COMPARISON OF STUDENT EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING 1 Executi

COMPARISON OF STUDENT EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING
1
Executive Summary
2
Comparison of Student Evaluations of Teaching with Online and
Paper-Based Administration
John F. Doe
Central Michigan University
Master of Science in Administration
MSA 698: Directed Administrative Portfolio
Dr. Larry F. Ross
September 28, 2020

Author Note
Data collection and preliminary analysis were sponsored by the
Office of the Provost and the
Student Assessment of Instruction Task Force. Portions of these
findings were presented as a poster at
the 2016 National Institute on the Teaching of Psychology, St.
Pete Beach, Florida, United States. We
have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Correspondence
concerning this article should be addressed to
Claudia J. Stanny, Center for University Teaching, Learning,
and Assessment, University of West Florida,
Building 53, 11000 University Parkway, Pensacola, FL 32514,
United States. Email:
[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
3
Table of Contents (optional)

4
Comparison of Student Evaluations of Teaching with Online and
Paper-Based Administration
Student ratings and evaluations of instruction have a long
history as sources of information
about teaching quality (Berk, 2013). Student evaluations of
teaching (SETs) often play a significant role in
high-stakes decisions about hiring, promotion, tenure, and
teaching awards. As a result, researchers
have examined the psychometric properties of SETs and the
possible impact of variables such as race,
gender, age, course difficulty, and grading practices on average
student ratings (Griffin et al., 2014;
Nulty, 2008; Spooren et al., 2013). They have also examined
how decision-makers evaluate SET scores
(Boysen, 2015a, 2015b; Boysen et al., 2014; Dewar, 2011). In
the last 20 years, considerable attention
has been directed toward the consequences of administering
SETs online (Morrison, 2011; Stowell et al.,
2012) because low response rates may have implications for

how decision-makers should interpret SETs.
Online Administration of Student Evaluations
Administering SETs online creates multiple benefits. Online
administration enables instructors to
devote more class time to instruction (vs. administering paper -
based forms) and can improve the
integrity of the process. Students who are not pressed for time
in class are more likely to reflect on their
answers and write more detailed comments (Morrison, 2011;
Stowell et al., 2012; Venette et al., 2010).
Because electronic aggregation of responses bypasses the time-
consuming task of transcribing
comments (sometimes written in challenging handwriting),
instructors can receive summary data and
verbatim comments shortly after the close of the term instead of
weeks or months into the following
term.
Despite the many benefits of online administration, instructors
and students have expressed
concerns about online administration of SETs. Students have
expressed concern that their responses are
not confidential when they must use their student identification
number to log into the system

(Dommeyer et al., 2002). However, breaches of confidentiality
can occur even with paper-based
administration. For example, an instructor might recognize
student handwriting (one reason some
5
students do not write comments on paper-based forms), or an
instructor might remain present during
SET administration (Avery et al., 2006).
In-class, paper-based administration creates social expectations
that might motivate students to
complete SETs. In contrast, students who are concerned about
confidentiality or do not understand how
instructors and institutions use SET findings to improve
teaching might ignore requests to complete an
online SET (Dommeyer et al., 2002). Instructors, in turn, worry
that low response rates will reduce the
validity of the findings if students who do not complete a SET
differ in significant ways from students
who do (Stowell et al., 2012). For example, students who do not
attend class regularly often miss class
the day that SETs are administered. However, all students

(including nonattending students) can
complete the forms when they are administered online. Faculty
also fear that SET findings based on a
low-response sample will be dominated by students in extreme
categories (e.g., students with grudges,
students with extremely favorable attitudes), who may be
particularly motivated to complete online
SETs, and therefore that SET findings will inadequately
represent the voice of average students (Reiner
& Arnold, 2010).
Effects of Format on Response Rates and Student Evaluation
Scores
The potential for biased SET findings associated with low
response rates has been examined in
the published literature. In results that run contrary to faculty
fears that online SETs might be dominated
by low-performing students, Avery et al. (2006) found that
students with higher grade-point averages
(GPAs) were more likely to complete online evaluations.
Likewise, Jaquett et al. (2017) reported that
students who had positive experiences in their classes
(including receiving the grade they expected to
earn) were more likely to submit course evaluations.

Institutions can expect lower response rates when they
administer SETs online (Avery et al.,
2006; Dommeyer et al., 2002; Morrison, 2011; Nulty, 2008;
Reiner & Arnold, 2010; Stowell et al., 2012;
Venette et al., 2010). However, most researchers have found
that the mean SET rating does not change
6
significantly when they compare SETs administered on paper
with those completed online. These
findings have been replicated in multiple settings using a
variety of research methods (Avery et al., 2006;
Dommeyer et al., 2004; Morrison, 2011; Stowell et al., 2012;
Venette et al., 2010).
Exceptions to this pattern of minimal or nonsignificant
differences in average SET scores
appeared in Nowell et al. (2010) and Morrison (2011), who
examined a sample of 29 business courses.
Both studies reported lower average scores when SETs were
administered online. However, they also
found that SET scores for individual items varied more within
an instructor when SETs were

administered online versus on paper. Students who completed
SETs on paper tended to record the same
response for all questions, whereas students who completed the
forms online tended to respond
differently to different questions. Both research groups argued
that scores obtained online might not be
directly comparable to scores obtained through paper-based
forms. They advised that institutions
administer SETs entirely online or entirely on paper to ensure
consistent, comparable evaluations across
faculty.
Each university presents a unique environment and culture that
could influence how seriously
students take SETs and how they respond to decisions to
administer SETs online. Although a few large-
scale studies of the impact of online administration exist
(Reiner & Arnold, 2010; Risquez et al., 2015), a
local replication answers questions about characteristics unique
to that institution and generates
evidence about the generalizability of existing findings.
Purpose of the Present Study
In the present study, we examined patterns of responses for
online and paper-based SET scores

at a midsized, regional, comprehensive university in the United
States. We posed two questions: First,
does the response rate or the average SET score change when an
institution administers SET forms
online instead of on paper? Second, what is the minimal
response rate required to produce stable
average SET scores for an instructor? Whereas much earlier
research relied on small samples often
7
limited to a single academic department, we gathered SET data
on a large sample of courses (N = 364)
that included instructors from all colleges and all course levels
over three years. We controlled for
individual differences in instructors by limiting the sample to
courses taught by the same instructor in all
three years. The university offers nearly 30% of course sections
online in any given term, and these
courses have always administered online SETs. This allowed us
to examine the combined effects of
changing the method of delivery for SETs (paper-based to
online) for traditional classes and changing

from a mixed method of administering SETs (paper for
traditional classes and online for online classes in
the first two years of data gathered) to uniform use of online
forms for all classes in the final year of
data collection.
Method
Sample
Response rates and evaluation ratings were retrieved from
archived course evaluation data. The
archive of SET data did not include information about the
personal characteristics of the instructor
(gender, age, or years of teaching experience), and students
were not provided with any systematic
incentive to complete the paper or online versions of the SET.
We extracted data on response rates and
evaluation ratings for 364 courses that had been taught by the
same instructor during three consecutive
fall terms (2012, 2013, and 2014).
The sample included faculty who taught in each of the five
colleges at the university: 109
instructors (30%) taught in the College of Social Science and
Humanities, 82 (23%) taught in the College
of Science and Engineering, 75 (21%) taught in the College of

