed he inal manusc ip .
Funding
Sul an Qaboos Uni e si y p o ided inancial suppo o
his s udy.
Da a a ailabili y s a emen
Da a is a ailable on eques due o p i acy/e hical es ic ions.
Re e ences
1. La y C umbley D, Reichel KJ. Teaching
e ec i eness, imp ession managemen , and
dys unc ional beha io : S uden e alua ion o eaching
con ol da a. Quali y Assu ance in Educa ion.
2009;17(4):377-92.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/09684880910992340]
2. Oe mann MH, Conklin JL, Rush on S, Bush MA.
S uden e alua ions o eaching (SET): guidelines o
hei use. Nu sing Fo um. 2018;53(3):280-285.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/nu .12249]
3. Spence KJ, Schmelkin LP. S uden pe spec i es on
eaching and i s e alua ion. Assessmen & E alua ion in
Highe Educa ion. 2002;27(5):397-409.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/0260293022000009285]
4. O ani K, Kim BJ, Cho JI. S uden e alua ion o
eaching (SET) in highe educa ion: how o use SET
mo e e ec i ely and e icien ly in public a ai s
educa ion. Jou nal o Public A ai s Educa ion.
2012;18(3):531-44.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/15236803.2012.12001698]
5. Jones J, Ga ney-Rhys R, Jones E. Handle wi h ca e!
An explo a ion o he po en ial isks associa ed wi h he
publica ion and summa i e usage o s uden e alua ion
o eaching (SET) esul s. Jou nal o Fu he and Highe
Educa ion. 2014;38(1):37-56.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/0309877X.2012.699514]
6. Mohammed TA, Pandhiani SM. Analysis o ac o s
a ec ing s uden e alua ion o eaching e ec i eness in
Saudi highe educa ion: he case o Jubail Uni e si y
College. Ame ican Jou nal o Educa ional Resea ch.
2017;5(5):464-75. [h ps://doi.o g/10.12691/educa ion-
5-5-2]
7. U l B, Whi e CA, Gonzalez DW. Me a-analysis o
acul y's eaching e ec i eness: s uden e alua ion o
eaching a ings and s uden lea ning a e no ela ed.
S udies in Educa ional E alua ion. 2017;54:22-42.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.s ueduc.2016.08.007]
8. Vilchez JA, K use J, Pu e M, Dudo i z RN.
Teache s and school heal h leade s' pe spec i es on
dis ance lea ning physical educa ion du ing he COVID‐
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
7 / 8
Poo kiani e al
.
: Nu sing s uden s' pe cep ions o eaching e ec i eness e alua ions
122 Jou nal o Medical Educa ion De elopmen ¦ Volume 18 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ 2025
19 pandemic. Jou nal o School Heal h. 2021;91(7):541-
9. [h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/josh.13030]
9. Pau le NA, Sloa EF. Using s anda ds o e alua e
accoun abili y policy in con ex : school adminis a o
and eache pe cep ions o a eache e alua ion sys em.
S udies in Educa ional E alua ion. 2020;64:100806.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.s ueduc.2019.07.007]
10. Ca less D, Wins one N. Teache eedback li e acy
and i s in e play wi h s uden eedback li e acy. Teaching
in Highe Educa ion. 2023;28(1):150-63.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372]
11. Esa ey J, Valdes N. Unbiased, eliable, and alid
s uden e alua ions can s ill be un ai . Assessmen &
E alua ion in Highe Educa ion. 2020;45(8):1106-20.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/02602938.2020.1724875]
12. Quinn DM. Expe imen al e idence on eache s’
acial bias in s uden e alua ion: he ole o g ading
scales. Educa ional E alua ion and Policy Analysis.
2020;42(3):375-92.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.3102/016237372093218]
13. K ei ze RJ, Swee -Cushman J. E alua ing s uden
e alua ions o eaching: a e iew o measu emen and
equi y bias in SETs and ecommenda ions o e hical
e o m. Jou nal o Academic E hics. 2021;20(3–4):1–12.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10805-021-09400-w]
14. Rolle W, Bijlsma H, Röhl S. S uden eedback on
eaching in schools: using s uden pe cep ions o he
de elopmen o eaching and eache s. Sp inge , Cham.
2021: 237-56. [h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-3-030-
75150-0]
15. Boysen GA. The mul idimensional na u e o
eaching and s uden e alua ions: commen a y on
s uden s' judgmen s o lea ning and eaching
e ec i eness. Jou nal o Applied Resea ch in Memo y
and Cogni ion. 2020:9(2);152–156.
16. Baniasadi A, Salehi K, Khodaie E, Baghe i
Noapa as K, Izanloo B. Fai ness in class oom
assessmen : a sys ema ic e iew. The Asia-Paci ic
Educa ion Resea che . 2022:1-9.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s40299-021-00636-z]
17. Clayson DE. A comp ehensi e c i ique o s uden
e alua ion o eaching: C i ical pe spec i es on alidi y,
eliabili y, and impa iali y. Rou ledge; 2020.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9781003091462]
18. S oebe W. S uden e alua ions o eaching
encou age poo eaching and con ibu e o g ade
in la ion: a heo e ical and empi ical analysis. Basic and
Applied Social Psychology. 2020;42(4):276-94.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/01973533.2020.1756817]
19. Ca pen e SK, Wi he by AE, Taube SK. On
s uden s'(mis) judgmen s o lea ning and eaching
e ec i eness. Jou nal o Applied Resea ch in Memo y
and Cogni ion. 2020;9(2):137-51.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ja mac.2019.12.009]
20. Chambe lin K, Yasué M, Chiang I-CA. The impac
o g ades on s uden mo i a ion. Ac i e Lea ning in
Highe Educa ion. 2023;24(2):109-24.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/146978741881972]
21. Be ez ai Z, Luká s GD, Molon ay R. Can p o esso s
buy be e e alua ion wi h lenien g ading? The e ec o
g ade in la ion on s uden e alua ion o eaching.
Assessmen & E alua ion in Highe Educa ion.
2021;46(5):793-808.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/02602938.2020.1821866]
22. Chá ez K, Mi chell KM. Explo ing bias in s uden
e alua ions: gende , ace, and e hnici y. Poli ical Science
& Poli ics. 2020;53(2):270-4.
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/S1049096519001744]
[h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ja mac.2020.02.001]
[ DOI: 10.61186/edcj.18.1.115 ] [ Downloaded om edujou nal.zums.ac.i on 2025-11-26 ]
Powe ed by TCPDF (www. cpd .o g)
8 / 8
