FINAL Research Paper

Teacher Likability 1
Running head: TEACHER LIKABILITY AND STUDENT PERFORMANCE
The Correlation Between Science Teacher Likability
and Corresponding Academic Performance in Seventh Graders
Thomas J. Chester
April 26, 2011
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Masters of Arts in Teaching Degree
University of Arkansas
THE CORRELATION BETWEEN SCIENCE TEACHER LIKABILITY AND

CORRESPONDING ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN SEVENTH GRADERS
Abstract
Research on the topic of teacher likability has been done almost exclusively at the
college level. Students at the secondary level have a drastically different
perspective and motivation for attending school. Many educators hold to the belief
that students’ feelings toward their teachers influence how well they perform
academically. This can be seen in the types of questions asked in student
evaluations of teachers. This research attempts to find the relationship between
teacher likability and academic performance, as well as the general traits that
students find likable and dislikable in teachers. Both quantitative and qualitative
data is used. This study surveys thirty-two seventh graders from two different
school districts in Northwest Arkansas to rate their science teacher’s overall
likability. This score, measured by an adaptation of the Reysen Likability Scale, is
compared with each student’s corresponding grade. The participants were also
asked to rate other statements relating to science as a subject, if their science
teacher motivates them to do their best work, and how much they believe teacher
likability effects how much they learn. The qualitative data focuses on the general
qualities in teacher that students find likable and dislikable. While no significant
correlation between the teacher likability and grade was found, a large correlation
between the high subgroup’s teacher likability rating and overall grade suggest that
some elusive mechanism may be at work. The general qualities that students find
likable were reflective of the literature’s definition of likable qualities. However,
the dislikable qualities given were somewhat unexpected. Other findings in this
research, the great gap in the literature on this topic, and the important suggestions
on how to improve studies in this area support a basis for further research.
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
For many students, there is a larger obstacle to learning than the typical aversion to work.
Even if the subject area is captivating, useful to them for future application, and easy to
comprehend, a student may still choose to not learn. For many, the reason is that they do not
have a positive relationship with their teacher. Teacher likability and student learning are two
commonly linked areas under discussion. In a particular study, d’Apollonia and Abrami (1997)
analyzed seventeen different student rating forms and found the common factors that these forms
identified as essential to effective teaching. According to student rating forms, it would seem
that effective teaching boils down to one factor: is the teacher interesting and likable? (Delucchi
& Pelowski, 2000)
Most students have experienced a class with a dislikable teacher. The subject area is
interesting, and the class is worthy of attention; but, for some reason, the student dislikes the
teacher, causing him or her to unintentionally –or even purposefully, tune the teacher out. What
motivates students to do their best? Is it grades, subject interest, avoiding punishment, etc.? The
main motivation to succeed in school may derive from a respect for the teacher, where a desire to
not disappoint the teacher drives the learning process. It is possible that classroom success starts
here and the other positive traits follow. Because a student likes or respects a teacher, they will
listen and find that they are genuinely interested in the subject. Or maybe, the student, because
they like and respect the teacher, studies and earns a good grade, causing them to see the
relationship between hard work and academic success. Cottinger (2002) put forward the idea
that the more likable a person is the more positive influence that person has, especially in certain
positions such as being a teacher.
The following is a real-life example. Reece, a seventh grader struggling in school, has
trouble paying attention. In fact, he is failing everything and never does any of his work except
for one class: science. He doesn’t have any particular interest in the subject, but, for some
reason, he has decided that he should put in some extra effort in this class. He doesn’t
communicate with any of his teachers except one: the science teacher. Reece brings this teacher
gifts and often stops by the teacher’s classroom to say hello. Grades are obviously not
motivating him to try to succeed in school; he is barely passing. His interest in science isn’t so
overwhelming that it calls for this drastic change in behavior. And, from his number of visits to
the principal’s office, punishment is not a drastic enough consequence to stop his practices.
Some teachers bring out the best in their students: what is it about them that does so? Cottinger
(2002) states that likability is based on certain traits like honesty, empathy, humor, politeness,
positive thinking, and supportiveness. Does Reece’s reaction to his science teacher mean the
other teachers do not have any of these qualities? Probably not. However, there are teachers
who turn this student’s motivation off. What is it about these teachers that cause this?
Before this problem can be accurately addressed, one must recognize the individuality in
what likability means. At the end of each semester, college students answer “student evaluations
of teaching” forms (SETs) on how well a professor teaches. These results are important and are
taken into consideration in tenure and promotion decisions (Delucchi & Pelowski, 2000).
However, SETs are many times used as likability reports, and tests teaching ability poorly. On
that same note, using college students to measure likability and its correlation between issues
like teaching effectiveness, perceptions of learning, or scores on standardized testing is not
entirely relevant when comparing those results to students in junior high. College students are
customers taking classes that they choose; junior high students are required by law to attend their
classes. So, some students may like teachers because of good rapport; others may like teachers
for behaviors contrary to good teaching like lenient grading and simple assignments. (Greenwald
& Gilmore 1997). Despite these differences in interpreting what is considered “likable”, each
student forms an opinion about their teachers. By looking at these views, a relationship may be
found between these individuals’ feelings toward their teachers and their respective grades. With
further questioning, a trend of personality characteristics (common specific traits that make
students interpret as likable or dislikable) may develop. There may be certain traits common to
turning on –or turning off a student to liking his or her teacher. This study will shed more light
on what qualities teachers may need to emphasize or avoid doing in the classroom.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to identify students’ perception of their science teacher’s
likability and its relationship with his or her corresponding academic performance in the class. It
also attempts to find trends in what characteristics students list as distinctly likable or dislikable
about a teacher.
Significance of the Study
There is a good amount of literature on the likability of a person in general, but there is not
much research on what specifics make teachers likable to their students –or if teacher likability
matters in academic achievement at the secondary level. Most, if not all, research in this area has
been conducted at the college level, which is very different from the junior high level. All
teachers need to be aware of their students’ perception of them, especially if it has a significant
impact on academic success. If there is a strong positive correlation between teacher likability
and academic success, there might be clues as to what specific characteristics of the teacher that
the students found likable or dislikable. From there, schools could implement those practices or
coach teachers into incorporating those traits in their classroom to improve student performance.
It is possible, with further research on the subject, that this knowledge could be applied to other
venues outside of teaching. For example, is there a strong correlation between employer
likability and hard work from the employees?
Specific Research Questions This project will ask the following questions:
1. Is there a correlation between teacher likability (measured by questionnaires) and academic
success (grade in course)?
2. What traits of teachers do students commonly list as likable or dislikable?
3. Do the likability ratings given by students affect how much they believe they learn from
the teacher (measured by questionnaires)?
Method
The study will require students to answer a questionnaire (Appendix B & C). The
questions will measure the students’ opinions of items like teacher likability, teaching
effectiveness, and subject interest. Subject interest is taken into account because it is possible
that a student may like or dislike a teacher because of the subject taught. Separate from the
questions about the teacher, they will be asked to list traits that they see as distinctly likable and
dislikable traits found in teachers they have had. After this, they will be asked to rate how much
teacher likability determines how much they feel they learn from them. Before the questionnaire
is given, each student’s percentage grade in the class is written on the top of his or her paper by
the researcher. This is to ensure the students’ answers remain confidential and the precise grade
percentage is accurately recorded. If the student’s grade was recorded after answering the
questionnaire, the student may fear the researcher will connect the student to his or her score and,
thus, will know his or her answers; this concern may lead to skewed data. With grades being
recorded as they are handed out, their anonymity will be assured. Also, the teacher will not be in
the classroom or see the results.
Assumptions The following assumptions apply to this study:
1. Students will respond honestly to questionnaire questions.
2. Students will participate in all activities.
3. Students will know what or why they like the teacher.
Limitations Imposed on the Researcher
There are three major limitations of this research.
1. The data will only show correlations, not causations.

