TDNet Discover

This quantitative study examined the relationship between adult learners’ perceptions of instructional clarity and feedback usefulness and overall faculty evaluation scores in higher education. Based on Knowles’ theory of andragogy, the study investigated how student-centered assessment frameworks reflected adult learners’ instructional experiences and whether these perceptions varied across academic disciplines. The study utilized a secondary dataset from a 360-degree evaluation system, analyzing student-level feedback from approximately 5,000 course evaluations. Independent variables were extracted from Likert-scale questions aligned to clarity and feedback constructs, and the dependent variable was a composite faculty evaluation score. Data were analyzed using XLSTAT for multiple linear regression to address the first research question and one-way ANOVA to address the second. Specifically, the study asked: (1) What was the relationship between adult learners’ perceptions of instructional clarity and feedback usefulness and overall faculty evaluation scores? (2) How did adult learners’ perceptions of instructional clarity and feedback usefulness differ across academic disciplines? Findings indicated that neither instructional clarity nor feedback usefulness significantly predicted overall faculty evaluation scores, and no significant disciplinary differences were observed. Diagnostic results revealed ceiling effects and high multicollinearity, suggesting that the evaluation instrument lacked sensitivity to capture nuanced learner perceptions. These results suggest that while adult learners consistently value clarity and feedback, institutional evaluation systems may not effectively reflect these priorities. Recommendations include expanding instruments to mitigate ceiling effects, employing qualitative or mixed-methods designs, and examining demographic subgroup differences.