Education and Professional Studies, 58
(16%) taught in the College of Health, and 40 (11%) taught in
the College of Business. Each instructor
provided data on one course. Approximately 259 instructors
(71%) provided ratings for face-to-face
courses, and 105 (29%) provided ratings for online courses,
which accurately reflects the proportion of
face-to-face and online courses offered at the university. The
sample included 107 courses (29%) at the
8
beginning undergraduate level (1st- and 2nd-year students), 205
courses (56%) at the advanced
undergraduate level (3rd- and 4th-year students), and 52 courses
(14%) at the graduate level.
Instrument
The course evaluation instrument was a set of 18 items
developed by the state university
system. The first eight items were designed to measure the
quality of the instructor, concluding with a
global rating of instructor quality (Item 8: “Overall assessment
of instructor”). The remaining items

asked students to evaluate components of the course, concluding
with a global rating of course
organization (Item 18: “Overall, I would rate the course
organization”). No formal data on the
psychometric properties of the items are available, although all
items have obvious face validity.
Students were asked to rate each instructor as poor (0), fair (1),
good (2), very good (3), or
excellent (4) in response to each item. Evaluation ratings were
subsequently calculated for each course
and instructor. A median rating was computed when an
instructor taught more than one section of a
course during a term.
The institution limited our access to SET data for the three
years of data requested. We
obtained scores for Item 8 (“Overall assessment of instructor”)
for all three years but could obtain
scores for Item 18 (“Overall, I would rate the course
organization”) only for Year 3. We computed the
correlation between scores on Item 8 and Item 18 (from course
data recorded in the 3rd year only) to
estimate the internal consistency of the evaluation instrument.
These two items, which serve as

composite summaries of preceding items (Item 8 for Items 1–7
and Item 18 for Items 9–17), were
strongly related, r(362) = .92. Feistauer and Richter (2016) also
reported strong correlations between
global items in a large analysis of SET responses.
Design
This study took advantage of a natural experiment created when
the university decided to
administer all course evaluations online. We requested SET data
for the fall semesters for 2 years
9
preceding the change, when students completed paper-based
SET forms for face-to-face courses and
online SET forms for online courses, and data for the fall
semester of the implementation year, when
students completed online SET forms for all courses. We used a
2 × 3 × 3 factorial design in which course
delivery method (face to face and online) and course level
(beginning undergraduate, advanced
undergraduate, and graduate) were between-subjects factors and
evaluation year (Year 1: 2012, Year 2:

2013, and Year 3: 2014) was a repeated-measures factor. The
dependent measures were the response
rate (measured as a percentage of class enrollment) and the
rating for Item 8 (“Overall assessment of
instructor”).
Data analysis was limited to scores on Item 8 because the
institution agreed to release data on
this one item only. Data for scores on Item 18 were made
available for SET forms administered in Year 3
to address questions about variation in responses across items.
The strong correlation between scores
on Item 8 and scores on Item 18 suggested that Item 8 could be
used as a surrogate for all the items.
These two items were of particular interest because faculty,
department chairs, and review committees
frequently rely on these two items as stand-alone indicators of
teaching quality for annual evaluations
and tenure and promotion reviews.
Results
Response Rates
Response rates are presented in Table 1. The findings indicate
that response rates for face-to-

face courses were much higher than for online courses, but only
when face-to-face course evaluations
were administered in the classroom. In the Year 3
administration, when all course evaluations were
administered online, response rates for face-to-face courses
declined (M = 47.18%, SD = 20.11), but
were still slightly higher than for online courses (M = 41.60%,
SD = 18.23). These findings produced a
statistically significant interaction between course delivery
method and evaluation year, F(1.78, 716) =
10
101.34, MSE = 210.61, p < .001.1 The strength of the overall
interaction effect was .22 (ηp2). Simple main-
effects tests revealed statistically significant differences in the
response rates for face-to-face courses
and online courses for each of the 3 observation years.2 The
greatest differences occurred during Year 1
(p < .001) and Year 2 (p < .001), when evaluations were
administered on paper in the classroom for all
face-to-face courses and online for all online courses. Although
the difference in response rate between

face-to-face and online courses during the Year 3 administration
was statistically reliable (when both
face-to-to-face and online courses were evaluated with online
surveys), the effect was small (ηp2 = .02).
Thus, there was minimal difference in response rate between
face-to-face and online courses when
evaluations were administered online for all courses. No other
factors or interactions included in the
analysis were statistically reliable.
Evaluation Ratings
The same 2 × 3 × 3 analysis of variance model was used to
evaluate mean SET ratings. This
analysis produced two statistically significant main effects. The
first main effect involved evaluation
year, F(1.86, 716) = 3.44, MSE = 0.18, p = .03 (ηp2 = .01; see
Footnote 1). Evaluation ratings associated
with the Year 3 administration (M = 3.26, SD = 0.60) were
significantly lower than the evaluation ratings
associated with both the Year 1 (M = 3.35, SD = 0.53) and Year
2 (M = 3.38, SD = 0.54) administrations.
Thus, all courses received lower SET scores in Year 3,
regardless of course delivery method and course
level. However, the size of this effect was small (the largest
difference in mean rating was 0.11 on a five-

item scale).
1 A Greenhouse–Geisser adjustment of the degrees of freedom
was performed in anticipation of a
sphericity assumption violation.
2 A test of the homogeneity of variance assumption revealed no
statistically significant difference in
response rate variance between the two delivery modes for the
1st, 2nd, and 3rd years.
11
The second statistically significant main effect involved
delivery mode, F(1, 358) = 23.51, MSE =
0.52, p = .01 (ηp2 = .06; see Footnote 2). Face-to-face courses
(M = 3.41, SD = 0.50) received significantly
higher mean ratings than did online courses (M = 3.13, SD =
0.63), regardless of evaluation year and
course level. No other factors or interactions included in the
analysis were statistically reliable.
Stability of Ratings
The scatterplot presented in Figure 1 illustrates the relation

between SET scores and response
rates. Although the correlation between SET scores and
response rate was small and not statistically
significant, r(362) = .07, visual inspection of the plot of SET
scores suggests that SET ratings became less
variable as response rate increased. We conducted Levene’s test
to evaluate the variability of SET scores
above and below the 60% response rate, which several
researchers have recommended as an
acceptable threshold for response rates (Berk, 2012, 2013;
Nulty, 2008). The variability of scores above
and below the 60% threshold was not statistically reliable, F(1,
362) = 1.53, p = .22.
Discussion
Online administration of SETs in this study was associated with
lower response rates, yet it is
curious that online courses experienced a 10% increase in
response rate when all courses were
evaluated with online forms in Year three. Online courses had
suffered from chronically low response
rates in previous years when face-to-face classes continued to
use paper-based forms. The benefit to
response rates observed for online courses when all SET forms
were administered online might be

attributed to increased communications that encouraged students
to complete the online course
evaluations. Despite this improvement, response rates for online
courses continued to lag behind those
for face-to-face courses. Differences in response rates for face-
to-face and online courses might be
attributed to the characteristics of the students who enrolled or
to differences in the quality of student
engagement created in each learning modality. Avery et al.
(2006) found that higher-performing
students (defined as students with higher GPAs) were more
likely to complete online SETs.
12
Although the average SET rating was significantly lower in
Year 3 than in the previous 2 years,
the magnitude of the numeric difference was small (differences
ranged from 0.08 to 0.11, based on a 0–
4 Likert-like scale). This difference is similar to the differences
Risquez et al. (2015) reported for SET
scores after statistically adjusting for the influence of several
potential confounding variables. A

