Skip to main content
Download PDF

Investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the students’ point of view: a systematic review

BMC Medical Education volume 24, Article number: 187 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Faculty evaluation is essential as a principle in educational organizations because it helps measure the quantity and quality of education in universities and educational institutions. There are various ambiguities regarding the desirable and deserving characteristics of a good teacher. Therefore, this study was conducted with the aim of investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the perspective of students.

Methods

A systematic review study was conducted by searching for studies in both Persian and English languages from 2014 to 2022 in the following databases: Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect, Magiran, SID, Iran Doc using keywords including Evaluation, Assessment, Estimate, Appraisement, Appraisal, Faculty Member, Professor, University, and College, as well as their MeSH equivalents, using “AND” and “OR” operators. The results of the articles about investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the perspective of students were reviewed, summarized, and reported.

Results

In the initial search, 3949 articles were found, and after evaluation, finally 21 articles were included in the systematic review. Based on the findings, investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the perspective of 130,187 students can be categorized into 6 dimensions and 53 components. These dimensions include individual and professional characteristics of the educational system, attitude within the educational system, educational programs and guides, teaching methodology, internal coherence of educational resources, and evaluation system information.

Conclusion

The results of the articles about investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the perspective of students were reviewed, summarized, and reported. It is necessary to pay attention to the factors affecting the evaluation of teachers in the recruitment of faculty members. Additionally, by holding practical training workshops with consideration of various dimensions that have an impact on faculty evaluation and student learning, it is possible to enhance the expertise of faculty members.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The core of education is teaching and learning, and learning takes place best when there are effective teachers. One of the ways to determine the effectiveness of teaching is through students’ evaluation of teachers and surveys that students complete each academic term [1]. Evaluation is a pervasive and essential process that is recognized as a principle in educational organizations [2, 3]. Because evaluation helps to measure the quantity and quality of education in universities and educational institutions. University teachers are considered the main pillars of education in the modern educational system’s structure and framework, and their performance plays a critical role in the overall effectiveness of the education system [4]. Faculty evaluation is one of the most complicated types of evaluation, and its complexity is due to the lack of credibility and accuracy of the tools and measurement methods used. Therefore, it is suggested that different aspects of evaluation should be considered for the final judgment, taking into account various evaluation criteria [5].

However, there are various ambiguities about the desirable and deserving characteristics of a good teacher. Some believe that a desirable teacher is someone who has expertise in their field of study and can provide high levels of knowledge and expertise in related areas. Others believe that the knowledge and skills should be practical and applicable. Some also consider the ability to cultivate ethical matters in students and the role of guidance to be important, and in fact, they have given the highest score to the personal and ethical characteristics of the teacher [6]. Nobakht et al., 2013 also was shown that students rated the control and management methods of the class, the personal and social appearance of teachers, and the mutual relationships between teachers and students as the most important factors [7]. In another study, 94% of students considered teachers scientific mastery of the subject matter, 91% of students, teachers expression power, and 90%, teachers efforts in clarifying scientific concepts as essential evaluation criteria for teachers [8]. Studies have shown the existence of gender bias in students’ evaluations of teaching [9, 10]. Some studies have reported that students’ criteria for judging their teachers can be different from their actual teaching quality [11]. The results of some research showed a positive relationship, when teacher was knowledgeable, friendly, and fair from the students’ point of view, higher evaluation scores were reported [12]. The main problem of the evaluation systems used in universities is that it only takes into account some specific aspects of teaching, including the transparency and ethics of teachers, which cannot accurately reflect the quality of teaching and learning [13]. Understanding students’ opinions about factors affecting the evaluation of teachers can provide useful guidance for addressing existing problems. Additionally, identifying strengths and weaknesses in the evaluation of teachers can help educational planners develop a program to improve and enhance the quality of evaluation. Considering the various factors discussed in the studies, also the existence of some contradictions in these studies and the ambiguities in this regard, this study was conducted to investigate factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities. Researchers in order to answer the research question, what are the factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the students’ point of view? They conducted a systematic review with the aim of investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the students’ point of view.

Methods

Systematic review protocol

A systematic review was conducted based on a predesigned protocol in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [14].

