Towards Meaningful Student Course Evaluations

Student course evaluations (SCEs) are now seen as good practice in higher education. In general, SCEs comprise a series of questions in which students rate the quality of the content and methodology used in the course, the relevance of the material, and the clarity and fairness of the requirements and their assessment. Usually, space is also provided for free response, particularly suggestions for ways in which the course could be improved in the future.

There is an enormous body of literature on SCEs – some positive, most very negative. On the one hand, SCEs have been found to be fairly reliable and consistent, generally with agreement among students in their ratings of instructors. However, responses to SCEs have been found to bear little connection with what actually takes place in the classroom, and do not correlate with how much students actually learn. Responses are often shaped by extraneous issues such as a professor’s gender, race, age, accent, and even physical attractiveness. In a number of studies a correlation was found between SCEs and professorial leniency. One study found that one-third of students acknowledged lying on their SCEs.

…responses to SCEs have been found to bear little connection with what actually takes place in the classroom, and do not correlate with how much students actually learn.

A possible pathway to more meaningful student course evaluation is to introduce reciprocal components: students are asked not only to evaluate the course and the instructor, but also themselves in terms of their personal engagement and interpersonal cooperation.

This session will discuss the challenges of SCEs and guide the development of a Student Reciprocal Evaluation process relevant to the particular context of each participant. The desired outcome is a tangible document that could be the basis for future use.