| The purpose of this study was to obtain the perspectives of Saudi and United States students about the characteristics of ideal university instructors and to construct an instrument to determine characteristics of the ideal university instructor (IUI). A mixed method design, qualitative and quantitative methods, was used in this study. Two studies were conducted using different methodologies. Study 1 consisted of a sample of 180 students (i.e., 75 Saudi and 105 U.S. students); Study 2 consisted of a sample of 2,127 students (i.e., 1,413 Saudi and 714 U.S. students). A qualitative analysis (i.e., content analysis) was used for Study 1, and eight themes were identified. From extensive qualitative data characteristics, 70 items were chosen to construct the IUI scale. The IUI scale was used to conduct the quantitative analyses for Study 2. The results from the Analysis of Frequency indicated that students from Saudi and U.S. and both genders from the two countries reported similar and different desirability at the top of characteristics frequency. The 70 items were analyzed by Mokken analysis, which constructed items in a hierarchical order. Three valid and reliable instruments were constructed for each set of data: (a) Saudi data included 57 items with r = .98 and H = .45, (b) U.S. data had 43 items with r = .96 and H =.41, and (c) Combined data had 55 items with r = .97 and H =.44. There was no significant Country by Gender interactions for item level. Few significant gender differences were found in two items, and country differences for the items were bigger and found in 36 items. There were significant correlations only between IUI and Gender in the Saudi data, and IUI with Country, Gender, and GPA in the Combined data. The U.S. data had no significant correlations with any independent variables. There were significant differences between Saudi universities in rating ideal characteristics. The characteristics identified in this study may serve as basis for further research into the perception of the ideal professor and to additional instruments for evaluating faculty. |
