Enhancing Student Feedback Efficacy: A Critical Analysis of University's Module Evaluation Questionnaires
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31949/ijeir.v3i1.7037Abstract
This report discusses a British university Module Evaluation Questionnaires (MEQ) which was produced as a part of university-wide interdisciplinary MEQ project at a British University. Purpose: The aim of this report is to investigate the purpose of university MEQ and to review aims and weakness of the current Sussex University MEQ seven questions/statements. Methods: The method is quantitative and critical review and analysis was conducted. Data was collected at University of Sussex, UK. The participants were three members of the MEQ project team. The focus of analysis is to identify the aim and weakens of the current University MEQ questions/statements. Results: MEQ has three stakeholders, students, university and staff. Each stakeholder’s purpose of MEQ are different. University has institutional and teaching staff have teaching and academic promotional purposes. It is suggested to MEQ designers to take consideration of students whose mother tongue is not English and to write questions as simple and clear language as possible. Implications: The primary recommendation of this report is to undertake a staff-student partnership to agree the purpose of the MEQs and co-design a revised instrument that meets the stated purpose.
Keywords:
University Module Evaluation Questionnaires, Student Evaluation of Teaching, Academic promotion, staff-student partnershipDownloads
References
Bassett, J., Cleveland, A., Acorn, D., Nix, M., & Snyder, T. (2017). Are they paying attention? Students’ lack of motivation and attention potentially threaten the utility of course evaluations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 431-442. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1119801
Bavishi, A., Madera, J. M., & Hebl, M. R. (2010). The effect of professor ethnicity and gender on student evaluations: Judged before met. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 3(4), 245. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0020763
Becker, W. E., & Watts, M. (1999). How departments of economics should evaluate teaching. American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), 89, 344–349.
Beran, T. N., & Rokosh, J. L. (2009). Instructors’ perspectives on the utility of student ratings of instruction. Instructional Science, 37, 171-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-007-9045-2
Bienefeld, S., & Almqvist, J. (2004). Student life and the roles of students in Europe. European Journal of Education, 39(4), 429-441. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1503869
Blackmore, J. (2009). Academic pedagogies, quality logics and performative universities: Evaluating teaching and what students want. Studies in higher education, 34(8), 857-872. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070902898664
Braga, M., Paccagnella, M., & Pellizzari, M. (2014). Evaluating students’ evaluations of professors. Economics of Education Review, 41, 71-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.04.002
Carrell, S. E., & West, J. E. (2010). Does professor quality matter? Evidence from random assignment of students to professors. Journal of Political Economy, 118(3), 409-432. https://doi.org/10.1086/653808
Feldman, K. A. (1978). Course characteristics and college students' ratings of their teachers: What we know and what we don't. Research in Higher Education, 9, 199-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976997
Gray, D. E. (2004), Doing Research in the Real World, London, Sage Publications.
Gurung, R. A., & Vespia, K. M. (2007). Looking good, teaching well? Linking liking, looks, and learning. Teaching of Psychology, 34(1), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280709336641
Isely, P., & Singh, H. (2005). Do higher grades lead to favorable student evaluations?. The Journal of Economic Education, 36(1), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.36.1.29-42
Johnson, R. (2000). The authority of the student evaluation questionnaire. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(4), 419-434. https://doi.org/10.1080/713699176
Johnson, V. E. (2003). Grade inflation: A crisis in college education. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Kearns, K. (1998). Institutional Accountability in Higher Education: A Strategic Approach. Public Productivity & Management Review, 22(2), 140–156. https://doi.org/10.2307/3381030
Langbein, L. (2008). Management by results: Student evaluation of faculty teaching and the mis-measurement of performance. Economics of Education Review, 27(4), 417-428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.12.003
McPherson, M. A. (2006). Determinants of how students evaluate teachers. The Journal of Economic Education, 37(1), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.37.1.
McPherson, M. A., & Jewell, R. T. (2007). Leveling the playing field: Should student evaluation scores be adjusted?. Social Science Quarterly, 88(3), 868-881. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2007.00487.x
Olivares, O. J. (2003). A conceptual and analytic critique of student ratings of teachers in the USA with implications for teacher effectiveness and student learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/1356251032000052465
Ory, J. C. (2001). Faculty thoughts and concerns about student ratings. New directions for teaching and learning, 2001(87), 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.23
Patrick, C. L. (2011). Student evaluations of teaching: effects of the Big Five personality traits, grades and the validity hypothesis. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(2), 239–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903308258
Penny, A. R., & Coe, R. (2004). Effectiveness of consultation on student ratings feedback: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 74(2), 215-253. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074002215
Penny, A. R. (2003). Changing the agenda for research into students' views about university teaching: Four shortcomings of SRT research. Teaching in higher education, 8(3), 399-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510309396.
Robson, C. (2002), Real World Research – Second Edition, Oxford, Blackwell.
Spooren, P., Brockx, B., & Mortelmans, D. (2013). On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: The state of the art. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 598-642. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870
Stensaker, B., & Harvey, L. (2011). Accountability in Higher Education – Global Perspectives on Trust and Power. New York: Routledge.
Titus, J. J. (2008). Student ratings in a consumerist academy: Leveraging pedagogical control and authority. Sociological Perspectives, 51(2), 397-422. https://doi.org/10.1525/ sop.2008.51.2.39
Weinberg, B. A., Fleisher, B. M., & Hashimoto, M. (2009). Evaluating teaching in higher education. Journal of Economic Education. 40, pp. 227–261.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Junko Winch, Sam Demirkol
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