substantial literature has discussed the appropriate and
inappropriate interpretation of SET ratings
(Berk, 2013; Boysen, 2015a, 2015b; Boysen et al., 2014; Dewar,
2011; Stark & Freishtat, 2014).
Faculty have often raised concerns about the potential
variability of SET scores due to low
response rates and thus small sample sizes. However, our
analysis indicated that classes with high
response rates produced equally variable SET scores, as did
classes with low response rates. Reviewers
should take extra care when they interpret SET scores.
Decision-makers often ignore questions about
whether means derived from small samples accurately represent
the population mean (Tversky &
Kahneman, 1971). Reviewers frequently treat all numeric
differences as if they were equally meaningful
as measures of actual differences and give them credibility even
after receiving explicit warnings that
these differences are not significant (Boysen, 2015a, 2015b).
Because low response rates produce small sample sizes, we
expected that the SET scores based
on smaller class samples (i.e., courses with low response rates)
would be more variable than those

based on larger class samples (i.e., courses with high response
rates). Although researchers have
recommended that response rates reach the criterion of 60% –
80% when SET data are used for high-
stakes decisions (Berk, 2012, 2013; Nulty, 2008), our findings
did not indicate a significant reduction in
SET score variability with higher response rates.
Implications for Practice
Improving SET Response Rates
When decision-makers use SET data to make high-stakes
decisions (faculty hires, annual
evaluations, tenure, promotions, teaching awards), institutions
would be wise to take steps to ensure
13
that SETs have acceptable response rates. Researchers have
discussed effective strategies to improve
response rates for SETs (Nulty, 2008; see also Berk, 2013;
Dommeyer et al., 2004; Jaquett et al., 2016).
These strategies include offering empirically validated
incentives, creating high-quality technical systems

with good human factors characteristics, and promoting an
institutional culture that supports the use of
SET data and other information to improve the quality of
teaching and learning. Programs and
instructors must discuss why information from SETs is essential
for decision-making and provide
students with tangible evidence of how SET information guides
decisions about curriculum
improvement. The institution should provide students with
compelling evidence that the administration
system protects the confidentiality of their responses.
Evaluating SET Scores
In addition to ensuring adequate response rates on SETs,
decision-makers should demand
multiple sources of evidence about teaching quality (Buller,
2012). High-stakes decisions should never
rely exclusively on numeric data from SETs. Reviewers often
treat SET ratings as a surrogate for a
measure of the impact an instructor has on student learning.
However, a recent meta-analysis (Uttl et
al., 2017) questioned whether SET scores have any relation to
student learning. Reviewers need
evidence in addition to SET ratings to evaluate teachings, such
as evidence of the instructor’s disciplinary

content expertise, skill with classroom management, ability to
engage learners with lectures or other
activities, impact on student learning, or success with efforts to
modify and improve courses and
teaching strategies (Berk, 2013; Stark & Freishtat, 2014). As
with other forms of assessment, anyone's
measure may be limited in terms of the quality of information it
provides. Therefore, multiple measures
are more informative than any single measure.
A portfolio of evidence can better inform high-stakes decisions
(Berk, 2013). Portfolios might
include summaries of class observations by senior faculty, the
chair, or peers. Examples of assignments
and exams can document the rigor of learning, especially if
accompanied by redacted samples of
14
student work. Course syllabi can identify intended learning
outcomes; describe instructional strategies
that reflect the severity of the course (required assignments and
grading practices); and provide other

information about course content, design, instructional
strategies, and instructor interactions with
students (Palmer et al., 2014; Stanny et al., 2015).
Conclusion
Psychology has a long history of devising creative strategies to
measure the “unmeasurable,”
whether the targeted variable is a mental process, an attitude, or
the quality of teaching (e.g., Webb et
al., 1966). Besides, psychologists have documented various
heuristics and biases that contribute to the
misinterpretation of quantitative data (Gilovich et al., 2002),
including SET scores (Boysen, 2015a,
2015b; Boysen et al., 2014). These skills enable psychologists
to offer multiple solutions to the challenge
posed by the need to objectively evaluate the quality of teaching
and the impact of teaching on student
learning.
Online administration of SET forms presents multiple desirable
features, including rapid
feedback to instructors, economy, and support for
environmental sustainability. However, institutions
should adopt implementation procedures that do not undermine
the usefulness of the data gathered.

Moreover, institutions should be wary of emphasizing methods
that produce high response rates only to
lull faculty into believing that SET data can be the primary (or
only) metric used for high-stakes decisions
about the quality of faculty teaching. Instead, decision-makers
should expect to use multiple measures
to evaluate the quality of faculty teaching.
Recommendations
Data
15
References
Avery, R. J., Bryant, W. K., Mathios, A., Kang, H., & Bell, D.
(2006). Electronic course evaluations: Does an
online delivery system influence student evaluations? The
Journal of Economic Education, 37(1),
21–37. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.37.1.21-37
Berk, R. A. (2012). Top 20 strategies to increase the online
response rates of student rating scales.

International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning,
8(2), 98–107.
Berk, R. A. (2013). Top 10 flashpoints in student ratings and
the evaluation of teaching. Stylus.
Boysen, G. A. (2015a). Preventing the overinterpretation of
small mean differences in student
evaluations of teaching: An evaluation of warning effectiveness.
Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning in Psychology, 1(4), 269–282.
https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000042
Boysen, G. A. (2015b). Significant interpretation of small mean
differences in student evaluations of
teaching despite explicit warning to avoid overinterpretation.
Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning in Psychology, 1(2), 150–162.
Boysen, G. A., Kelly, T. J., Raesly, H. N., & Casner, R. W.
(2014). The (mis)interpretation of teaching
evaluations by college faculty and administrators. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education,
39(6), 641–656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.860950
Buller, J. L. (2012). Best practices in faculty evaluation: A
practical guide for academic leaders. Jossey-
Bass.

Dewar, J. M. (2011). Helping stakeholders understand the
limitations of SRT data: Are we doing enough?
Journal of Faculty Development, 25(3), 40–44.
Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P., & Hanna, R. W. (2002). College
students’ attitudes toward methods of
collecting teaching evaluations: In-class versus online. Journal
of Education for Business, 78(1),
11–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320209599691
https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.37.1.21-37
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.860950
https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320209599691
16
Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P., Hanna, R. W., & Chapman, K. S.
(2004). Gathering faculty teaching
evaluations by in-class and online surveys: Their effects on
response rates and evaluations.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(5), 611–623.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930410001689171
Feistauer, D., & Richter, T. (2016). How reliable are students’

evaluations of teaching quality? A variance
components approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 42(8), 1263–1279.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1261083
Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.). (2002).
Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive
judgment. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098
Griffin, T. J., Hilton, J., III, Plummer, K., & Barret, D. (2014).
Correlation between grade point averages
and student evaluation of teaching scores: Taking a closer look.
Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 39(3), 339–348.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.831809
Jaquett, C. M., VanMaaren, V. G., & Williams, R. L. (2016).
The effect of extra-credit incentives on
student submission of end-of-course evaluations. Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning in
Psychology, 2(1), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000052
Jaquett, C. M., VanMaaren, V. G., & Williams, R. L. (2017).
Course factors that motivate students to
submit end-of-course evaluations. Innovative Higher Education,
42(1), 19–31.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9368-5
Morrison, R. (2011). A comparison of online versus traditional
student end-of-course critiques in
resident courses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
36(6), 627–641.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003632399
Nowell, C., Gale, L. R., & Handley, B. (2010). Assessing
faculty performance using student evaluations of
teaching in an uncontrolled setting. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 35(4), 463–
475. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902862875
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930410001689171
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1261083
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.831809
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-016-9368-5
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003632399
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902862875
17
Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online
and paper surveys: What can be done?
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701293231
Palmer, M. S., Bach, D. J., & Streifer, A. C. (2014). Measuring
the promise: A learning-focused syllabus
rubric. To Improve the Academy: A Journal of Educational
Development, 33(1), 14–36.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tia2.20004
Reiner, C. M., & Arnold, K. E. (2010). Online course
evaluation: Student and instructor perspectives and
assessment potential. Assessment Update, 22(2), 8–10.
https://doi.org/10.1002/au.222
Risquez, A., Vaughan, E., & Murphy, M. (2015). Online student
evaluations of teaching: What are we
sacrificing for the affordances of technology? Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education,
40(1), 210–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.890695
Spooren, P., Brockx, B., & Mortelmans, D. (2013). On the
validity of student evaluation of teaching: The
state of the art. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 598–
642.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870
Stanny, C. J., Gonzalez, M., & McGowan, B. (2015). Assessing
the culture of teaching and learning