2. Even if a trend of likable/dislikable traits from student lists emerges, they cannot be
generalized to schools in general. Because cultures, social norms, and value sets are largely
regionally-based, likability traits may differ greatly depending on where the research is
conducted.
3. It is very difficult to separate the likability of a teacher from the likability of a teacher’s
subject area.
Delimitations
1. The questionnaire is designed to measure teacher likability, but it is very difficult to
differentiate the teacher from the subject that they teach.
2. The study does not take into account any differences between teachers (gender, age, teaching
style, etc.).
3. Outside events that may skew individual students’ data cannot be controlled for. Many junior
high students are influenced by day-to-day issues (bad test score, family problems, etc.), and this
may affect the scores given on the teacher’s likability ratings. While this is unavoidable, human
error like this should become negligible with increased sample size.
4. Results will be limited to the students who are present and willing to participate.
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This research addresses two major questions. First, is there a correlation between teacher
likability and academic success? And second, what are the traits that students identify as likable
or dislikable? The importance of these questions is clear. If teacher likability and student
performance is not linked in any significant way, then there is one less thing for teachers,
administrators, and other contributors to education need to take into account. However, if there
is some type of correlation, each party will want to find means to improve likability.
The primary research done on this topic has been in the college setting (Brady, 1994,
d’Appollonia & Abrami, 1997, Delucchi & Pelowski, 2000, Marsh, 1980, etc). This presents
several issues, especially when attempting to relate the findings to younger students. First of all,
college students choose their profession, which classes they enroll in, and their professors.
Younger students do not have these choices. They are required to attend school, while college
students choose to. This means that there are two very different motivations driving each
group’s decisions and opinions. Secondly, college students have different expectations than
students in junior high. College students are paying customers training for future employment in
their field of expertise; junior high students simply want to pass the class and go. The lack of
research done for secondary education is a gap in the literature that needs to be addressed. Junior
high and high school teachers are just as important –if not more so, than college instructors in the
education of young people. They typically form lasting relationships with the students and are
very influential in these young peoples’ important time of growth.
Finally, there is a good amount of literature on the likability of a person in general, but
there is not a great deal of research on what specifics make teachers likable to their students
(Cottringer, 2002, Delucchi & Pelowski, 2000, Uranowitz & Doyle, 1978, etc.). This may be
due to the lack of any major scientific finding stating a definite positive correlation between
teacher likability and academic achievement, so there is no need for a more precise definition
than the general one already developed.
Teacher likability & college students
Findings on likability in education are mixed. Recent work has renewed this debate over
likability’s relationship to student learning and performance. Delucchi & Pelowski (2000)
reviewed over 1000 student evaluations of teachers (SETs) and discovered a statistically
significant positive effect of teacher likability on overall rating of teaching ability. However, the
results did not show an effect of teacher likability on students’ perception of learning. It would
be expected that high teacher likability and teaching ability would translate into higher
perceptions of learning, but this has not been shown to be the case. Morgan & Bergeron (2007)
examined the effects of teacher likability on student compliance. The results show that there is
no more compliance for a likable teacher than for a unlikable one. This is could be because the
participants were tested using fictitious teachers; a personal relationship with an actual teacher
may produce more accurate results (Wilson, 2006). There was a strong correlation, though,
between teacher likability and willingness of future enrollment in courses with the likable
teacher.
The central finding in the Morgan & Bergeron study (2007) suggests a disturbing idea.
Instructors who focus more on likability can produce higher student evaluations, which are
commonly reviewed in tenure and promotion decisions, may neglect to stress effort and enhance
learning. Even more disturbing, Weinstein (1987) presents evidence that teachers who score
high on student evaluations “do not usually produce students who predictably score high on
standardized tests of academic achievement, and do not typically produce students who
predictably score high on more usual nonstandardized classroom examinations” (p. 273). This
insinuation is made even worse in a study that found teachers, judged by students as outstanding,
produce students who leave the class knowing less than those students with teachers judged as
poor (Coker et al., 1980).
On the other hand, a more recent study shows more hopeful results. Brady (1994) gave
undergraduates descriptions of four hypothetical male professors: the demanding-positive
professor, the demanding-negative professor, the easy-positive professor, and the easy-negative
professor. Unsurprisingly, the positive professor was considered more effective than the
negative one. Astoundingly though, the positive, demanding professor was seen as more
effective than the positive, easy professor and was liked better! Thus, students see a teacher who
exhibits positive traits like kindness and humor as more effective and likable. Also, students see
the demanding teacher as not only more effective, but more likable as well.
The relationship between student expectations and likability
The vast majority of college students expect instruction that effectively promotes
understanding of that subject and how to retain and use that information for future usage. When
it comes to likability, some students may like teachers because of good rapport; others may like
teachers for behaviors contrary to good teaching like lenient grading and simple assignments
(Greenwald & Gilmore 1997). College students also pay for tuition in those classes. When the
time comes to fill out the “student evaluations of teaching” forms (SETs), student consumerism
may cloud the judgment of many. These evaluations are sometimes referred to as “popularity
contests” because some believe they do not accurately reflect the teaching ability of the
professor. But, if teacher likability is positively correlated to high academic achievement,

