Using student evaluations of teaching as a tool for continuous professional development
The Educationalist. By Alexandra Mihai
Welcome to a new issue of “The Educationalist”! This month I am happy to welcome back a valued guest- Dr. Niels van der Baan- who wrote a post here a couple of years ago. This time he addresses a topic that we, as faculty, feel quite strongly about: student evaluations of teaching. As we are approaching the end of the academic year and the courses we are teaching come to an end, the shadow of these evaluations looms large and, why not recognise it upfront, for those at the beginning of their careers they constitute a genuine cause for worry. Books can be (and are!) written about this topic from different angles, including, for instance, how to design the evaluations so the results are meaningful and how the evaluations are related to our career paths. But Niels wants to put a learning spin on the topic and gives us some ideas on how to transform this tool that is seen as irrelevant or even scary into a tool to inform our professional development. He also shares some practical experience from his own work and some useful resources. Hope you enjoy reading and find some food for thought. Have a nice rest of the week!
The purpose of student evaluations
Lately, there has been a lot of commotion about student evaluations of teaching (SET). The purpose of SET is to monitor educational quality, to evaluate courses and teaching performance. There is a widespread perception among faculty that this purpose of evaluating teaching performance is to inform career decisions, such as promotion and tenure, instead of a tool for learning and a trigger for professional development. This perception about the purpose of SET as an instrument for summative assessment rather than a tool to inform continuing professional development (CPD) can influence teaching behaviour. Faculty can feel compelled to prioritise student satisfaction over good teaching, to secure good evaluations.
The changing role of the teacher
The role of a teacher in higher education has started shifting from a transmitter of knowledge to a facilitator of students’ learning process (van Dijk et al., 2020). For example, instead of passive lectures, teaching and learning activities have become more active, where students are required to co-construct knowledge with their peers. Teachers facilitate and guide this learning process. A good teacher also challenges students to become self-regulated learners.
Some students expect their teacher to immediately provide answers or explanations, without letting them construct the knowledge themselves. For faculty it can be difficult to push back against these expectations. Some teachers indeed mention that they worry about receiving low evaluations from students, and that this would have consequences for their career. However, a low grade does not necessarily mean the teacher is lacking the necessary teaching competences.
Towards continuous professional development: the role of reflection
In fact, the narrative feedback from students can help explain why they provided a low evaluation. Narrative feedback can give faculty insights into their performance and learning needs. Hence, SET can inform their continuing professional development (CPD). Teachers may reflect on these narrative comments in order to learn from them and improve their teaching performance. This reflection can take place individually or with others, such as colleagues, supervisors and direct managers. Reflecting and discussing the SET results with others can help teachers put them in perspective, thus increasing the learning potential.
A practical example
To facilitate these group reflections and discussions, the Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML) of Maastricht University organises structured peer-to-peer coaching sessions, three times a year. These sessions are organized and moderated by the taskforces Faculty Development and Programme Evaluation. The taskforce Programme Evaluation is concerned with monitoring and enhancing educational quality. During these sessions, faculty from different courses and with various levels of experience are brought together to discuss their SET results and are guided in their reflection on these results. Reflecting and discussing can help teachers to transfer SET results into actionable points to improve their teaching and inform their CPD.
Tips and Tricks
Offer faculty development initiatives that provide teachers with the opportunities to discuss their SET results with colleagues;
SET results are something to learn from and grow from. Don’t expect novice teachers to immediately receive high evaluations. Allow them to grow. Use evaluations in a more formative way (Roxå et al. 2022);
As supervisor and direct manager, you can also initiate discussions about SET results to encourage teachers to learn from them;
Offer a range of CPD activities aiming to help staff to grow in teaching competencies.
Useful resources
Paper reconceptualizing student evaluations of teaching to support teaching quality (Roxå et al. 2022): https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00615-1
The relationship between students’ evaluations of teaching and academics professional development (Karm et al., 2022): https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2022.2057214
How can student evaluations lead to improvement of teaching quality? A cross-national analysis (Ulker, 2021): https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2021.1873406
Interview with Dr. Carolin Sehlbach about feedback as a tool for growth in education: https://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/news/carolin-sehlbach%E2%80%99s-research-examines-feedback-tool-growth-education
Dr. Niels van der Baan obtained his PhD at the Department of Educational Research and Development at the School of Business and Economics (SBE) at Maastricht University. His research interests include coaching and reflection for lifelong learning. Currently, he works as an Assistant Professor and a member of the taskforce Programme Evaluation at the Department of Educational Development and Research at the Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML) at the same university, where he also teaches in the Bachelor Health Sciences and the Master of Health Professions Education (MHPE). If you are interested in knowing more, you can contact Niels via email at n.vanderbaan@maastrichtuniversity.nl or on LinkedIn. Niels wrote this post in collaboration with Dr. Carolin Sehlbach from the taskforce Programme Evaluation, and Dr. Herma Roebertsen from the taskforce Faculty Development, both at FHML.
References
Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Gijselaers, W. H., Moust, J. H. C., Grave, W. S. de, Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P., & Vleuten, C. P. M. van der. (2002). Trends in research on the tutor in problem-based learning: conclusions and implications for educational practice and research. Medical Teacher, 24(2), 173–180.
Roxå, T., Ahmad, A., Barrington, J., Van Maaren, J., & Cassidy, R. (2022). Reconceptualizing student ratings of teaching to support quality discourse on student learning: a systems perspective. Higher Education, 1-21.
Van Dijk, E. E., van Tartwijk, J., van der Schaaf, M. F., & Kluijtmans, M. (2020). What makes an expert university teacher? A systematic review and synthesis of frameworks for teacher expertise in higher education. Educational Research Review, 31, 100365.
