All frameworks and cheat sheets

Framework

The three dimensions of teacher credibility

Competence, trustworthiness and caring, from McCroskey and Teven's source credibility measure

Framework showing the three dimensions of teacher credibility: competence, trustworthiness and caring, as measured by McCroskey and Teven.
Students judge a lecturer on all three, and caring is the one most questionnaires leave out Source: James C. McCroskey and Jason J. Teven, Communication Monographs (1999)
Download PNG

The three parts of teacher credibility that students use to judge a lecturer: competence, trustworthiness and caring (also called goodwill). It follows McCroskey and Teven's 18-item source credibility measure, which has six items for each part. Quality officers can use it to check whether a course evaluation asks about all three, or folds them into one global rating. Koji's course evaluations follow each rating with a question about the reason, which shows which part a score is really about.

What's in this framework

  1. Competence: How knowledgeable, expert and capable the lecturer seems to students.
  2. Trustworthiness: Whether the lecturer seems honest, ethical and genuine.
  3. Caring: Whether the lecturer seems to care about students and have their interests at heart.

Use this image

Free to use in your docs, decks and posts under CC BY 4.0, as long as you credit Koji with a link to this page. To embed it, paste this into your page:

html
<a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/teacher-credibility-three-dimensions-framework"><img src="https://www.koji.so/visuals/teacher-credibility-three-dimensions-framework/teacher-credibility-three-dimensions-framework.png" alt="Framework showing the three dimensions of teacher credibility: competence, trustworthiness and caring, as measured by McCroskey and Teven." width="1200" height="630" /></a>
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/teacher-credibility-three-dimensions-framework">The three dimensions of teacher credibility</a>, Koji</p>

Related

Framework of the five parts of a research recruitment email: subject line, personalized opener, clear ask, what they get and a frictionless call to action.

Anatomy of a research recruitment email: five parts

Framework of four costs of using expert network calls instead of customer interviews: recall over observation, narrative smoothing, selection and no churn risk.

Expert calls vs customer interviews: four costs of the proxy

Framework of the four Paperwork Reduction Act tests: by or for an agency, identical questions, ten or more persons, and mandatory, voluntary or for a benefit.

When federal research needs OMB approval: the four tests