teachers who score the highest on these evaluations should have students who score high on
assessments over the material than those students who have teachers who score low on these
evaluations. Marsh (1980) predicted that college professors “need only to give higher grades
and demand little work of students to be evaluated favorably” (p. 234). Surprisingly, Marsh
found that the demanding professors got higher evaluations than the easy professors from
students. This leads to the question: what is likability?
What is likability?
Not surprisingly, likability is based on traits like honesty, empathy, humor, politeness,
positive thinking, and supportiveness (Cottinger, 2002). Uranowitz & Doyle state that likability
is based on several items (1978). Likability is enhanced by attributes like warmth, sincerity,
intelligence, and other positive dispositions, but there is much more. Those who offer praise, are
cooperative, and disclose information about them tend to be more likable. Also, similarities
between two parties cause an increase in likability. Other studies have shown this as well. For
example, African American students perform better in school when taught by an African
American teacher (Dee, 2004). It goes the same for Anglo-White students who have an Anglo-
White teacher. And again, at the college level, students see demanding professors as more
effective and likable than easy ones (Brady, 1994). So one could hypothesize that the ideal
teacher would be positive, demanding, and of the same background and race as his or her
students.
Conclusion
The fact that most –if not all research on teacher likability has been done at the college
level leaves an enormous gap in the scientific literature. It also leaves a huge question for all of
the teachers in junior high and high school: does how much students like a teacher have any
relationship to how well they perform academically in the class? This is a very important
question with so many major state and national tests these students take each year. If there is a
relationship, what makes these teachers likable? Research shows that college students like their
teachers to be positive and demanding. Is it the same for younger students? This research
attempts to answer these questions and provide a bigger picture of the educational process. In
the end, the findings will hopefully be a useful tool into enhanced understanding and future
research of the topic.

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD
Introduction
Most research on teacher likability has been done using participants at the collegiate
level. These “student evaluations of teaching” (SETs) are used as gauges of how well a
professor teaches and are taken into consideration in tenure and promotion decisions (Delucchi
& Pelowski, 2000). Using college students to measure likability and its correlation between
issues like teaching effectiveness, perceptions of learning, or scores on standardized testing is not
entirely relevant when comparing those results to students in junior high. Student consumerism
may cloud the judgment of many college students filling out these evaluations. Students who are
paying customers for the class may expect to be entertained rather than challenged to learn and
accomplish something (Edmundsen, 1997). Students in secondary education are obligated to be
there; it is not an option. Learning the material, for the most part, is essential to pass the class,
and teachers play a crucial role in the process. By law, they must attend school. To continue,
they must pass the class, and, thus, they must learn the material. The question in consideration is
whether or not teacher likability is a factor in how much or how well students learn.
Research Questions
The study attempts to show the relationship between teacher likability and academic
performance in the science classroom by asking the following questions.
1. Is there a correlation between likability ratings and student grades?
2. What are the traits students list as making teachers likable/dislikable?
3. What is the relationship between how much a student likes a teacher and how
much they believe they can learn from them?

Nature of the Study
The study is based on both qualitative and quantitative data. The researcher presented the
participants, whose parents had already read and signed the informed consent form, with
questionnaires that contain both quantitative data and qualitative data. For example, their grade
in the class, class likability ratings, teacher likability ratings, and other items have been assigned
quantitative values. The qualities that each participant lists as making a teacher likable or
dislikable has been analyzed qualitatively by the researcher.
Subjects
The subjects were thirty-two seventh graders attending two separate schools in Northwest
Arkansas. Each participant had been in the same general science class with the same science
teacher throughout the year. Permission to test these students was obtained from each science
teacher and each school’s principal. Any and all students in these science classes could have
participated.
Instruments
The questionnaire is an adaption of an established likability questionnaire. The Reysen
Likability Scale (Appendix A) has already been tested for validity and reliability through critical
analysis. The scale was tested with college students rating a target individual for general
likability. The scale has also been compared with several other well-established scales such as
Goldberg’s Five Factor Model. The changes made to the original questionnaire will exclude
questions six, seven, and nine (Appendix B). This edited version of the instrument was piloted
and shown to be appropriate for junior high students. The second part of the questionnaire asked
students to list traits in teachers that they feel are likable and dislikable along with other
qualitative questions (Appendix C). The readability and process for these questionnaires was
tested and shown as appropriate for students at this grade level in measuring likability.
Research Procedure
Before the study began, IRB approval was obtained. This study attempts to find the
correlation between teacher likability and academic performance. After gaining consent from
both the students and their parents, the researcher wrote the current overall grade for each student
in the top right corner of the questionnaire. The researcher handed the student the questionnaire
and instructed them to leave it face down on the desk. Once all students had a questionnaire with
their grade in the top right corner, the participants answered the questionnaire. This was done in
their science classroom, but the science teacher was never present. The science teacher was in
place since the beginning of the school year. The participants may or may not have known the
researcher. Some have had the researcher as an intern teacher but still answered questions based
on their regular teacher. The participants had thirty minutes to complete the questionnaire,
which was more than enough time. Before allowing the students to begin, each participant’s
confidentiality was reiterated, and they were encouraged to answer honestly and thoughtfully.
The researcher collected the finished questionnaires and took them out of the room.
Timeline
Before the study began, IRB approval was obtained. The administration of the
questionnaires was given during the early spring. The participants had had their teacher for the
full school year. Permission from each science teacher to administer the questionnaire was
gained prior to distributing the informed consent forms. All students present and with signed
consent forms from both student and his or her parent/guardian were given the questionnaire.
Data Reduction
The results from the questionnaires were compiled and interpreted by the researcher and
other associates. With the likability scale given quantitative values, the Pearson’s correlation
coefficient was found. This provided a correlation between teacher likability and grade
percentage, which is this study’s main focus. Other correlations were found as well. The results
from the list of likable and dislikable traits were lumped into categories to provide an overall
picture of the trends. The review of the literature on this topic provides a solid basis for this
particular issue. Studying this correlation provides essential basic knowledge for continuing
research in this area.
Validity and Reliability
The likability scale was based on a well-established instrument. This instrument was not
specifically designed for teacher likability, which is why certain questions were omitted. Asking
a junior high student to determine whether or not he or she would like to be roommates with the
teacher or if he or she finds the teacher physically attractive would be inappropriate. While it
was piloted for appropriateness, it was the first time this specific, edited instrument was used in
assessing this age group. Reliability of this scale was not problematic, but it had not been tested
in how well it reflects teacher likability. Despite these issues, the instrument was readable and
appropriate for the participants it is designed to measure. One threat to validity in this study is
the difficulty in separating a student’s opinion of the teacher from that of the subject being
taught. This will always be an issue in any study focusing on teachers.