Search strategy

During the period of January 2014 to June 2022, a search was conducted in databases and search engines, including Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect, Magiran, SID, Iran Doc using keywords such as evaluation, assessment, estimate appraisal, appraisal faculty member, professor, university, college, as well as their MeSH equivalents, using the “AND” and “OR” operators.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The present study is designed to answer the question of investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the perspective of students. The inclusion criteria for articles include being available, published in reputable research and university journals, including descriptive, observational, and qualitative studies, the presence of keywords or their equivalents in the title or abstract, and articles in both English and Persian. The exclusion criteria include articles that did not address evaluation in universities and did not focus on teachers in medical sciences.

Study selection, data extraction and study quality

Figure 1 depicts the study selection and review processes. During the search process, a total of 3,949 articles were found. After removing duplicates and reviewing the titles, abstracts, and full texts, 21 studies were ultimately included in the analysis. The references of the final articles were also reviewed. The STROBE and COREQ checklists were used to evaluate the quality of articles. The STROBE checklist contains 22 items and 34 sub-items, 20 articles were evaluated by this checklist. Scores of 0–1 and 2 were given for each sub-item based on its correctness, uncertainty, or incorrectness. The maximum and minimum scores obtained were 48 and 34, respectively. To evaluate the quality of a qualitative article, the COREQ checklist, which contains 32 items, was used. Scores of 0 and 1 were given based on reporting or non-reporting of each item, and the article’s score was 13. Data extraction was performed using a checklist including author information, publication year, study objective, study design, sample size, data collection method, and results. The results obtained from the analysis of the articles were summarized and reported. All search, review, and quality assessment steps were performed by two researchers (F.F and Z.S) and in cases of disagreement, a third researcher (Kh.Sh) was consulted. To access the proposal of this study, you can contact the corresponding author.

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection process

Full size image

Results

The search yielded 3949 articles from databases. After removing duplicates, 2797 articles remained; their titles and abstracts were scanned, and 763 relevant articles were identified. The full texts of these 763 articles were reviewed. Among the included articles, 21 original articles were undergone further data extraction and analysis. The key information of the 21 original articles is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Studies included in the analysis process regarding factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the students’ point of view
Full size table

The study was carried out on 130,187 student samples from studies conducted in Iran, the United States, Spain, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Oman, and the Philippines. Based on the findings of the reviewed articles, the factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the students’ point of view were identified and these factors were categorized by the researchers, which can be introduced in 6 dimensions and 53 components. The 6 dimensions include: individual and professional characteristics of the educational system with 26 components, attitude within the educational system with 7 components, educational programs and guides with 3 components, teaching methodology with 7 components, internal coherence of educational resources with 4 components, and evaluation system information with 6 components. The dimension of individual and professional characteristics of the educational system, which has more components than other dimensions, and more studies pointed out these components. The most important components of this dimension include: individual and social characteristics, teachers’ scientific mastery, teaching quality, communication skills, ability to attract students’ attention, and classroom management. In the dimension of attitude within the educational system, respect for students, teacher’s attitude, support for students were among the most important components of this dimension. The dimension of educational programs and guides consist of linking content with different career, matching competencies with career development and appropriate planning. The teaching methodology dimension includes important components, encouraging and giving motivation, involving students in discussions, presenting lessons in a practical way, using interactive and innovative teaching methods. The most important components of the internal coherence of educational resources include helping to identify related sources and books, organizing the content, fully explaining lesson objectives and presenting lesson plan. In the dimension of evaluation system information, evaluation skills, appropriateness between course content and exam questions, diversity of student learning evaluation procedures, providing timely feedback are important components. The dimensions and components extracted from the studies are detailed in Table 2.

Table 2 Classification of evaluation dimensions and its components
Full size table

Discussion

This systematic review study was conducted with the aim of investigating the factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the perspective of students.

The results of the reviewed articles showed that these factors can be categorized into six dimensions: Individual and professional characteristics of the educational system, attitude within the educational system, educational programs and guides, teaching methodology, internal consistency of educational resources, and evaluation system information. Each dimension and extracted components were discussed with other studies. Which will be explained as follows.

