Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Seeing
Michelle Dalton / UCD Library
@mishdalton
Through
Learners’
Eyes
Why Student
Feedback?
Self-
reflection
Scholarship
Students
Peers
(Brookfield, 2002)
v a r
i a
t i o n
c o n s i
s t e n c
y
Best Practice?
“the less time
it takes for a student to complete a survey, the
more likely it is they will do so”
(Nulty, 2008, p.305)
Quantitative?
Collected & analysed more quickly
“if all the items require a simple numerical rating then there will
probably be less engagement”
(Nulty, 2008, p. 305)
Qualitative?
“the range of responses and
ideas expressed are not limited to
those designed by the lecturer”
(Surgenor, 2010, [p. 3])
Student Satisfaction?
“…is influenced by a wide variety of contextual factors that are
not intrinsically related to the quality of teaching”
:-(
:-/
:-)
:-|
:-))
(Wiers-Jenssen et al., in Richardson, 2005, p. 403)
Self Rating? “undue modesty” of top performers
poor performers often “think they are doing just fine”
(Ehrlinger et al., 2008, p. 118)
“participants completing the web-based version left
comments that were more than 50% longer”
(Heath et al., 2007 p. 260)
“good practice to make feedback questionnaires available in a variety of
formats for use by students with disabilities”
(Richardson, 2005, p. 406)
feedback
In Practice?
as short as possible
open-ended & qualitative
online (google forms)
print (h-form layout)
linked with descriptive class data
Positives Overall
Rating
Suggestions
for
Improvement
Additional
Comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Identify & feed back student needs at:
Module level
Programme level
University level
not enough
time
earlier/later in
semester
more advanced
sessions
additional
topics
T E A C H I N G
L E A R N I N G
References Brookfield, S. D. (2002). Using the Lenses of Critically Reflective Teaching in the
Community College Classroom. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2002(118), 31.
Ehrlinger, J., Johnson, K., Banner, M., Dunning, D., & Kruger, J. (2008). Why the unskilled are
unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105(1), 98–121. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.05.002
Heath, N. M., Lawyer, S. R., & Rasmussen, E. B. (2007). Web-Based versus Paper-and-Pencil
Course Evaluations. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4), 259–261.
doi:10.1080/00986280701700433
Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what
can be done? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314. doi:10.1080/02602930701293231
Richardson, J. T. E. (2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the
literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 387–415. doi:10.1080/02602930500099193
Surgenor, P. (2010). UCD Teaching & Learning Toolkit, Gathering Feedback 3. Accessed
3rd April 2014 from http://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/UCDTLT0014.pdf.