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Introduction
The instruments used in this study were based on an established likability questionnaire.
The Reysen Likability Scale (Appendix A) has already been tested for validity and reliability
through critical analysis. The scale was tested with college students rating a target individual for
general likability. The scale has also been compared with several other well-established scales
such as Goldberg’s Five Factor Model. The changes made to the original questionnaire will
exclude questions six, seven, and nine (Appendix B). The second part of the questionnaire asked
students to list traits in teachers that they feel are likable and dislikable along with other
qualitative questions (Appendix C). This study consists of both quantitative and qualitative
data. Each Likert scale answer was given a quantitative value:
1. This person is friendly.

Very Strongly Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Very Strongly
Disagree Disagree Agree Agree
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
And for the questions in Appendix C that required the student writing, the qualities were lumped
together into major groups. A quality had to be stated by at least two students to be included in
analysis. Each idea and thought stated by only one student will be reported, but will not be
included in the tables along with the major qualities. For example, the likable quality in a
teacher of having a “nice voice” was unique to only one participant and will not be included in
any table of the major themes.
Quantitative Results
This data addresses the main question of the study: Is there a correlation between teacher
likability (measured by questionnaires) and academic success (grade in course)? The first page
of the questionnaire was designed specifically to find the likability of a person (Appendix B).
The participants answered these questions with their science teacher in mind. The answers to all
of these questions were then averaged for all thirty-two participants to find each student’s overall
rating of teacher likability (Table 1).
Table 1: Sample of Question Ratings and Mean Likability Scores
Participant Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Mean

A 6 6 6 6 5 6 5 7 6 5.875

B 5 5 4 5 3 3 2 5 5 4

C 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1.75
Participant A rated the teacher with the average likability score of 5.875; this student can be
considered as strongly liking his or her science teacher. Participant B is overall neutral about his
or her teacher, and participant C, with an average score 1.75, is considered as strongly disliking
the teacher. The average likability rating toward the science teacher was 4.27, which is neutral.
However, overall, fifty percent of the participants gave their science teacher a positive review in
terms of likability, twenty-five percent gave a neutral review, and twenty-five percent gave their
science teacher a negative review as seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Average Likability Ratings
12
Number of Students
10
8
6
4
2
0
Very Strongly Dislike Neutral Like Strongly Very
Strongly Dislike (2.5-‐3.4) (3.5-‐4.4) (4.5-‐5.4) Like Strongly
Dislike (1.5-‐2.4) (5.5-‐6.4) Like
(1-‐1.4) (6.5-‐7)
Rated Likeability Score
This numerical figure of a student’s rating of his or her science teacher coupled with his or her
overall grade in the class leads to insight on whether or not teacher likability is related to
academic performance. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient was found comparing the average
likability ratings and their corresponding grade percentage in the class. These values do not
reflect any specific characteristics in individuals. When measuring opinions, there will be
variations in interpretation and applicability; however, individuals with higher average scores
will be more likely to exhibit certain positive feelings toward their science teacher than those
who rate their teacher with a low average score. These values are only meant to try to show
trends and cannot be generalized beyond this small group of students.
Table 2: Comparison between Grade Percentage and Average Likability Rating
Grade Average Grade Average

Percentage Likability Rating Percentage Likability Rating
Participant 1 72 3.375 Participant 17 88 2.375
2 75 5.75 18 88 4
3 78 4.5 19 88 4.5
4 80 2.875 20 89 5.125
5 82 4.75 21 89 2.125
6 82 3.875 22 89 3
7 83 5.875 23 89 5.5
8 84 5.125 24 90 3.875
9 84 5.571 25 90 3.875
10 84 3.5 26 90 3.875
11 85 4.625 27 91 4.25
12 85 5.125 28 92 4.75
13 86 1.75 29 92 5.875
14 86 3.125 30 92 5.25
15 87 4.375 31 94 5.375
16 87 3.375 32 95 5.375
The correlation between grade percentage and average likability rating is r = 0.0953, which is
not statistically significant. According to accepted values, it is just below the cutoff for a small
correlation. There is a small positive correlation between the two values (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Positive Correlation between Values

Average Likability Rating 7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Grade Percentage
When separating the participants into subgroups based on grade percentage, the correlations
show stronger results. There is a large positive correlation between average likability rating and
grade percentage in the high third (0.5199) of the participants. There is also a small positive
correlation between these values in the low third (0.2196) of the participants.
Figure 3: High & Low Subgroup with Strong Correlation
Low Subgroup (0.2196)

6.5
Average Likability Rating
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86
Grade Percentage
High Subgroup (0.5199)

6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96
Grade Percentage
On the other hand, the middle third shows a small negative correlation (-0.2032) between the two
values in focus. The values are seemingly even spread in the graph, and there is no explanation
for why this small correlation would occur. It is possible that a small sample size is responsible
for these findings. Additional research with a healthier sample size would give a clearer picture
of the relationship between these two values.
Figure 4: Middle Subgroup with Negative Correlation
Middle Subgroup (-‐0.2032)

5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
84 85 86 87 88 89 90
Grade percentage
Additional Data Analysis
A difficulty in measuring how much a student likes a teacher is that there is a strong
possibility that the student cannot separate the teacher from the subject being taught. The second
part of the questionnaire was given to find insight into this issue and other student feelings
toward science and his or her teachers (Appendix C). Participants rated five additional
statements on the same Likert scale as the first part of the questionnaire. First, the students rated
how much they like the subject of science and science class. These are intended to be different
in that a student may like the science as a subject but does not enjoy the class due to teaching
style, methods, or area of focus. The reverse is also possible: a student dislikes science as a
subject but enjoys aspects of the class.
Participants rated how much they agreed with the statement that they learn a lot from
their teacher. This most likely reflects how good of a teacher each student believes his or her
teacher is, by taking into account knowledge and teaching methods. They also rated whether or
not they agree with the statement that their teacher motivates them to do their best work. This is
a common question on student evaluations of teachers. Finally, they rated how much they agree
with this statement, “How much I like my teacher effects how much I learn from them.”
How students rated this statement is an incredibly important in the justification for future
research. These ratings were averaged to see how the overall class felt toward each statement
(Table 3). Additionally, both the relationship between the rating of each of these questions and
the corresponding grade percentage and the relationship between the rating of each of these
questions and the corresponding average likability rating was found (Table 4).
Table 3: Part 2 Questions 1-5 Means
Q1. Q2. Q3. Q4. Q5.

