Show source-provided references
1. The accuracy of student’s evaluations. Study of their evaluative competences
2. Fuentes, A.R., and Ortega, J.G. (2021). An Analytical Perspective of the Reliability of Multi-Evaluation in Higher Education. Mathematics, 9.
10.3390/math9111223 ↗3. Botaccio, L.A., Ortega, J.L.G., Rincón, A.N., and Fuentes, A.R. (2020). Evaluation for Teachers and Students in Higher Education. Sustainability, 12.
10.3390/su12104078 ↗4. Higher Education Funding Council for England (2021, August 20). National Student Survey Results 2016. Available online: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/lt/nss/results/2016/.
6. Paek, S., and Kim, N. (2021). Analysis of Worldwide Research Trends on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Sustainability, 13.
10.3390/su13147941 ↗8. NSS (2021, August 20). National Student Survey. Available online: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/lt/nss/results/2015/.
10. Symons, R. (2006). Listening to the Student Voice at the University of Sydney: Closing the Loop in the Quality Enhancement and Improvement Cycle, Australian Association for Institutional Research Forum. Available online: http://www.aair.org.au/app/webroot/media/pdf/AAIR%20Fora/Forum2006/Symons.pdf.
12. Does the student evaluation of teaching instrument really measure instructors’ teaching effectiveness? An econometric analysis of students’ perceptions in economics courses
10.1016/j.eap.2014.05.009 ↗14. Student Evaluations of Teaching: Are They Related to What Students Learn? A Meta-Analysis and Review of the Literature
10.1177/0273475308324086 ↗15. Are Student Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness Valid for Measuring Student Learning Outcomes in Business Related Classes? A Neural Network and Bayesian Analyses
10.1007/s11162-011-9229-0 ↗17. Ulmeanu, M.-E., Doicin, C.-V., and Spânu, P. (2021). Comparative Evaluation of Sustainable Framework in STEM Intensive Programs for Secondary and Tertiary Education. Sustainability, 13.
10.3390/su13020978 ↗18. Closed and Open-Ended Question Tools in a Telephone Survey About “The Good Teacher”: An Example of a Mixed Method Study
10.1177/1558689808331036 ↗19. The meaning of prompt feedback and other student perceptions of feedback: Should National Student Survey scores be taken at face value?
10.11120/ened.2011.06010031 ↗22. Using National Student Survey (NSS) qualitative data and social identity theory to explore students’ experiences of assessment and feedback
10.1080/23752696.2019.1601500 ↗24. Student evaluations of teaching: Improving teaching quality in higher education
28. Honesty on student evaluations of teaching: Effectiveness, purpose, and timing matter!
30. Oberrauch, A., Mayr, H., Nikitin, I., Bügler, T., Kosler, T., and Vollmer, C. (2021). I Wanted a Profession That Makes a Difference—An Online Survey of First-Year Students’ Study Choice Motives and Sustainability-Related Attributes. Sustainability, 13.
10.3390/su13158273 ↗34. An integrated strategy for the analysis of student evaluation of teaching: From descriptive measures to explanatory models
10.1007/s11135-016-0432-0 ↗35. A comprehensive empirical comparison of modern supervised classification and feature selection methods for text categorization
10.1002/asi.23110 ↗37. Wallace, B.C., Trikalinos, T.A., Lau, J., Brodley, C., and Schmid, C.H. (2010). Semi-automated screening of biomedical citations for systematic reviews. BMC Bioinform., 11.
10.1186/1471-2105-11-55 ↗38. Exploratory Visual Analysis and Interactive Pattern Extraction from Semi-Structured Data
10.1145/2812115 ↗39. Mining concepts of health responsibility using text mining and exploratory graph analysis
40. Semantic Web Search Results Clustering Using Lingo and WordNet
41. X-ray, lensing and Sunyaev-Zel’dovich triaxial analysis of Abell 1835 out to R200
43. Analyses of open-ended questions by renormalized associativities and textual networks: A study of perception of minerality in wine
10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.06.013 ↗45. Krosnick, J.A. (2018). Questionnaire design. The Palgrave Handbook of Survey Research, Springer International Publishing.
10.1007/978-3-319-54395-6_53 ↗46. Open-ended vs. close-ended questions in web questionnaires
47. Measuring Emotion in Open-ended Survey Responses: An Application of Textual Data Analysis
48. Determinants of First-Year Student Identity and satisfaction in higher education: A quantitative case study
10.1177/2158244019846689 ↗50. An Analysis of the Effects of Self-Esteem, Social Support, and Participation in Student Support Services on Students’ Adjustment and Commitment to College
10.2190/C0T7-YX50-F71V-00CW ↗51. It was nothing to do with the university, it was just the people: The role of social support in the first-year experience of higher education
10.1080/03075070500340036 ↗53. Wang, S., and Manning, C.D. (2012, January 8). Baselines and bigrams: Simple, good sentiment and topic classification. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Jeju, Korea.
55. Latent dirichlet allocation
56. Lau, J.H., Newman, D., and Baldwin, T. (2014, January 26–30). Machine reading tea leaves: Automatically evaluating topic coherence and topic model quality. Proceedings of the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Gothenburg, Sweden.
10.3115/v1/E14-1056 ↗58. Hettrick, S. (2013). What’s wrong with computer scientists?. Softw. Sustain. Inst., Available online: https://www.software.ac.uk/blog/2016-10-06-whats-wrong-computer-scientists.
59. (2021, December 22). Why Your Computer Science Degree Won’t Get You a Job. Available online: https://targetjobs.co.uk/career-sectors/it-and-technology/advice/323039-why-your-computer-science-degree-wont-get-you-an-it-job.
61. Silveira, N., Dozat, T., De Marneffe, M.C., Bowman, S.R., Connor, M., Bauer, J., and Manning, C.D. (2014, January 26–31). A gold standard dependency corpus for English. Proceedings of the LERC, Reykjavik, Iceland.
62. Wissler, L., Almashraee, M., Monett, D., and Paschke, A. (2014, January 26–27). The gold standard in corpus annotation. Proceedings of the IEEE GSC, Passau, Germany.