Table 1.

Correlation Matrix Relating Overall Lecture Ratings to Ratings of Specific Lecture Features^*

	E	I	R	C	SU	SC	Course Participants' Overall Rating	Subset of Raters' Overall Rating
Lecturer
Is engaging (E)	—	.91†	.76†	.91†	.78†	.71†	.78†	.95†
Identifies key points (I)		—	.77†	.88†	.69†	.80†	.80†	.91†
Is relevant to audience (R)			—	.70†	.55†	.47†	.64†	.76†
Is clear (C)				—	.82†	.74†	.75†	.92†
Uses humor	.24	.26	.13	.24	.09	.05	.24	.17
Uses understandable slides (SU)					—	.98†	.69†	.87†
Uses clearly formated slides (SC)						—	.66†	.80†
Lecture format
Case-based approach	.34‡	.33‡	.30‡	.28	.35‡	.33‡	.35‡	.33‡
Board simulation	.35‡	.32‡	.18	.32‡	.38‡	.34‡	.19	.34‡
Uses ARS before test	−.01	−.04	.01	−.11	−.03	−.04	−.09	−.03
Uses ARS during test	.19	.23	.23	.16	.23	.23	.33	.31‡
Uses ARS after test	−.24	−.18	−.23	−.17	−.25	−.23	−.09	−.17
Outside factors
Time of talk	.00	.04	−.00	−.04	−.02	−.02	−.04	−.02
Day of talk	−.15	−.06	−.02	−.07	−.24	−.24	.01	−.19

^*Correlations between ratings of specific lecture features and overall lecture ratings were based on overall ratings from 2 sources: the whole group of course attendees and the subset of 7 raters (who also rated individual lecture features). E indicates that the lecturer “is engaging”; I, “identifies key points”; R, “is relevant to audience”; C, “is clear”; SU, “uses understandable slides”; and SC, “uses clearly formatted slides.” ARS indicates audience response system.

^†P < .001;

^‡P < .01.