Individual and professional characteristics of the educational system

Siamian’s et al., 2013 study showed that “proficiency in expression” is one of the most important characteristics of a good teacher [34]. On the other hand, the El-Sayed et al., 2018 study, many students believed that the personality and attractiveness of faculty members affect their ranking [26]. However, this result was not found in Amr’s et al, 2012 study [35], which may be because more than 90% of the students in the El-Sayed study [26]were female. Mohammadi et al., 2015 believed that interaction between students and other students, faculty members, and staff in the university environment increases their satisfaction and interest and affects the evaluation of students’ performance by teachers [36]. Similar results were found in a study conducted on Omani nursing students, which showed that professional competence of mentors was considered the most important evaluation feature, and the relationship between mentors and students was the second most important feature [37]. The results of the Daragahi et al., 2013 demonstrated classroom management received the highest score among the areas of teacher evaluation, followed by course content management, professional role, and teaching and guidance [38]. In some cases, female teachers received better evaluations than male teachers. This difference and lack of agreement between studies suggests that gender bias in student evaluations depends on university background, field, and student body [39]. On the other hand, the findings showed that there is racial bias in the evaluation of teachers, so that people of color, especially black faculty members, were ranked lower than their white counterparts [40]. Evidence showed that older teachers scored lower, but these results disappeared after controlling for other influential factors in evaluation, such as physical appearance and course difficulty [41]. However, in some studies, even after controlling for other influential factors in student evaluation of teachers, it was shown that older teachers receive lower scores [42, 43].

Attitude within the educational system

Respect is considered a sign of value, and the fact that students feel respected by their teachers may be associated with higher levels of security and comfort in academic participation. Students also reported experiencing or witnessing demeaning statements, nonverbal disregard, and differential treatment by instructors [44]. The results of the Malekshahi et al., 2011 study showed that students prioritize respect for the student as a very important factor in evaluation [45]. The results of some researches also showed that the availability of the teacher and the time spent on solving students’ educational problems are influential factors in the evaluation of teachers, and students believed that such teachers would receive better grades in evaluation [8, 46]. As our study also showed, the type of behavior, attitude, and approach of the educational system towards students in the evaluation of this group is very important and is one of the pillars that students learn from.

Educational programs and guides

Students considered proper planning as one of the dimensions of evaluating teachers. The results indicated that students consider seriousness, planning, and organization of topics to be highly important [34, 47]. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that teachers proficiency in lesson planning and organization plays a significant role in evaluating students [48]. This study also showed that expressing the link between topics and various professional aspects, required professional competencies, and appropriate planning for courses are among the factors that have an impact on evaluating teachers by students in this dimension.

Teaching methodology

In Lopez’s et al., 2015 study, it is stated that teachers should decide on what methods to use in the classroom (individual, group, collaborative, etc.), what teaching and learning strategies to implement, what types of social relationships and groupings to create with their students, what types of activities to propose and in what order, and how to deal with the diversity of students [16]. The use of innovative and different teaching techniques instead of just lecturing leads to better evaluation of teachers by students, and having a lot of knowledge does not necessarily make someone a good teacher [20]. One of the dimensions of teachers evaluation by students is the use of instructional aids relevant to the subject [47]. In today’s age, a teacher must be aware, prepared, and familiar with the latest science. Preparedness does not mean accumulating information, but rather educational and research abilities, and awareness of innovative teaching methods is one of the necessities of this key role [49]. In our study, in addition to the mentioned cases, it was shown that encouraging and motivating students, encouraging them to participate in discussions and presenting lessons practically, and considering the proportionality of the materials to the students level of knowledge are taken into account in evaluating teachers.

Internal coherence of teaching resources

Educational resources encompass a wide range of techniques, strategies, tools, and materials, from white/blackboards and markers to videos and the use of the internet [16]. A study showed that approximately 88% of the surveyed students considered the organization of instructional materials, fairness in grading, and learning of the taught materials to be very important in evaluating teachers [50]. On the other hand, helping students identify relevant course materials and textbooks by teachers and providing a comprehensive description of lesson objectives and presenting a lesson plan are also considered important by students.