through a syllabus review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 40(7), 898–913.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.956684
Stark, P. B., & Freishtat, R. (2014). An evaluation of course
evaluations. ScienceOpen Research.
https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AOFRQA.v1
Stowell, J. R., Addison, W. E., & Smith, J. L. (2012).
Comparison of online and classroom-based student
evaluations of instruction. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 37(4), 465–473.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.545869
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small
numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2),
105–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031322
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701293231
https://doi.org/10.1002/tia2.20004
https://doi.org/10.1002/au.222
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.890695
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.956684
https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AOFRQA.v1
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.545869
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031322
18

Uttl, B., White, C. A., & Gonzalez, D. W. (2017). Meta-analysis
of faculty’s teaching effectiveness: Student
evaluation of teaching ratings and student learning are not
related. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 54, 22–42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007
Venette, S., Sellnow, D., & McIntyre, K. (2010). Charting new
territory: Assessing the online frontier of
student ratings of instruction. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 35(1), 101–115.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802618336
Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L.
(1966). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive
research in the social sciences. Rand McNally.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802618336
19
Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations for Response Rates (Course
Delivery Method by Evaluation Year)

Administration year Face-to-face course Online course
M SD M SD
Year 1: 2012 71.72 16.42 32.93 15.73
Year 2: 2013 72.31 14.93 32.55 15.96
Year 3: 2014 47.18 20.11 41.60 18.23
Note. Student evaluations of teaching (SETs) were administered
in two modalities in Years 1 and 2:
paper based for face-to-face courses and online for online
courses. SETs were administered online for all
courses in Year 3.
20
Figure 1
Scatterplot Depicting the Correlation Between Response Rates
and Evaluation Ratings
Note. Evaluation ratings were made during the 2014 fall
academic term.

21
Appendixes (if applicable)
1
5
Ensuring Diversity in the Workforce
Emad N. Alkhadabah
Central Michigan University
Master of Science in Administration
MSA 698: Directed Administrative Portfolio
Dr. Larry F. Ross
April 7, 2021
Introduction
Diversity consciousness makes one open and welcoming to

characteristics that various individuals tend to assume are
correct but are not. Many people view diversity as a positive
trait. Diversity typically includes; age difference, sexual
orientation, ethnicity, race, culture, etc.?? This is very helpful
in getting a whole extensive scope of the point of view. When
working with groups, there are prompts and many thoughts,
which helps in extensive exchanges on the chances and
difficulties that may arise as one is working with a large group
of people from wide and far. Having diversity consciousness is
essential in ensuring that the business and its operation are
increasing, and it is ready to address any issues that may arise
from diverse markets.
Diversity is only perceived when there exists a close monitoring
of the working environment. One must be supposed to ensure
that the healthcare sector is supposed to blossom with diversity
consciousness since the workers will be very mindful about
social wellness, positively impacting the people. Getting
prepared and planning on working well with groups is essential
in ensuring that groups are working. This helps the organization
have a culture of regard, being corresponding, and being more
resistant if there are some challenges in the organization. This
paper will discuss the possible challenges of diversity,
systematic approach and attention, competence, language use
and training. This is because diversity is very important in
promoting the organization's development (Butin, 2016).
System's Approach and Attention to Cultural Competence
Cultural competence can be described as the set of congruent
behaviors, policies, and attitudes that come together in a health
care system, enabling the whole system to work together more
effectively. However, it not only concentrates on the health
sector but also on a broader approach, and this aims to provide
diverse clients with some services that are all for their
excellent. Systematic attention is required in the field of
diversity since it is possible to promote an organization's output
by assessing all its departments. The assessment can be
conducted to ensure that all the departments observe the

diversity and inclusion policies as stipulated by the
organization.
For any society to have cultural competence, one must require
many other attributes. This includes an open attitude, which
means that one can learn so much from others since they have
the spirit of curiosity. Self-awareness means that one regards
his/her worldview; this may include knowing your assumptions,
biases (spelling), and judgment. Having awareness for others is
essential, which means that some actions demonstrate cultural
knowledge. Through this, one is in a position to acquire
information from others. This can either be regarding values,
norms and beliefs. This will help one know how well they are
supposed to adapt to certain places with different people.
Specific system approaches are applicable in various sectors of
the health care system. This is because health care is an
interrelated and interdependent body. The health care system
has some professional staff, deals with finances, and has
physical and administrative subsystems. The system approach is
important in cultural competency since it integrates many
practices of the organization's management. The policies and
the structures are critical in ensuring that health care workers
are working in the most effective and culturally diverse
situations. A culturally diverse working environment is
important as there is a lot of learning and adapting to the
systems, which further demonstrates the need for having a
diverse workforce in the health care sector.
Diversity Challenges
In any organization which has diverse groups of people, there
are several challenges that the organization might experience.
The first challenge is harassment; this means that there is any
unwelcome conduct in the organization. This is based on
specific characteristics such as age, race, pregnancy status, and
sex. The other challenge is the issue of age discrimination. This
means that some people consist of some special treatment more
than others because of their age. An act was formulated to
ensure that people are not getting discriminates against based on

their ages. Harassment can also be classified into reverse
discrimination; in this case, discrimination can happen against
women and other racial and ethnics who are the minority in the
organization. Some organizations have tried to address this
challenge by providing equal opportunity to everyone to
exercise their talents, but there is still reverse discrimination in
other sectors.
Race and ethnic disparities
There are socially constructed categories, and this includes race
and ethnicity. However, the two have effects on how one is
being perceived and how one perceives others. Therefore,
acknowledging that there are concepts of race and ethnicity that
are supposed to be considered is very important. This will
ensure that the implications of the two have been mitigated.
This can be done by accepting the individual differences in
society and becoming an agent of change.
There are some health disparities amongst the Native
Americans. This is by creating Indian health services; this can
be described as the trend in self-determination. This has
contributed to improving the Native American health sector to
ensure that disparity is being solved. A national interview was
carried out, and the report was stated on either the fairness or
the impoverished circumstances of the health sector. This was
only 9.8 % of the total population (MacDorman, 2011)
Disparities or Differences across Other Diversity Dimensions
Gender, Sexual Orientation, the Elderly
Health disparities and gender disparities go hand in hand;
they're acknowledging that some biological inequality is
significant. This is, for instance, when it comes to the issue of
having prostate and ovarian cancer. However, some other
disparities may stem from social, economic conditions, which is
essential in shaping gender differences in healthcare sectors.
Workforce diversity challenges
There may be Workplace Discrimination, and thus can be said
to occur if an employee is being mistreated, maybe during the
hiring of jobs. This makes the organization have a negative

