Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness and Student Performance Across Diverse Courses: An Analysis of Final Exam Scores and Teaching Techniques

Vicente E. Montano; Glenndon C. Sobrejuanite

doi:10.17309/jltm.2025.6.1.03

Authors

Vicente E. Montano University of Mindanao https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9117-568X
Glenndon C. Sobrejuanite University of Mindanao https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7841-7912

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17309/jltm.2025.6.1.03

Keywords:

teaching effectiveness, student performance, Bayesian analysis, pedagogical strategies, business education, learning outcomes

Abstract

Objectives. This study examines teaching effectiveness and student performance for four business-related courses: Monetary Policy and Central Banking (FM 221), Good Governance and Social Responsibility (BAHR 213), Consumer Behavior (MM 212), and Introduction to Microeconomics (BE 121).

Materials and methods. 147 students participated in the study, and Bayesian pairwise comparison, descriptive statistics, and effect size analysis were used to determine which courses had significantly different performance scores.

Results. The results show that BAHR 213 and MM 212 students performed better than FM 221 and BE 121 students, indicating the role of active learning strategies, structured content delivery, and student engagement techniques for better learning. Lower performance with higher variability of scores in FM 221 and BE 121 indicates the requirement for pedagogical improvements, additional support for students, and curriculum modifications.

Conclusions. Bayesian analysis confirmed that the differences are statistically significant: the first discriminant function explains 86.8% of the variation, p < 0.001; the second function explains 13.2%, p < 0.001. The paper concludes with a discussion on the need to refine instructional methods and targeted interventions to improve student outcomes. Future studies need to look into longitudinal studies and controlled pedagogical experiments that can further validate these findings and enhance best practices for effective teaching strategies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Vicente E. Montano, University of Mindanao

Business Economics Department, College of Business Administration Education
Bolton St., 8000, Davao City, Philippines
vicente_montano@umindanao.edu.ph

Glenndon C. Sobrejuanite, University of Mindanao

Business Economics Department, College of Business Administration Education
Bolton St., 8000, Davao City, Philippines
glenndon_sobrejuanite@umindanao.edu.ph

References

Akiri, A. A. (2013). Effects of teachers’ effectiveness on students’ academic performance in public secondary schools; Delta State-Nigeria. Journal of Educational and social Research, 3(3), 105-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2013.v3n3p105

Phye, G. D. (1984). Student performance and the evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, 11(2), 92-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top1102_9

Emery, C. R., Kramer, T. R., & Tian, R. G. (2003). Return to academic standards: a critique of student evaluations of teaching effectiveness. Quality assurance in Education, 11(1), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880310462074 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880310462074

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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.007

Krätzig, G. P., & Arbuthnott, K. D. (2006). Perceptual learning style and learning proficiency: A test of the hypothesis. Journal of educational psychology, 98(1), 238. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.238 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.238

Kleinsasser, R. C. (2014). Teacher efficacy in teaching and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 44, 168-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.07.007

Delialioğlu, Ö. (2012). Student engagement in blended learning environments with lecture-based and problem-based instructional approaches. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 310-322.

Koopman, M., & Beijaard, D. (2024). Nuances and details in student approaches to learning in innovative secondary education using profiles. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 6, 100316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100316

Darling-Hammond, L., Adamson, F., & Abedi, J. (2010). Beyond basic skills: The role of performance assessment in achieving 21st century standards of learning (p. 52). Stanford Center for Opportunity Pollcy in Education.

Birenbaum, M., & Dochy, F. (Eds.) (2012). Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning processes and prior knowledge (Vol. 42). Springer Science & Business Media.

Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: issues and practice, 30(1), 3-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2010.00195.x

Ratanawongsa, N., Thomas, P. A., Marinopoulos, S. S., Dorman, T., Wilson, L. M., Ashar, B. H., ... & Bass, E. B. (2008). The reported validity and reliability of methods for evaluating continuing medical education: a systematic review. Academic Medicine, 83(3), 274-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181637925

Price, P. C., Jhangiani, R. S., & Chiang, I. C. A. (2015). Reliability and validity of measurement. Research methods in psychology.

Tripon, C. (2019). POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF TEACHER ASSESSMENT BIAS IN SCHOOLS. Journal of Innovation in Psychology, Education and Didactics, 23(1), 101-116.

Whitesides, H., & Beck, J. S. (2020). “There is Subjectivity, There is Bias”: Teacher Candidates’ Perceptions of Equity in Data Literacy for Teaching. The Teacher Educator, 55(3), 283-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2020.1725792

Carpenter, S. K., Witherby, A. E., & Tauber, S. K. (2020). On students’(mis) judgments of learning and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Applied research in Memory and cognition, 9(2), 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.12.009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.12.009

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American economic review, 104(9), 2593-2632. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2593

Hein, G. E. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. Institute for Inquiry. Available at:/http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning. htmlS.

Kumar, A. (2013). Formative assessments as pedagogic tools. International Journal of Human Sciences, 10(1), 750-759.

Hagstrom, F. (2006). Formative learning and assessment. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(1), 24-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/15257401060280010301 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15257401060280010301

Duane, B. T., & Satre, M. E. (2014). Utilizing constructivism learning theory in collaborative testing as a creative strategy to promote essential nursing skills. Nurse Education Today, 34(1), 31-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.03.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.03.005

Collins, S. R. (2008). Enhanced student learning through applied constructivist theory. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal, 2(2).

Dwiyanti, R. (2024, June). The Group Final Exam with Constructivist Learning Theory as a Solution to Overcome the Situation if Students Losing Interest in Learning After the Exam. In International Conference on Elementary Education, 6(1), 428-434.

Wu, D., Bieber, M., Hiltz, S. R., & Han, H. J. (2004, January). Constructivist learning with participatory examinations. In 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the (pp. 10-pp). IEEE. https://aisel.aisnet.org/jise/vol19/iss3/9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2004.1265046

Aydogdu, B., & Ay, T. S. (2016). Determination of teacher characteristics that support constructivist learning environments. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16(63). DOI: https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.63.17

Nurhuda, A., Al Khoiron, M. F., Azami, Y. S. I., & Ni’mah, S. J. (2023). Constructivism Learning Theory in Education: Characteristics, Steps and Learning Models. Research in Education and Rehabilitation, 6(2), 234-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51558/2744-1555.2023.6.2.234

Fernando, S. Y., & Marikar, F. M. (2017). Constructivist teaching/learning theory and participatory teaching methods. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 6(1), 110-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v6n1p110

Moallem, M. (2001). Applying constructivist and objectivist learning theories in the design of a web-based course: Implications for practice. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 4(3), 113-125.

Ng’ambi, D., & Johnston, K. (2006). An ICT-mediated Constructivist Approach for increasing academic support and teaching critical thinking skills. Journal of EducationalTechnology & Society, 9(3), 244-253.