Mean (of all participants) 4.75 4.8125 5.34375 4.53125 5.296875
Table 4: Correlation Coefficient between 5Qs & Grade Percentage and 5Qs & Mean Likability
Rating
1. Subject of Science 2. Science class 3. Learning level 4. Teacher motivation 5. Likability effecting Learning
Grade Percentage 0.1994 0.2679 0.4466 0.0665 -0.1515
MeanLikability 0.2153 0.3895 0.3985 0.2629 0.4359

Rating
The values are very important and offer tremendous insight in how these participants may view
teachers and the subjects they teach. Another single value found that is not included in the Table
4 is the correlation between the subject of science likability rating and the science class likability
rating. There is a large positive correlation between the two (0.698). These values will be
addressed more extensively in the discussion.
Qualitative Results
The second page of the questionnaire ends with two questions that required the
participants to answer in their own words. The students wrote the qualities that make teachers in
general likable and dislikable. Their answers were lumped into major categories. In Table 4,
only the qualities that were listed by at least two students are included.
Table 5: Major Likable & Dislikable Qualities
Major Likable Qualities Major Dislikable Qualities

Funny/Entertaining Assigns too much
47% of participants 34% of participants
homework/note-taking
Kind/Nice 47% Cranky/Short-tempered 28%
Knowledgeable/ Varying 31% Mean/Disrespectful 25%
Teaching Methods Racism/Favoritism 16%
Cares/Helpful 19% Uncaring 13%
Approachable 13% Boring/Repetitive 13%
Appropriately Strict 9% Overly Strict 9%
Confusing/Bad
6% 6%
Encouraging Explanations
Specific quotes on these concepts were enlightening. A funny or entertaining teacher was
a popular likable quality; however, some students went on to express being funny is not a good
thing. One student stated that a teacher “needs to be funny but still keep me on task”, implying
that a teacher can go too far in the name of entertainment. Also, a dislikable quality is when a
teacher “makes funny conversation, but when students laugh and join in, the teacher scowls and
instantly shut down all the fun”. There were several occasions where students stated that they
did not like when the expectations for them as students were not the same as those for the
teacher. One student stated it in this way, “Teachers think we should be nice when they are
horrible to us.”
Kindness was an unsurprisingly popular likable quality. If this idea had been paired with
being caring and helpful, the data would show that the majority of students taking this
questionnaire feel kindness is the major quality of likable teachers. Conversely, many stated that
they do not like teachers who are cranky or short-tempered. If this quality had been paired with
another dislikable quality of being mean and disrespectful, it would have easily shown that the
majority of students feel this way. Specifically, the students said that they do not like teachers
who “don’t care what you have to say”, “think you’re an idiot”, “ignore you”, or “yell for no
reason”. Shockingly, five of the students felt like racism and/or favoritism was an issue for some
teachers. Some stated that teachers are “sometimes meaner to the Hispanic kids than with the
American kids”. One student stated that he or she did not like how teachers sometimes “lecture
just one student”, and another stated that some teachers “have a class pet” –an unlikable quality
to this person.
Several qualities listed as likable and dislikable traits were directly related to the teaching
methods and style of the teacher. It is important to the students to have knowledgeable teachers
who “make class different each day”. While many want knowledgeable teachers, one student
stated he or she does not like “know-it-alls”. The top dislikable quality for these seventh graders
had to do with teachers assigning too much homework and notes. Many state that teachers keep
them loaded down in “busywork”. This also corresponds to their dislike of boring or repetitious
teaching methods, stating that it is a dislikable quality to “[teach] the same way all the time”.
Confusing teachers –and those who have bad explanations of concepts are dislikable; similarly,
one student states, “I don’t like teachers who are lazy and not smart”.
Surprisingly, a lot of the qualities listed had to do with teaching methods and classroom
management, not personal qualities. One student stated that he or she likes when teachers “move
at a fast pace”, but another stated that he or she dislikes teachers who “test too quickly”. Some
students like teachers who are “strict when they need to be”; some phrased it by saying they
dislike teachers who are “overly strict”. One student says he or she likes teachers who “do not
yell unless needed”; another phrased it by saying he or she dislikes teachers who “yell for no
reason”. In the area of personal qualities, some students like that a teacher is approachable and
can be a “friend”. One student felt this was definitely a bad thing; he or she dislikes when
teachers “get into personal stuff in your life (that’s weird)”.