Evaluation system information

The term “evaluation system” refers to a systematic set of processes that collects, analyzes, and interprets relevant information used to measure or describe each aspect of the educational reality, and based on this description, develops a value judgment using a criterion or model as a decision-making basis. Value judgments are made about various aspects that affect the teaching-learning process and confirm the skills acquired [51]. Skills in evaluation by teachers include the alignment of course content and exam questions, conducting progress evaluation tests, diversity in learning evaluation methods for students, and timely feedback to students, among other things.

Conclusion

The ultimate goal of the higher education system is to provide conditions for students to acquire knowledge, skills, and attitudes, and the main responsibility lies with the members of the faculty. Therefore, the need for continuous evaluation by stakeholders leads to the promotion and excellence of the university, and considering the students’ perspective as part of the university’s educational process is recommended to address deficiencies and improve education. The study results showed that from the students’ point of view, the individual and professional characteristics of the educational system, attitude within the educational system, educational programs and guides, teaching methodology, internal coherence of educational resources, and evaluation system information are factors affecting the evaluation of teachers. The results obtained in this study can be used in the selection of teachers and faculty members of universities because these results are derived from the factors affecting the evaluation of teachers from the students’ point of view. Also, by holding practical educational workshops that take into account the dimensions and components extracted in this study, it is possible to increase the quality of teaching and learning.

Weaknesses, strengths and limitations of the study

The strength of this study is the extensive review of databases and search engines, as well as the high sample size of the studies examined. The weakness of this study is the failure to consider articles in languages other than English and Persian, as well as only considering the students’ perspective and not taking into account the teachers’ perspective regarding the evaluation of teachers, which could be addressed in another project. It is recommended that future studies also consider intervention research. One limitation of the study was the lack of access to the full text of some articles.

Data availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Patacsil FF, Cenas PV, Roaring BF, Parrone JM. Evaluating Pangasinan State University Faculty Performance using associative rule analysis. Int J Inform Educ Technol. 2022;12(1).

  2. Al-Sudani D, Al-Abbas F, Al-Bannawi Z, Al-Ramadhan A. Professional attitudes and behaviors acquired during undergraduate education in the College of Dentistry, King Saud University. Saudi Dent J. 2013;25(2):69–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Paulsen MB. Evaluating teaching performance. New Dir Institutional Res. 2002;2002(114):5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yaminfirooz M, Esmaeili T. What Criteria do students use to EvaluateTheir teachers? Bimon Educ Strategies Med Sci. 2017;10(5):407–13.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Alibeygi AH, Barani S, Dehkordi MK. Designing a comprehensive model for teaching quality evaluation of faculty members: the case of Razi University. Curriculum Plann. 2019;16(63):21–34.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yaghoubi M, Salimi M, Karamali M, Ehsani-Chimeh E. Factors affecting the evaluation of teachers by systematic and Delphi methods in the military university in Tehran. J Mil Med. 2019;21(3):251–61.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nobakht M, RoudbariI M. Students assess the quality of instruction at the University of Tehran. J Teb Va Tazkiyeh. 2013;21(1):22–6.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Vakili A, Hajaghajani S, Rashidy-Pour A, Ghorbani R. An investigation of factors influencing student evaluation of teacher performance: A comprehensive study in Semnan University of Medical Sciences. Koomesh. 2011:93–103.

  9. Boring A, Philippe A. Reducing discrimination in the field: evidence from an awareness raising intervention targeting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching. J Public Econ. 2021;193:104323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mengel F, Sauermann J, Zölitz U. Gender bias in teaching evaluations. J Eur Econ Assoc. 2019;17(2):535–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wiley C. Standardised module evaluation surveys in UK higher education: establishing students’ perspectives. Stud Educational Evaluation. 2019;61:55–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hills SB, Naegle N, Bartkus KR. How important are items on a student evaluation? A study of item salience. J Educ Bus. 2009;84(5):297–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bagherian Far M, Nasr Esfahani AR, Ahanchian MR. A comparative study of assessment procedures in Universities of Iran and World Top universities. J New Thoughts Educ. 2020;16(2):29–74.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Vahabi A, Rahmani S, Rostami S, Vahabi B, Hosseini M, Roshani D. Factors affecting teacher evaluation scores: the students` viewpoints of Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2015;15(0):111–21.