image in the public's eyes, and most people do not like to work
together under such circumstances. When an organization
conducts a fair hiring process where the candidates a selected
based on merits, the healthcare sector will develop positive
image to the public and attract more workers (Saxena, 2014).
Language differences
Many people work in the health sector, which, to some point,
they lack English proficiency. There is language Access
PortalExtrnal, and this contains some of the information which
is in multiple languages. This ensures that all the languages that
the patients in the healthcare sector speak are understood. This
is most common where we have immigrants. The healthcare
sector must have a translator to facilitate effective
communication.
Strategies to Reduce the Disparity
Stakeholder Attention Disparities
Here are different people who are responsible for the disparities
which are happening in the organization. Management should be
blamed. This is because the moment people from diverse places
have come together to work, all the disparities ar4 (spelling?)
supposed to be dealt with and ensure no other difference is
observed. The other stakeholders are the staff themselves; they
are supposed to work together and ensure no disparities in the
organization (Zimmerman-Oster et al., 2010). APA problem –
corrected!
Systematic Strategies for Reducing Disparities
One way to do this is to ensure a culture of equity in the
organization, which can be done by recognizing some existing
equity champions. The other mechanism is to ensure that there
is the incorporation of the intervention measures into the
current systems, which would mean that there will be no one
who will have some disparities. Involving all the members and
the target population during planning is very important in
reducing inequalities (Millery & Kukafka, 2010).
People have different healthcare ideas; they have different
languages they use and have different literacy levels. Culture

and diversity are essential, and it allows people to get into
communications. This is because people from different
diversities require a lot of communicating and sharing to know
what other people think and understand regarding some
issues. As I had stated earlier, where we have immigrants, there
is a high possibility of having different languages and hence the
need for effective communication.
There are some communication rules which are supposed to be
learned. This includes knowing the best language to use, which
is going to be understood by all people. In the United States,
English language is the mode of communication regardless of
whether you are a citizen or an immigrant.
The Creative and Exponential Leadership Training Program
Getting compassion for the members is very important, being a
member who is involved in different kinds of projects which are
having different groups of people has got a lot of advantages.
This means that people can learn so much from what other
people are doing differently to ensure that the projects are
progressing using the resources more effectively. As a member
of different groups, one becomes very familiar with how to deal
with issues, such as watching and trying to figure out some of
the instructions given to the structure and how projects are
supposed to be carried out to ensure that they are working
effectively. It was profound that when a person has some
experiences, thinking about the activities that are supposed to
be undertaken should be because there is a lot of learning. This
means that very few strategies would require the extra gathering
of the information. The person who is working with diverse
groups of people and conscious about what is happening to learn
becomes very easy, and this is called experiential learning
(Robinson, 2017)
This can be described as one way towards the learning process,
and this makes a thing to be very easy since there is a lot of
understanding about what is being learnt. All these are
characterized through learning and reflecting from what one has
seen. For instance, as a creative leader, one can undertake a

training program as well, and an example of this can be how to
build a raft together and reflect on the styles of leadership. This
is important as it helps people venture out in a group through
the help of the building activity and the review on some specific
initiatives. This can be through gathering information from
different groups. This can construct a platform whereby people
can be learning from it.
Through this, people will be able to comprehend some of the
administration styles used by others to make sure that they are
achieving the objectives they have targeted. There must be a
discussion that should be carried out during the meeting. From
this discussion, the four leadership styles are supposed to be
discussed broadly to ensure that people are aware of best
initiatives to be used. The situation is where a person is.
Knowing which leadership style is the best for each person is
very important. A good leader is supposed to acknowledge the
values of diversity, foster the sense of diversity in the
workplace and acknowledge that globalization has influenced
the workforce to become more diverse.
The Value of Diversity Consciousness in Leadership
Effectiveness
Many investigations have been made regarding the value of
diversity consciousness, which has helped gather more
information about different kinds of groups and how they can be
handled. All these can be managed by understanding the
viewpoint's scope; the specialists can invest this to know the
issue's complexity. The reason for doing this is that some of the
gatherings are better to keep away from them. This is because
there is no learning which can take place from such groups.
However, some other groups are very compliant, which helps
ensure that the individuals' self-esteem has been boosted when
they are staying in. This is through having an examination and
basic assessment as well. When groups reach such places,
diversity issues such as sex, age, and ethnic diversities are
significant parts that people can learn from. Everything is
supposed to adjust so that they can continue being at the same

pace with all others. Each person in the group should therefore
be bound to keep up and aim that they are going to pursue
objectives and the reason as to why they went and involved
themselves with the groups (Jones et al., 2014).
The Future of Diversity and Cultural Competence
There are several ways the organization can ensure diversity
and cultural competence are guaranteed in the future. First,
there will be imperative demographics that are supposed to be
well established. Therefore, the case diversity will continue to
improve. There will be global interest and cultural competence
in health care, which will continue trending and the system
approach. There will be many force field analyses. This will
ensure that pressures have been analyzed and pressure against
change. This is because some people are struggling with how
they can make very tough decisions. All organizations must be
supposed to be sustainable to ensure that there are no changes
that are being made at any time (Northouse, 2014)
Diversity Skills
Many skills help improve some various skills to finish tasks and
the activities they are supposed to be taken into consideration.
There are some skills associated with taking up some exercises
and programs connected to direct results. This is linked with
associating with one's culture, which helps understand different
characters; this will empower social equity, which is essential
in making the world a better place to live. There is some
educational background that is important in ensuring that one
gets to acquire some of the skulls, which are essential in making
sure that one can interact. This is important in ensuring
cooperation and collaboration amongst the members who are
either specialists or others. The skills will be critical for solving
some issues, culture, and politics, amongst other things (Steffes,
2012).
Experiential training in diversity-conscious leadership
Anything good to happen to need some experience and time,
which is essential in creating some authority abilities, can be
achieved by drawing some determined companions through

training. This is important in making sure that diversity has
been considered to make sure that the advantages of diversity
have been acknowledged. There are many types of benefits; for
instance, there is much learning concerning what other people
might view as a good thing and what others may view some
things as not appealing. Training will help people know how
they can term one either a good or bad thing. There are other
authorities given to the people, which allows most people to
propel when they are working with groups. Therefore, having
continuous advancement of groups is essential in making
decisions, especially concerning the right person and at the
right time.
Conclusion
There are different advantages that the organization can get if it
becomes conscious in terms of diversity. Since diversity has
brought many benefits, it is essential if it is improved and in
every organization. This would mean that achieving many
things will be very easy because people with different
experiences and skills will be coming together, and the work
which will be done will be very effective. People will be doing
things using significantly less time.
References 0/0/doubled-spaced!
Butin, D. W. (2006). The limits of service-learning in higher
education. The review of higher education, 29(4), 473-498.
Jones, S. R., & Abes, E. S. (2004). Enduring influences of
service-learning on college students' identity
development. Journal of College Student Development, 45(2),
149-166.
MacDorman, M. F. (2011, August). Race and ethnic disparities
in fetal mortality, preterm birth, and infant mortality in the
United States: an overview. In Seminars in perinatology, 35(4),
200-208.
Millery, M., & Kukafka, R. (2010). Health information
technology and quality of health care: Strategies for reducing
disparities in underresourced settings. Medical Care Research

and Review, 67(5_suppl), 268S-298S.
Northouse, P. G. (2014). Leadership: Theory and practice.
SAGE Publications.
Saxena, A. (2014). Workforce diversity: A key to improve
productivity. Procedia Economics and Finance, 11, 76-85.
Steffes, J. S. (2012). Creative powerful learning environments
beyond the classroom. Academic Search Premier, 36 (3).
Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2000). Leadership in
the Making: Impact and Insights from Leadership Development
Programs in US Colleges and Universities. Executive Summary.
Emad, this is a good paper. The content and analysis are good. I
did make some changes to help the paper read a bit better . There
are some APA problems, and always remember that the entire
paper must be 0/0/doubled-spaced. Let me know if you have any
questions. Be safe, Dr. Ross.
Master of Science in Administration Project Paper
Partial Fulfillment for MSA 698
Rubric for MSA 602 Paper
Student Name:
Student I.D. Number:
Concentration:
Project Title:
Program Center:
EPN:

