Two paradigms measuring teaching effectiveness in higher education—one focusing on instructional behaviors (SET), and the other, on teachers' nonverbal and verbal immediacy (NVI-VI)—have been estranged from each other for decades despite their common focus on teaching effectiveness. To juxtapose the two paradigms, both SET and NVI-VI questionnaires were administered at separate times in courses taught by 183 college instructors. Correlations between the two measures were extremely high (up to r = 0.72), and a PCA yielded a strong and highly reliable first un-rotated component, indicating that the same underlying construct of "teaching effectiveness" was validly measured by both paradigms. Two clear components emerged after rotation, representing clear SET and NVI factors. Following median splits into a 2 × 2 table, consonant status of individual instructors on both SET and NVI-VI (being either "High/High" or "Low/Low") was found for 73% of the 183 instructors, but over a quarter of the sample demonstrated dissonant status, equally distributed between being "High SET/Low NVI-VI" or "Low SET/High NVI-VI." The NVI measurement administered in the 5th week of the semester predicted effectively the SET global evaluation at the end of the course. A theory of "Student Evaluations Fast and Slow" was proposed (following Kahneman's theorizing), where the early "fast" NVI precedes the later "slow" reasoned SET, leading to a rich, integrated picture of teaching effectiveness.

衡量高等教育教学效果的两种范式-专注于教学行为（SET），而另一种关注教师的非言语和言语直接性（NVI-VI）-尽管他们共同关注教学效果，但它们之间已经隔了几十年。为了将这两个范例并列，SET和NVI-VI问卷分别在183个大学讲师教授的课程中进行管理。两项措施之间的相关性极高（高达r = 0.72），并且PCA产生了一个强大且高度可靠的第一个未旋转组件，这表明“范式有效性”的相同基础结构已通过两种范式有效地进行了测量。旋转后出现两个清晰的分量，代表清晰的SET和NVI因素。在将中位数分成2×2表格后，在183位教师中，有73％的人发现SET和NVI-VI上个别教师的辅音状态（“高/高”或“低/低”）。样本的四分之一显示出不和谐状态，平均分布在“高SET /低NVI-VI”或“低SET /高NVI-VI”之间。在学期的第5周进行的NVI测量有效地预测了课程结束时的SET整体评估。“