    Google Scholar 

  16. López-Cámara A-B, González-López I, de León-Huertas C. Exploratory factor analysis to construct a model of university teaching evaluation indicators/Un análisis factorial exploratorio para la construcción de un modelo de indicadores de evaluación docente universitaria. Cultura Y Educación. 2015;27(2):337–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sepahi V, Khoshay A, POURMIRZA KR, Rostami P. Factors affecting student evaluation of teacher performance and its relationship with educational achievement. 2016.

  18. Soriano G, Aquino M. Characteristics of a good clinical teacher as perceived by nursing students and faculty members in a Philippine University College of Nursing. Int J Nurs Sci. 2017;7(4):96–101.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Spark MJ, Tawil R, O’Brien B, Sutherland-Plozza Z, Charles S, John DN. What are the attributes of good pharmacy faculty (lecturers)? An international comparison of the views of pharmacy undergraduate students from universities in Australia and Wales, UK. Pharm Educ. 2017;17.

  20. Kavosi Z, Nasab SB, Yusefi AR. Professors’ valuation criteria from the perspective of students of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences using Shannon’s Entropy technique in 2016. Strides Dev Med Educ. 2017;14(3).

  21. Hamedi P, Saleh S, Hojati H, Kalani N. The factors affecting the Tenured Faculty Member evaluation score from the perspective of students of Jahrom University of Medical Sciences in 2016. J Res Med Dent Sci. 2018;6(2).

  22. Shareinia H, Jahani M, Rahati J, Sokouti A, Mohammadian B, Najafi S. Relationship between Social and Academic Integration of Students with student evaluation of teacher performance in Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran in 2016. J Med Educ Dev. 2018;11(30):20–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yaghoubi M, Salimi M. Determining the factors affecting faculties’ educational evaluation in a military university of medical sciences in Tehran, Iran. J Military Med. 2018;20(1):73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ganbari S, Soltanzadeh V. Improving the quality of teaching in the light of the evaluation of professors: reflectively on students’ perspective. J Res Teach. 2018;6(2):15–31.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Heidari AA, Khooei A, Dadgarmoghadam M. Content analysis of educational assistants views regarding the evaluation of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences’ professors in educational clinical departments: a qualitative study. Future Med Educ J. 2018;8(4):3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  26. El-Sayed M, Simon MA, El-Wasify M, Nambiar V. Medical students’ perception of teaching evaluation and feedback: a study at Oman Medical College. Middle East Curr Psychiatry. 2018;25(3):131–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Arasteh MT, Pouragha B, Norouzinia R. Studying the conformity of self-assessment results of higher education lecturers with the assessment by others. Int J Pharm Res. 2018;10(3):269–76.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rahimi Moghadam, Hosseini MS, Fekri N, Emkani M. Survey of the priorities of teachers evaluation and effective factors from students viewpoint of Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences. Med Educ. 2019;7(2):14–22.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Myerholtz L, Reid A, Baker H, Rollins L, Page C. Residency faculty teaching evaluation: what do faculty, residents, and program directors want? Fam Med. 2019;51(6):509–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Basirat M, Motevasseli S, Mirfarhadi N, Taheri M. Dentistry Students´ viewpoints about evaluation of Faculty members during and at the end of Semester in 2016. Res Med Educ. 2019;11(1):3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Stroud L, Freeman R, Kulasegaram K, Cil TD, Ginsburg S. Gender effects in assessment of clinical teaching: does concordance matter? J Graduate Med Educ. 2020;12(6):710–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Arrona-Palacios A, Okoye K, Camacho-Zuñiga C, Hammout N, Luttmann-Nakamura E, Hosseini S, et al. Does professors’ gender impact how students evaluate their teaching and the recommendations for the best professor? Heliyon. 2020;6(10):e05313.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Griffith AL, Sovero V. Under pressure: how faculty gender and contract uncertainty impact students’ grades. Econ Educ Rev. 2021;83:102126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Siamian H, Bala Ghafari A, Aligolbandi K, Seyyede Fereshteh Reza Nezhad SF, Sharifi Nick M, Shahrabi A, et al. Characteristics of a good university lecturer according to students. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci. 2013;22(96):106–13.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Amr M, Al Saeed U, Shams T. Medical students’ perceptions of teaching evaluation in psychiatry. Basic Res J Educ Res Rev. 2012;1(5):81–4.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mohammadi M, Ghatrei H. The role of students’ Social and Academic Integration in their evaluation of faculties’ Educational Performance Quality in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. Iran J Med Educ. 2015;15(0):460–74.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Madhavanprabhakaran GK, Shukri RK, Hayudini J, Narayanan SK. Undergraduate nursing students’ perception of effective clinical instructor: Oman. Int J Nurs Sci. 2013;3(2):38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Dargahi H, Mohammadzadeh N. Faculty Members’ evaluation by students: valid or invalid. Iran J Med Educ. 2013;13(1):39–48.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Boring A, Ottoboni K. Student evaluations of teaching (mostly) do not measure teaching effectiveness. ScienceOpen Res. 2016.

