![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The technique of meta‐analysis has been credited with resolving research issues in the areas of class size and the efficacy of psychotherapy, yet meta‐analyses have failed to form a consensus regarding the effects of student ratings feedback to college teachers. This failure can be traced to three types of problems: (a) methodological problems with the technique of meta‐analysis; (b) the quality of the research base; and (c) the social and professional context in which research is conducted. Meta‐analysis is an important addition to what may become a rigorous review methodology, but it is not a substitute for the qualitative review. Comprehensive meta‐analyses should include (a) a discursive review of each study, (b) a report of how each effect‐size was calculated, (c) the location of the statistics on which the calculation was based, and (d) a discussion of the factors that limit the validity of the statistic. Individual authors can contribute to the validity of future quantitative syntheses by reporting their results more thoroughly and clearly.