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS
Summary of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify seventh grade students’ perception of their
science teacher’s likability and its relationship with his or her corresponding academic
performance in the class. It also searched for trends in what characteristics students list as
distinctly likable or dislikable about a teacher. Most research done on this topic has been done at
the college level (Brady, 1994, d’Appollonia & Abrami, 1997, Delucchi & Pelowski, 2000,
Marsh, 1980, etc). This study will extend the same question to a very different kind of student:
the seventh grader. This age group has very different motivations for attending school than
college students, and their responses to the questions asked lead to insight on their view of what
they feel is important in teachers.
The investigation utilizes both quantitative and qualitative information. The researcher
administered questionnaires to determine how well students liked their science teacher. These
questions were based on a previously established likability questionnaire using a Likert scale. A
second part asked students to rate their feelings toward science as both a subject and a class, as
well as how much they learn from and are encouraged by their teacher. The last question the
students rated was how much they believe likability influences how much they learn from their
teachers. This information was all translated into quantitative data. The last two questions of the
questionnaire asked the students to list the qualities in teachers that they both like and dislike.
This qualitative data was recorded and will be discussed in the following sections.
Key Findings & Implications: Quantitative Data
The first issue to be addressed is the main research question: is there a correlation
between students’ likability rating for their science teacher and the overall grade percentage in
the class? Based on the complete set of data, there is no correlation. According to accepted
correlation values, the value barely missed the cutoff for a small correlation. Overall, the
likability ratings were evenly spread, regardless of grade. Some of the students with the highest
grades give their teacher some of the lowest likability ratings, and vice versa. However, when
separated in high, middle, and low thirds (in terms of grade percentage), there are stronger
correlations. The high subgroup shows a large, positive correlation. Despite a small sample
size, this hints that there is some elusive mechanism at work here. This could possibly mean that
upper level students, who already have the ability to perform well, earn even higher grades the
more they like the teacher. Due to the small sample size, this correlation may be due to chance.
There is a small positive correlation in the low subgroup and a baffling small negative
correlation in the middle subgroup. There is no explanation for why this may be. A main source
of error is the small sample size. A larger number of participants would offer clearer results.
Similarly, the time at which the data was obtained offered a limited representation of academic
performance. A new quarter had begun at the time of this study, which means there were fewer
assignments and tests than if conducted at the end of the year. In hindsight, the grade recorded
should have been the third quarter’s overall grade. This offers no conclusive evidence for the
interaction between teacher likability and academic performance, nor can the trends be
generalized to any group beyond this particular set of students.
Additional Findings in Quantitative Data Analysis
On average, the students agreed with each statement on the second part of the
questionnaire. A correlation was found for each question and both the students’ grades and
average likability rating. This sheds light on the main research question and supports the basis
for further research. Due to sample size, these conclusions cannot be generalized to any group
outside the participating students.
#1. I like the subject of science.
A difficulty in a study such as this is that it is very tricky to have students differentiate the
teacher from the subject that they teach. This question attempts to find the difference between teacher
likability and subject area likability, if there is one. The average likability rating for the science teacher
was 4.27, which is slightly lower than the average likability rating for science of 4.75. While there is a
major difference in the amount of questioning applied to find these averages, it supports the idea that the
student’s feelings for the teacher’s subject area is very closely related to the feelings toward the teacher.
Similarly, there is small positive correlation between the teacher’s average likability rating and the
subject likability rating (Table 4). There is also a small positive correlation between grade and subject
likability, providing evidence that the student’s feelings toward the subject area is a slightly better
predictor of grade as teacher likability, which did not show any correlation.
#2. I like science class.
Science as a subject is not the same as science class. Typically, if a student likes science
in general, he or she will enjoy science class as well, but this does not always have to be the case.
This question was employed to gauge the difference in perception of the subject versus the class.
Overall, the average likability ratings for the subject, class, and teacher were the same, with the
class having the highest average likability. Similarly, there is a large positive correlation
between the ratings of the subject of science and science class (0.698). Because these scores are
especially related to one another, there is no surprise to find that there is, as earlier, a small
positive correlation between grade and science class likability. However, there is a moderate
correlation between science class likability and teacher likability. This may be a small hint that
these students can separate the subject from the class, but, in the end, these students rate the
science teacher, subject of science, and science class the same. There is no realistic separation in
these students. This questions the strong correlation found between teacher likability and
willingness of future enrollment in courses with the likable teacher in the study by Morgan &
Bergeron (2007). These students could be more willing to enroll in courses with this teacher
because they enjoyed the subject and class, which may or may not be connected to the teacher’s
likability. Their finding could be strengthened if students were asked to rate how willing they
would be to take a class with the teacher in question if the teacher was to be teaching in a
different subject area.
#3. I feel like I learn a lot from my teacher.
This statement received the highest average level of agreement. It also shows a upper-
level moderate positive correlation with grade percentage, the strongest predictor of grade in this
study than any other rating. It is close to the cutoff for a large correlation; thus, while causation
cannot be determined, students have a decent gauge of how much they feel they learn from their
teachers; this rating is a strong predictor of their academic performance. Similarly, the rating of
this question has a moderate correlation with teacher likability ratings. It seems that students
may like teachers that they feel are teaching them well. There is some disagreement in the
literature on this. Weinstein (1987) states that high teacher likability does not correspond with
high test scores, and Coker (1980) states that teachers, judged by students as outstanding,
produce students who leave the class knowing less than those students with teachers judged as
poor. However, a more recent study conducted in 1994 gave evidence that it is demanding
teachers who receive the highest ratings in likability (Brady, 1994). This research opposes both
Weinstein and Coker’s findings. When asked if they felt like they learned a lot from their
teacher, students’ responses moderately correlate with both their grades and likability ratings of
the teacher. This shows that the more they feel like they learn from their teacher, the more they
like them, and the better their academic performance.
#4. My teacher motivates me to do my best work.
This statement received the least level of agreement of these statements on the second
half of the questionnaire. There was no correlation between teacher motivation and academic
performance, yet there was a correlation between this and teacher likability. This question is
often included in student evaluations of teachers (SETs) at the college level. It also supports the
idea that these evaluations are simply “popularity contests”, rather “questions should center on
how much we help them learn” (Delucchi, 2000, p228). This statement does not relate to
academic performance, only teacher likability. Even if likability does have a valid role in
effective teaching, teachers may begin to focus more on likability than true learning because of
evaluations such as these, which have often been used in tenure and promotion decisions
(Delucchi & Pelowski, 2000).
#5. How much I like my teachers effects how much I learn from them.
The final question addresses how much the students agree that likability plays a role in
their learning. The average student agreed with this statement; it received the second highest
level of agreement out of these statements. An interesting finding is that there is a small negative
correlation between how much they agreed that likability affects their learning and their overall
grade. While this is a weak relationship, it suggests that the lower the overall grade, the more the
students believe likability effects learning. Is this why students tend to blame teachers for bad
grades? The teacher’s likability (or dis-likability) can be used as a scapegoat for not learning.
And, it would also suggest that students with high grades do not believe likability effects their
leaning, which could mean that students claim full responsibility for high grades. The data also
shows that the best predictor for the teacher’s likability is how much they believe likability
affects learning. There is a moderate positive correlation between these two numbers: the higher
the teacher likability rating, the more they agree likability affects how much they learn, and vice
versa. This is surprising; it would be expected that students would believe that teacher likability
influences how much they learn regardless of their grade. It is apparently not the case.
Key Findings & Implications: Qualitative Data
The traits given by the participants of general qualities that they find likable in teachers
were no surprise. Accordingly, the literature supports that being funny (47%), kind (47%),
positive (19%), and supportive (6%) are basic traits considered likable, which were traits listed
by the students (Cottinger, 2002). Uranoqitz & Doyle state that likability is also enhanced by
approachable (13%) and knowledgeable (31%) are traits that enhance likability. Marsh (1980)
found that demanding professors were more well liked than easy professors, which may relate to
the participants’ answer of appropriate strictness (9%) as being a likable quality. In fact, one
student stated that humor is only a likable quality if paired with an ability to keep him or her on
task.
Most of the dislikable qualities listed were simply the converse of the positive ones
(Funny/entertaining – boring/repetitive, Kind/nice – mean/disrespectful, Cares/helpful –
uncaring, Appropriately strict – overly strict, etc.). However, it also presented dislikable
qualities that were unexpected. Likability is enhanced by knowledge, and, in educators, teaching
methods and styles also enhances it. Several students stated that class content effected likability
in one way or another. Some state it is a likable trait when a teacher “makes class different every
day” or “doesn’t make you take a lot of notes”. On the other hand, some stated it by saying a
teacher who is confusing or gives bad explanations exhibits dislikable traits. The top dislikable
trait was teachers who assign too much homework or note-taking (34%). Many of them simply
listed “busy-work” as the dislikable trait. Another dislikable trait is crankiness or being short-
tempered (24%).
Perhaps the most shocking dislikable trait provided was racism or favoritism (16%).
While the ethnicity of the participants was not recorded, it is possible that each minority student
in the study stated this in some form; however, without recorded demographic data, this cannot
be claimed with any certainty. This basic idea may be supported by the literature. Dee (2004)
states that students perform better in school when taught by a teacher who is of the same ethnic
background. This may be due to similarities in communication and learning styles, but it may
also be due to likability.
Recommendations for Future Research
While no correlation was found between academic performance and teacher likability,
there should nonetheless be more research conducted on this topic. There still seems to be an
elusive mechanism at work in this area of likability and student performance, as seen in the
correlation among the high subgroup. To move even farther away from, seemingly, only
intuition, this study has many areas to improve upon. First, the sample size should be
dramatically increased. While it still may not lead to any larger generalizations, it will at least
provide sufficient data to see true trends, instead of chance. In a future study on this topic,
demographics should be incorporated into the participant data. This is to test for the differences
in teacher likability between race, gender, and background.
The study should be conducted at a time of year that is not influenced by end of course
tests such as the benchmark. This questionnaire was administered at a time of intense review
and content cramming. The stress could have easily influenced both the student grades and
teacher likability rating. If focusing on seventh graders, the questionnaires should be
administered well before the Benchmark or after. In this study, grade percentage was chosen as
the level of academic performance. Future research should base academic performance on a
more comprehensive assessment. Another method of assessment should be changed. While the
instrument was based on a tested likability scale, the questionnaire used is probably not a great
tool for teacher likability. In hindsight, a better, piloted questionnaire for teacher-likability
should be used in the future. Overall, the questionnaire was readable and appropriate for seventh
graders; however, the ESL students required assistance in answering the questionnaire (how to
answer on the Likert scale, meaning of certain words such as “approachable”, etc.).
The values assigned to the likability scale only apply to groups in that members of the
group tend to lend themselves to certain positive feelings toward the teacher. There is no true
definition of a likability rating of 5. In a future study, there should follow-up interviews with a
selection of students from each likability rating. This is to both test the instrument for validity
and link individuals to likability ratings. It would be an attempt to give a voice to the score. In
this study, it has no voice and cannot be defined in any specific terms.
To continue in this study, a valid, reliable likability instrument for teachers would need to
be developed for accurate results. This is the first step and would require several tests in itself.
After a capable instrument is constructed, the research may be able to put its finger on this
elusive mechanism at work. There is a relationship between teacher likability and academic
performance, but there is a long road ahead in finding it.