  40. Chávez K, Mitchell KM. Exploring bias in student evaluations: gender, race, and ethnicity. PS: Political Sci Politics. 2020;53(2):270–4.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Stonebraker RJ, Stone GS. Too old to teach? The effect of age on college and university professors. Res High Educt. 2015;56(8):793–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sohr-Preston SL, Boswell SS, McCaleb K, Robertson D. Professor gender, age, and hotness in influencing college students’ generation and interpretation of professor ratings. 2016.

  43. Wilson JH, Beyer D, Monteiro H. Professor age affects student ratings: Halo effect for younger teachers. Coll Teach. 2014;62(1):20–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Liang CT, Rocchino GH, Gutekunst MH, Paulvin C, Melo Li K, Elam-Snowden T. Perspectives of respect, teacher–student relationships, and school climate among boys of color: a multifocus group study. Psychol Men Masculinities. 2020;21(3):345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. malekshahi f. Shaikhian a, tarrahi mj. Attitude of students of Lorestan Medical Science University towards priorities in teachers Assessment Iranian. J Nurs Res. 2011;5(19):16–24.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kerman Saravi F, Navidian A, Navabi Rigi SD. Nursing Student and Teachers’ Viewpoints toward Priorities in Teachers Evaluation. Iran J Nurs (2008–5923). 2011;24(72).

  47. Zare Bidaki M, Rajabpour Sanati A, Hashemian S, Rajai Ghannad F, Nadjafi Semnani M. A survey on students’ attitude toward teachers’ educational characteristics in Birjand University of Medical Sciences in 2014. J Med Educ Dev. 2014;9(2):41–8.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Aliasgharpour M, Monjamed Z, Bahrani N. Factors affecting students’ evaluation of teachers: Comparing viewpoints of teachers and students. Iran J Med Educ. 2010;10(2).

  49. Jirovec RLRC, Alvarez AR. Course evaluations. J Soc Work Educ. 2014;34(2):229–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Crumbley L, Henry BK, Kratchman SH. Students’ perceptions of the evaluation of college teaching. Quality assurance in Education; 2001.

  51. Zabalza MÁ, Beraza MÁZ. Competencias docentes del profesorado universitario: calidad y desarrollo profesional. Narcea Ediciones; 2003.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

There is no funding for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Trauma Nursing Research Center, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran

    Zahra Sooki & Khadijeh Sharifi

  2. Student Research Committee, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran

    Forough Faroughi

Authors
  1. Zahra Sooki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Khadijeh Sharifi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Forough Faroughi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

F.F. and Z.S. and KH.SH. wrote the main manuscript text and F.F. prepared figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Forough Faroughi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The name of the ethics committee: Ethics Committee of Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran. Approval ID: IR.KAUMS.NUHEPM.REC.1402.012.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary Material 2

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sooki, Z., Sharifi, K. & Faroughi, F. Investigating factors affecting the evaluation of teachers’ medical universities from the students’ point of view: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ 24, 187 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05161-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05161-3

Keywords

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

Contact us