ABSTRACT
Is there a bottom line?
The study of SET provides a fascinating look into assessment and the problems and consequences of a widely used instrument. The process has had some positive benefits. Instructors have been held responsible for their behavior and the content of their classes. Student input into their own education is a valuable goal, and institutions of higher learning are more welcoming and student-oriented than ever before. Given the prestige of certain researchers and their careful analyses of the SET process, it was once reasonable to defend the evaluations, but given the evidence from the past two decades, this optimism no longer appears to be justified. The irony is how little impact the research has had on the actual utilization of the evaluations. SET appears to have become more of an ideological and bureaucratic necessity than an evidence-driven one. Given the near universal applications of SET, a number of concluding questions still need to be addressed. Are students better educated? Has higher education been improved? Has society benefited? SET information must be held to a high standard. When evaluations consume considerable resources and constitute a major measure of faculty competency, more than good faith, theory, or administrative necessity is warranted.