Semester/Year for MSA 698:
Instructor’s Name:
Instructions
Course instructors are required to use this rubric for the
individual papers, MSA 601, 602, 603, and 604.
Compute the total points and insert the grade based on the
grading scale at the bottom of this form.
Dimension and Percentage Weight
MSA Instructor
(Score & Feedback)
Assessment (10 points)
Score:
Relationship to Concentration and Administration
This paper reflects an administrative approach to examining an
issue directly related to the student’s concentration. Specify the
student’s concentration in the feedback box.
Core Course Objectives (20 points)
Score:
Does the paper reflect current financial statement theory and
protocols?
Does the paper display a significant level of financial
understanding?
Does the paper apply financial theory?
Does the paper demonstrate a solid understanding of the
objectives of MSA 602?
Paper Introduction, Body of the Paper and Conclusion (45

points)
Score:
Does the introduction adequately support the contents of the
paper?
Is there a natural progression from the introduction through to
the conclusion of the paper?
Does the paper explain how this core course fits it with the
other core courses?
Does the paper use financial analysis in the proper context?
Does the conclusion fully summarize the contents of the paper?
References (10 points)
Score:
Are the references in compliance with the latest APA style
manual?
Are references scholarly and sufficient in number to support the
paper. There should be no less than 6 scholarly references.
Are sources in the text properly listed on the reference pages,
and vice-versa?
Writing Format (15 points)
Score:
Executive summary is not over one page.
Demonstrates proper English usage, spelling, and context
Proofread for spelling, typing, and grammatical errors.
References in text and on reference page follow current APA
style,

Proper citation
All elements conform to the latest edition of the APA Style
Manual
Writing reflects graduate work.
Total Points (Possible 100 Points)
Total Score:
Grade:
Grading Scale:
94-100%
A
90-93%
A-
87-89%
B+
84-86%
B
80-83%
B-
77-79%
C+
74-76%
C
<74%
E
Instructor’s Name:
Title:
Date:

- Rubric for MSA 602 Paper –(revised August 2017)
2
1 | P a g e
MSA 698 Research Data Support
This is an overview. The paper submission links and grading
rubrics are in the weekly
folders under “Weekly Materials | Tasks.”
Students will produce four (4) papers and a final critical
analysis paper related to their area of
concentration. Papers must reflect the master’s level writing.
We expect the four essays and the
final critical analysis paper will require a minimum of 150-
clock hours of work for
completion. Cognitive tasks must be specifically designed to
relate directly to the student’s
professional work assignments or the approval of the instructor.
The papers should be of
sufficient depth to deal entirely with the issue.
The minimum length is eight (8) pages with a maximum of ten
(10) pages for each of the four
(4) papers, and 12-15 written pages for the final critical
analysis, excluding tables, graphs, and
appendixes.
Papers 1-4 follow the same issue, or organization, or problem.

1. Paper 1 applies to content and theory from MSA 601 to an
issue/problem/research
related to the student’s concentration.
2. Paper 2 applies to content and theory from MSA 603 to the
same issue/problem/research
developed in paper 1 and is related to the student’s
concentration.
developed in papers 1 and 2 and is related to the student’s
concentration
developed in papers 1-3 and is related to the student’s
concentration.
We expect the final critical analysis paper to draw conclusions
and make recommendations
based on the insights discovered in papers 1-4. I recommend
that your title be generic, and here
is why?
If you look at the examples that we gave you in the document
“MSA 698 Research Data
Support,” you will find that the only thing that is constant for
each paper would be “John Doe
Administration.” For example, here are the titles that one could
generate for each paper in the
John Doe Administration:

Administration
Administration
Administration
Besides, according to some scholars, good titles in academic
research papers have several
characteristics:
• The title accurately addresses the subject and scope of the
study.
• The title should not have any abbreviations.
2 | P a g e
• Make sure that one uses only words that create a positive
impression and stimulate reader
interest.
• Always use a current nomenclature from the field of
study/concentration.
• Make a concerted effort to identify critical variables, both
dependent and independent.
• In many cases, you might want to reveal how the paper will be
organized.
• There are times that you might suggest a relationship between
variables which supports the
primary hypothesis.
• It is limited to 10 to 15 substantive words – shorter is much

better.
• Make sure it does not include the study of, analysis of, or
similar constructions.
• Many titles are usually in the form of a phrase. However, it
can also be in the form of a
question.
• Always use correct grammar and capitalization with all first
words and last words
capitalized, including the first word of a subtitle. All nouns,
pronouns, verbs, adjectives,
and adverbs that appear between the first and last words of the
title are also capitalized.
• In academic papers, rarely is a title followed by an
exclamation mark. However, a title or
subtitle can be in the form of a question.
Again, looking at the above, we could have a generic title that
could cut across all papers as “An
Effective John Doe Administration.” As one might see, this is a
short, simple, and to the point
title. Another example could be “John Doe: An Effective John
Doe Administration.”
Nevertheless, if one did not start with a generic title, one would
create a title for each
assignment, as seen with the four paper illustrations above. In
the end, a generic title is best
because we can cover any body of knowledge of research.
Therefore a generic title is best, and
you will not have to generate a title for each paper. At that
point, you will need only to cover the
“same issue, or organization, or problem” for each essay/paper.
Each of the five papers must include the following:

• Title Page. The title should be descriptive and suggest the
paper’s purpose
• Table of Contents
• Contain an introduction, body of the paper, and conclusion.
• Appendices (if applicable):
• Reference List (every citation in the Text must be correctly
listed in the Reference
List) There must be 6 to 10 scholarly references per paper.
If you have more than one Table, a List of Tables Page follows
the Table of Contents
If you have more than one Figure, a List of Figures Page
follows the Table of Contents or the
List of Tables Page (if there is a List of Tables Page).
Students must follow the most recent edition of the APA
Publication Manual when submitting
the papers required for this course.
Format:
a. Blank Page
b. Executive Summary
c. Title Page
3 | P a g e
d. Table of Contents
e. List of Tables (optional)
f. List of Figures (optional)

g. The Text
h. References
Copies:
• The student must submit all five papers electronically to the
instructor via the submission
links in Bb.
• Students should always retain a copy of any materials
submitted to the instructor.
• Individual Feedback:
• The instructor reviews the student’s papers and notes any
concerns, and, if necessary,
returns them to the student with appropriate feedback.
• The student will schedule a 15-minute appointment with the
instructor to discuss the
feedback.
• The Final Critical Analysis Report Presentation:
• The presentation should be brief (approximately eight
minutes) and should be
accompanied by a short PowerPoint.
• Record the presentation using Blackboard WebEx. Detail and
resources are provided in
the Week 12-15 folder.
As we might already know, students will be writing about and
seeking to understand concepts
and practices about many subjects. We might even feel that
there are a great many reasons for

the popularity of the subject matter we want to address.
Therefore, we challenge you not to be
nervous about the subject matter and push forward to get it
done.
We want to do everything that we can to help in this endeavor.
Below is a helpful guide on the
concepts used in various MSA courses (601, 602, 603, and 604)
that can be used to link to any
subject matter (title). Operating as an example, “John Doe
Administration,” the data below can
serve as topics to address in the paper to clearly show the link
to the various MSA courses. Some
simple things that could link the title/problem statement to one
of the courses: State that it is a
challenge for the John Doe Administration’s capacity to align
the organization to better support
the mission. You could also argue its ability to upgrade
technology to enhance the production of
John Doe services. By expanding the thought process above, we
would see a tangible link to the
MSA 603 course. In other words, the topics below have
something for everyone. The items
below were generated from various books on John Doe and each
of the course books (MSA 601,
602, 603, and 604). Again, it does not matter what topic the
subject matter is; one can find
data/material below to address in the paper associated with a
particular course. Please do not
hesitate to address any concerns with the professor. You can do
this!
Example Generic Titles that cut across all Papers for a John Doe
Administration:
• An Effective John Doe Administration