Bibliography
Brady, P.J. (1994). How likability and effectiveness ratings of college professors by their
students are affected by course demands and professors’ attitudes. Psychological
Reports, 74, 907-‐913.
Coker, H., Medley, D.M., Soar, R.S. (1980). How valid are expert opinions about effective
teaching? Phi Delta Kappan, 62, 131-‐149.
Cottringer, W. (2002). The power of likability. Retrieved October, 30 2010 from Electronic
Library database: http://www.sq.4mg.com/Cottringer_article.htm
d’Appollonia, S., & Abrami, P. (1997). Navigating student ratings of instruction. American
Psychologist, 52, 1198-‐1208.
Dee, T.S. (2005). A teacher like me: Does race, ethnicity, or gender matter? American
Economic Review, 95 (2), 158-‐165.
Delucchi, M. (2000). Don’t worry, be happy: instructor likability, student perceptions of
learning, and teacher ratings in upper-‐level sociology courses. Teaching Sociology,
28 (3), 220-‐231.
Delucchi, M., & Pelowski, S. (2000). Liking or learning? The effect of instructor likability
and student perceptions of learning on overall rating of teaching ability. Radical
Pedagogy, 2 (2).
Edmundsen, M. (1997). As lite entertainment for bored college students. Harper’s
Magazine, September, 39-‐49.
Greenwald, A. & Gillmore, G. (1997). Grading leniency is a removable contaminant of
student ratings. American Psychologist, 52, 1209-‐17.

Marsh, H.W. (1980). The influence of student, course and instructor characteristics in
evaluations of university teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 17,
219-‐237.
Uranowitz, S.W. & Doyle, K.O. (1978). Being liked and teaching: The effects and bases of
personal likability in college instruction. Research in Higher Education, 9, 15-‐41.
Weinstein, L. (1987). Good teachers are needed? Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25 (4),
273-‐274.
Wilson, J.H. (2006). Predicting student attitudes and grades from perceptions of
instructors’ attitudes. Teaching of Psychology, 33, 91-‐95.

Appendix A
Reysen Likeability Scale

Instructions: Circle how strongly you agree with each statement.

2. This person is likeable.

3. This person is warm.

4. This person is approachable.

5. I would ask this person for advice.

6. I would like this person as a coworker.

7. I would like this person as a roommate.

8. I would like to be friends with this person.

9. This person is physically attractive.

10. This person is similar to me.

11. This person is knowledgeable.

Reysen, S. (2005). Construction of a new scale: The Reysen likeability scale. Social
Behavior and Personality, 33, 201-208.
Appendix B
Reysen Likeability Scale


2. This person is likeable.

3. This person is warm.

4. This person is approachable.

5. I would ask this person for advice.

6. I would like to be friends with this person.

7. This person is similar to me.

8. This person is knowledgeable.

Reysen, S. (2005). Construction of a new scale: The Reysen likeability scale. Social
Behavior and Personality, 33, 201-208.

Appendix C

1. I like the subject of science.
2. I like science class.

3. I feel like I learn a lot from my teacher.

Disagree Disagree
4. My teacher motivates me to do my best work.

