The purpose of the study is to determine if there is an effect on intervention/nonintervention attitudes associated with an introductory microeconomics class. The population consisted of all students enrolled in eighteen sections of Economics 1100 during the Fall semester, 1984, at North Texs State University. There were seven sections of Economics 1100, ten sections of Sociology 1510, and ten sections of Political Science 2010 used as control groups. The instruments used for pretesting and posttesting were the twenty-three item Attitude Scale and Demographic Questionnaire. The Attitude Scale contained twelve intervention and eleven nonintervention questions. Intervention questions were reverse scored so that a high score is noninterventionist and a low score is interventionist. Data were analyzed using a multiple linear regression to determine how each variable affected the intervention/nonintervention student attitudes.

The problem with which this investigation is concerned is that of determining the differential impact of an introductory economics course on the liberalism/conservatism of students, as compared to an introductory course in sociology or psychology. In addition, the study seeks to determine whether a significant relationship exists between a course in microeconomics and student conservatism. The source of data is the pre- and posttest class means of the scores on the Rokeach Opinionation Scale, measuring liberalism/conservatism. Chapter Five contains the conclusion that there is a significant difference between postmean scores on liberalism/conservatism of the students in economics and those in sociology or psychology. Also, an introductory course in microeconomics produces significantly different mean gains in student conservatism, as measured by the Opinionation Scale/compared to mean gains in an introductory course in sociology or psychology. A nonhypothesized relationship emerged between teacher attitude and student posttest mean scores on the Opinionation Scale.

This research sought to ascertain whether differences exist in the levels of student-faculty interactions between students taught by part-time and full-time faculty. Differences in the interactions of students with faculty were examined for four types of content (a) course-related, (b) intellectual, (c) career planning, and (d) informal socializing; for both in-class and out-of-class.

The problem of this investigation is to determine the relationships between certain cognitive, conative, and demographic variables and student ratings of instructors and introductory economics courses at North Texas State University. In addition, the study seeks to determine whether significant, interactive effects exist among the seventeen main variables: pretest, posttest, sex, age, college major, required course, actual grade, residence, SAT, socioeconomic class, Opinionation, Dogmatism, instructor, course rating, instructor rating, expected grade, and attitude. The principal sources of data are students' test scores on the Test of Understanding in College Economics, Rokeach Scales of Opinionation and Dogmatism, Modified Purdue Rating Scale, Personal Data Sheet with Hollingshead Index, and Questionnaire on Student Attitude Toward Economics-Revised. The organization of the study includes a statement of the problems, a review of the literature related to student ratings of courses and instructors, the ethodology used in the statistical analysis of the data, an analysis of the data, and the findings, conclusions, implications, and recommendations for additional research. Chapter I introduces the background and significance of the problems. Hypotheses are stated in the research form, terms in the study are defined, and limitations are delineated. Chapter II is a topically-arranged review of the related literature, including both experimental and descriptive studies. Literature is included on student ratings of courses and instructors, attitude, achievement, grades (actual and expected), and student characteristics. Chapter III includes information on the population of the study, the Test of Understanding in College Economics, Modified Purdue Rating Scale for College Instructors, the Rokeach Dogmatism and Opinionation Scales, the Questionnaire on Student Attitude Toward Economics-Revised, Hollingshead Two-Factor Index of Social Position, the variables used in each study, methods of data collection, and stepwise multiple linear regression, the basic statistical design employed in the study, with a nonlinearity factor added. In Chapter IV, data were analyzed and reported in tables of regression coefficients on Studies One through Six: actual grade, course rating, instructor rating, expected grade, student attitude, and posttest. A summary table is included for the significant, absolute beta coefficients for these six studies. Chapter V concludes that grade expectations, Opinionation and Dogmatism, ability levels, and attitude influence student ratings. For example, very bright students tended to be more discriminating in their ratings of their courses. Students who liked the instructor and were less open-minded tended to rate the course high. Grade expectations tended to exert a negative influence on course ratings; students with high grade expectations rated the course low, and students with low grade expectations rated the course high. The combination of a student with high grade expectations and a student with high SAT score resulted in a low rating for the instructor. A student's background (Dogmatism, Opinionation, and place of residence) influenced his attitude toward economics. Higher grade expectations were correlated significantly with a favorable attitude toward economics. Significant demographic variables related to conative and cognitive variables were SAT, expected grade, actual grade, Hollingshead socioeconomic class, residence, Dogmatism, and Opinionation. The implication from these findings is to use student ratings cautiously as a consideration for university merit raises and/or faculty promotions. Reasons for caution stem from the significant findings of the influence on student ratings of several cognitive, conative, and demographic variables. Too much appears to be happening in the teaching-learning process which cannot be measured accurately.