• John Doe: An Effective John Doe Administration
4 | P a g e
One again, if one used a generic title like the above example,
there would be no need to change
each paper title.
MSA 601 Organizational Behavior and John Doe Administration
1. The connection: Overview of John Doe and Organizational
Behavior
• John Doe structure
• Diversity in John Doe organization
• Attitudes and perceptions of John Doe
2. Foundations of Organizational Structure
• What is an organizational structure in the John Doe industry?
• Common organizational frameworks and structures (The
simple structure, the
bureaucracy, the matrix structure)
• Alternate design options
• The leaner organization: Downsizing
• Why does the structure differ?
• Organizational designs and employee behavior
3. Understanding Individuals Behaviors in John Doe
Administration
• Content theories of motivation
• Process theories of motivation
• Attribution theory and motivation

• Contemporary theories of motivation
• Job engagement
• Employee involvement and participation
• Using rewards to motivate employees
• Using benefits to motivate employees
• Using intrinsic rewards to motivate employees
4. Leadership
• Power and influence
• Trait and behavioral theories of leadership
• Contingency theories of leadership
• Contemporary leadership theories
• Transactional and transformational leadership
• Servant leadership
• Positive leadership
• Training to be a leader
5. Communication
• Functions of communication
• Direction of communication
• Modes of communication
• Persuasive communication
• Barriers to effective communication
• Cultural factors in communication
5 | P a g e
6. Intrapersonal and Interpersonal issues associated with John
Doe
• Stress in the workplace and stress management
• Decision making
• Conflict management and negotiation skills
• Coping skills

7. Groups and Teams
• Overview of group dynamics in the John Doe industry
• Defining and classifying groups
• Stages of group development
• Roles and norms
• Why teams?
• Type of teams
• Team and team building
• Creating effective teams
• Turning individuals into team players
8. Managing Organizational Change in the John Doe Facility
• Change in an organization
• Approaches to managing change
• Organizational development
• Resistance to change and change management
9. Diversity in Organizations
• Demographics characteristics in the organization
• Levels of diversity in John Doe organization
• Discrimination patterns
• Implementing diversity management strategies
• Implications for leadership and the organization as a whole
10. Attitudes and Job Satisfaction
• Climate study data
• Job attitudes
• Job satisfaction
• The impact of job dissatisfaction
11. Personality and Values
• Personality framework
• Personality and situations
• Linking an individual’s personality and values to the
workplace/organization

• Cultural values
12. Perception and Individual Decision Making
• What is perception?
• Person perception: Making a judgment about others
• The link between perception and individual decision-making
• Decision-making in organizations
• Influences on decision-making: Individual differences and
organizational
constraints
• What about ethics in decision-making?
6 | P a g e
• Creativity, creative decision-making, and innovation in
organizations
13. Power and politics
• Power and leadership
• Bases of power
• Dependence: The key to power
• Power tactics and political savviness
• How power affects people
• Politics: Power in action
• Causes and consequences of political behavior
14. Organizational Culture
• What is organizational culture?
• What does culture do?
• Creating and sustaining the culture
• How employees learn the culture
• The learning organization

• Influencing an organizational culture (An ethical culture; A
positive culture; A
spiritual culture)
15. Human Resources Policies and Practices
• Recruitment practices
• Selection practices
• Substantive and contingent selection
• Training and development programs
• The leadership role of HR
• Succession planning
MSA 603 Strategic Planning and John Doe Administration
1. Leadership and Strategic Planning
• Definition of leadership
• Key Leadership Roles in the John Doe facility
• Physician involvement in John Doe’s strategic planning
2. Mission, Vision, and Culture: The Foundation for Strategic
Planning in John Doe
Administration (facility)
• The impact of mission, vision, and culture on profits and
strategic planning
• The effect of ownership on profits and the strategic planning
process
• Implementing organizational change
3. Transformational Leadership Maximizes Strategic Planning
• The concept of transformational leadership
• Why is transformational leadership essential to this research

study?
• Ethics as a foundation for leadership and strategic planning
• The role of transformational leaders in managing the strategic
planning process in
John Doe Administration
• Organizational transformation as a competitive advantage
• Factors affecting organizational transformation
7 | P a g e
4. Fundamentals of Strategic Planning in John Doe
Administration
• Analysis of the internal environment - inside the organization
• Analysis of the external environment - outside the
organization
• Gap analysis
• Discuss the strategic planning areas
• Evaluation of previous performance
• Discuss planning at the local, regional, national, or
international (Global) levels
5. Strategic Planning and SWOT Analysis
• Steps in the SWOT analysis
• Force Field Analysis
• Gap analysis
• Results
6. Strategic planning and John Doe Information Technology
(HIT)
• Strategic HIT initiatives
• Strategic planning for HIT
• John Doe information databases

7. Strategic Planning and the John Doe Business Plan
• John Doe business plan
• Net present value
• Internal rate of return
• Planning tools
8. Communicating the Strategic Plan
• Motivation
• Presentation of the strategic plan
9. Medical Group Planning and Joint Ventures
• Clinical integration
• Potential structures for physician-hospital integration
• Physician engagement in strategic planning
10. Strategic Planning and John Doe Long term Care Services
• Demographics of an aging population
• Inpatient John Doe rehab facilities
• Skilled nursing facilities
• Adult daycare centers
• Hospice
11. Strategic Planning in John Doe Systems
• Hospital mergers and acquisition
• Integrated delivery systems
• Strategic Planning at the John Doe system level
12. Strategic Planning and Pay for Performance
• Medicare Pay-for-performance initiatives
• Additional initiatives in pay for performance
• Physicians attitudes regarding pay for performance
• The growing demand for quality-related data
• Future P4P initiatives: Pay for value

8 | P a g e
• Incorporating P4P into a strategic plan
13. The New Value Paradigm in John Doe Organization
• The value frontier
• Strategic planning for John Doe’s value
MSA 604 Diversity Consciousness and John Doe Administration
1. A System’s Approach to Cultural Competence
• Dimensions of diversity
• John Doe diversity challenges
• John Doe disparities in the United States
• Changing the U.S. John Doe care system
• System approach in the John Doe care delivery organization
• The importance of leadership
2. Systematic Attention to John Doe Disparities
• What are John Doe disparities?
• Race and ethnic disparities in John Doe
• Disparities or differences across other diversity dimensions:
Gender, sexual
orientation, the elderly
• Stakeholder attention to John Doe disparities
• Systematic strategies for reducing John Doe disparities
3. Workforce Demographics
• Trends in the US labor force
• Diversity and the John Doe professions