5. How much I like my teachers effects how much I learn from them.
Answer each question in your own words.
What are the qualities in teachers that you find likable?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
What are the qualities in teachers that you find dislikable?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

PARENTAL CONSENT FORM

Title: The correlation between science teacher likability and corresponding academic performance

Researcher:
Thomas J. Chester / Graduate Student
Dr. William McComas, Faculty Advisor
College of Education and Health Professions
Department of Curriculum and Instruction
F22 Stone House South
Fayetteville, AR 72701
870-‐378-‐3578 tcheste@uark.edu

Description: This study will compare the student ratings of his or her science teacher’s likability
with his or her academic performance in the class. It is also designed to discover what traits
students believe make teachers likable or dislikable. Students will be given a questionnaire asking
them to rate their teacher’s likability and answer different questions about what makes teachers
likable and dislikable. Before completing this questionnaire, each student’s grade percentage for
the class will be recorded on this form.

Risks and Benefits: There are no risks. This study does not require any additional work on the part
of the student outside of the regular classroom. Completing this questionnaire holds the potential
to illuminating the relationship between teacher likability and academic performance. Following
this idea may lead to more understanding of what qualities teachers need to exhibit in order to
improve student relations and possibly student performance.

Voluntary Participation: Your child will complete the student questionnaire as a classroom activity.
No scores will be given for this. Signing this form indicates your permission for this data to be used.

Confidentiality: Your child’s answers to the questionnaire will remain confidential throughout the
study. To ensure confidentiality, questionnaires are completed without names. Other than your
child’s grade percentage, the questionnaire will not ask for any personal information. All data
collected during this study will be stored in a secure place and will be accessible only by the
researcher. Neither your child nor his/her answers will be personally identified.

Informed Consent: I, ______________________________________, have read the description of this
Please print your name
study. I understand the purpose of the study, the procedures to be used, the potential risks and
benefits, and how confidentiality will be established and maintained. I have read and discussed this
project with my child, ______________________________________.
Please print your child’s name

Our signatures below indicate that I and my child freely agree for his/her ratings/answers to be
recorded and analyzed as a participant in this study.

______________________________________ ______________________________________ ___________
Parent/Guardian Child/Participant Date
Signature Signature

College of Education and Health Professions
Department of Curriculum and Instruction

Master of Arts in Teaching Program

Date

Dear Parent/Guardian:

I am currently working on a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) degree at the University of
Arkansas. As a part of the requirements for the MAT program, I am conducting a research
project. While I am an intern in your child’s school, I will be conducting a study that
researches the relationship between teacher likability and student academic performance.

This study will compare student ratings of the science teacher’s likability to their
corresponding grade percentage in science class. It is also to discover the traits that
students commonly list as making a teacher likable and dislikable. Students will be given a
questionnaire asking them to rate their teacher’s likability and list traits they believe
makes teachers in general likable and dislikable. Their grade is also recorded on these
forms. This will be done in class and requires no additional work for your child outside of
the regular classroom. Participation is voluntary and there are no negative consequences if
you choose not to participate. By signing and returning the attached form, you grant
permission for me to use your child’s answers in the results of this research project. Please
note that confidentiality will be maintained and that your child’s name will not be used in
reporting results. All results are recorded anonymously and your child’s science teacher
will not see the results.

The attached informed consent form contains a more detailed description of this project.
Please take time to read it over, read it with your child and discuss it carefully. Feel free to
call me at 870-‐378-‐3578 regarding any questions you may have.

I am very excited about the research and working with the wonderful students at this
school. Thank you for you cooperation.

Sincerely,

Thomas J. Chester
Graduate Student of Science Education
University of Arkansas Department of Curriculum and Instruction

FINAL Research Paper

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

FINAL Research Paper

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Running head: TEACHER LIKABILITY AND STUDENT PERFORMANCE

The Correlation Between Science Teacher Likability

and Corresponding Academic Performance in Seventh Graders

April 26, 2011

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the Masters of Arts in Teaching Degree

THE CORRELATION BETWEEN SCIENCE TEACHER LIKABILITY AND

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

& Pelowski, 2000)

positions such as being a teacher.

like teaching effectiveness, perceptions of learning, or scores on standardized testing is not

Purpose of the Study

Significance of the Study

likability and hard work from the employees?

1. Is there a correlation between teacher likability (measured by questionnaires) and academic

success (grade in course)?

2. What traits of teachers do students commonly list as likable or dislikable?

the teacher (measured by questionnaires)?

the classroom or see the results.

Assumptions The following assumptions apply to this study:

1. Students will respond honestly to questionnaire questions.

2. Students will participate in all activities.

3. Students will know what or why they like the teacher.

Limitations Imposed on the Researcher

There are three major limitations of this research.

1. The data will only show correlations, not causations.

1. The questionnaire is designed to measure teacher likability, but it is very difficult to

differentiate the teacher from the subject that they teach.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

very influential in these young peoples’ important time of growth.

than the general one already developed.

Teacher likability & college students

poor (Coker et al., 1980).

undergraduates descriptions of four hypothetical male professors: the demanding-positive

The relationship between student expectations and likability

professor. But, if teacher likability is positively correlated to high academic achievement,

students. This leads to the question: what is likability?

research of the topic.

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD

accomplish something (Edmundsen, 1997). Students in secondary education are obligated to be

performance in the science classroom by asking the following questions.

1. Is there a correlation between likability ratings and student grades?

2. What are the traits students list as making teachers likable/dislikable?

much they believe they can learn from them?

Nature of the Study

dislikable has been analyzed qualitatively by the researcher.

The questionnaire is an adaption of an established likability questionnaire. The Reysen

research in this area.

Validity and Reliability

taught. This will always be an issue in any study focusing on teachers.

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

data. Each Likert scale answer was given a quantitative value:

1. This person is friendly.

any table of the major themes.

rating of teacher likability (Table 1).

Table 1: Sample of Question Ratings and Mean Likability Scores

science teacher a negative review as seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Average Likability Ratings

trends and cannot be generalized beyond this small group of students.

Table 2: Comparison between Grade Percentage and Average Likability Rating

Grade Average Grade Average

Figure 2: Positive Correlation between Values

Middle Subgroup (-‐0.2032)

Reports, 74, 907-‐913.

teaching? Phi Delta Kappan, 62, 131-‐149.

Psychologist, 52, 1198-‐1208.

Economic Review, 95 (2), 158-‐165.

Magazine, September, 39-‐49.

student ratings. American Psychologist, 52, 1209-‐17.

instructors’ attitudes. Teaching of Psychology, 33, 91-‐95.