• Drivers of inequalities in the John Doe professions
• Workforce diversity challenges
4. Foundations for Cultural Competence in John Doe
• What is cultural competence in John Doe?
• Cultural competence and the John Doe provider organization
• Cultural competence and the multicultural John Doe workforce
5. Training for knowledge and skills in culturally competent
care for diverse populations
• The principals for knowledge and skills training
• Cultural competence knowledge and skills for John Doe
administrators
• Cultural competency training for the John Doe professional in
John Doe
operations
• Cultural competence training for support staff
• The role of assessment in cultural competence training
6. Cultural Competence in John Doe Encounters
• Models from transcultural nursing
• Being culturally responsive
7. Language Access Services and cross-cultural communication
• Language use in the United States
• Language differences in John Doe encounter
• Attitudes toward limited-English speakers
9 | P a g e
• Changing responses to language barriers in John Doe
operations

• An expanding profession: The John Doe interpreter
• The translation is written by John Doe communication
8. Group Identity Development and John Doe Delivery
• Discuss the minority status group - identity development
• Discuss the majority status group - identity development
• Models to illustrate
9. The Centrality of Organizational Behavior
• The science of organizational behavior
• Organizations as a context for behavior
• Can culturally competent John Doe professionals do it by
themselves?
10. The Business Case for Best Practices
• The business case for cultural competence in John Doe
operations
• Workforce, HRM, and the business case
• Best demonstrated practices
• Benchmarking
11. The Future of Diversity and Cultural Competence in John
Doe
• Trends to support the adoption of a system’s approach to
diversity and cultural
competence in John Doe practices
• The sustainability movement
• Change management and force field analysis: Tools to
envision and shape the
future
MSA 602 Financial Management and John Doe Administration

1. The Role of Financial Management in John Doe
Administration
• Financial Management in the John Doe industry (facility)
• Current challenges
• Organizational goals
• Tax laws and the impact on John Doe
• John Doe reform and financial management
2. John Doe Insurance
• Major John Doe insurers (Third-Party Payers)
• Private insurers
• Public Insurers
• Medicare (government insurance)
• Value-Based benefit and insurance design
• John Doe reform and insurance
3. Payments to John Doe Providers
• Coding: The foundation of fee-for-service reimbursement
• Generic reimbursement methods
• Financial incentives to providers
• Financial risks to providers
• Pay for performance
• John Doe reform and payments to providers
10 | P a g e
4. Time Value Analysis
• Timelines
• Future value of a lump sum (compounding)
• The present value of a lump sum (discounting)
• Opportunity cost
• Solving the interest rate and time
• Annuities

• Perpetuities
• Uneven cash flow streams
• Using time value analysis to analysis to measure ROI
• Amortized loans
5. Financial Risk and Required Return
• The many faces of financial risks
• Risk aversion
• Probability distributions
• Expected and real rates of return
• Stand-alone risk
• Portfolio risk and return
• Portfolio risk of business investments
• Portfolio risk of stocks (Entire businesses)
• Portfolio betas
• The relevance of the risk measures
• Interpretation of risk measures
• The relationship between risk and return
6. Debt Financing
• The cost of debt
• Long-term debt
• Short-term debt
• Term loans
• Bonds
• Credit ratings
• Interest ratings
• Interest rate components
• The term structure of interest rates
• Advantages and disadvantages of debt financing
• Securities valuation
• The general valuation models
• Debt valuation
7. Equity Financing
• Rights and privileges of common stockholders

• Selling new common stock
• The market for common stock
• The decision to go public
• Advantages and disadvantages of common stock financing
11 | P a g e
• Equity in not-for-profit corporations
• Common stock valuation
• Security market equilibrium
• Information efficiency
• The risk/return trade-off
8. Lease Financing
• Lease parties and types
• Per procedure versus fixed payment leases
• Tax effects
• Balance sheet effects
• Evaluation by the lessee
• Evaluation by the lessor
• Lease analysis symmetry
• Setting the lease payment
• Leveraged leases
• Motivations for leasing
9. The Cost of Capital and Capital Structure
• An overview of the cost-of-capital estimation process
• Estimating the cost of debt
• Estimating the cost of equity to large investor-owned
businesses
• Estimating the cost of equity to large investor-owned
businesses
• Estimating the corporate cost of capital

• An economic interpretation of the corporate cost of capital
• Flotation costs
• Divisional cost of capital
• Cost-of-capital for small businesses
• Factors that influence a business’ cost of capital
10. Capital Structure
• Impact of debt financing on risk and return
• Business and financial risk
• Capital structure theory
• The Miller Model
• Financial distress costs
• Trade-Off models
• The asymmetric information model of capital structure
• Summary of the capital structure models
• Application of capital structure theory to not-for-profit firms
• Making the capital structure decision
• Capital structure decisions for a small investor-owned
business
11. Capital Budgeting
• Project clarifications
• The role of financial analysis in John Doe services capital
budgeting
• Overview of capital budgeting financial analysis
• Cash flow estimation
12 | P a g e
• Cash flow estimation example
• Breakeven analysis
• Return on Investment analysis
• Final thoughts on breakeven and profitability analysis

12. Financial Condition Analysis
• Financial reporting in the John Doe services industry
• Financial statement analysis
• Ratio analysis
• Tying the ratio together: Du Pont analysis
• Operating indicator analysis
• Limitations of financial statement and operating indicator
analysis
• Economic value added
• Benchmarking
• Key performance indicator and dashboards
13. Financial Forecasting
• Strategic planning
• Operational planning
• Financial planning
• Revenue forecasting
• Discuss forecasted financial statements
• Constant growth forecasting
• Factors that influence the external financing requirement
• Problems with constant growth methods
• Real-world forecasting
• Computerized financial forecasting models
• Financial controls
14. Revenue Cycle and Current Accounts Management
• Cash management
• Marketable securities management
• Revenue cycle management
• Supply chain management
• Current liability management
15. Business Combinations Valuation
• Level of merger activity
• Motives for the merger: The Good, the bad, and the ugly

(analysis with a story)
• Types of mergers
• Hostile versus friendly takeovers
• Mergers involving not-for-profit businesses
• Business valuation
• Unique problems in valuing small businesses
• Setting the bid price
• Structuring the takeover bid
• Due diligence analysis
• Corporate alliances
13 | P a g e
• Goodwill
• Who wins on a merger, the empirical evidence?
Contact the course instructor if you have any questions.
MIND MAP DISCUSSION
1
2
MIND MAP DISCUSSION
Mind Map Discussion

Diversity and Financial Management
Diversity is a critical factor since it promotes effective
outcomes based on financial assessment of a corporation. It is
possible to assess insurance, financial risk, debt financing, and
capital structure. All these subjects are connected to diversity
since promotes effective outcomes due to the availability of a
variety of talent to pick from. Research reveals that a diverse
workforce has been provided to be highly financially profitable
(Catalyst, 2020). Issues such as financial risk can get mitigated
by ensuring effective outcomes based on capabilities of each
employee. A company can develop a productive capital
structure by assessing its capabilities and comparing it to the
workforce. Once all diversity constraints are mitigated, it is
possible to produce high profits.
Reference
Catalyst, Why Diversity and Inclusion Matter: Financial
Performance (June 24, 2020).
Grissom, A. R. (2018). The Alert Collector: Workplace
Diversity and Inclusion. Reference & User Services Quarterly,
57(4). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/rusq.57.4.6700.
Narasimhan, S. D. (2019). A Commitment to Gender Diversity
in Peer Review, 57(4).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.043.

COMPARISON OF STUDENT EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING 1 Executi

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to COMPARISON OF STUDENT EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING 1 Executi

Similar to COMPARISON OF STUDENT EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING 1 Executi (20)

More from LynellBull52

More from LynellBull52 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COMPARISON OF STUDENT EVALUATIONS OF TEACHING 1 Executi