EUSTT

Can students evaluations
be trusted?

Karl Kilbo Edlund, March 7, 2022.

Social Sciences – Education Studies

Abstract: Although nearly ubiquitous in the modern higher education sector, student evaluations of teaching, or course evaluations, have been frequently criticised in scientific literature. From a student’s vantage point, these feedback systems represent one of the most commendable ideals of modern pedagogy: the involvement of student voices in course design and development. Therefore, while they are most often (and rightly so) at the periphery of a student’s mind, student evaluations become a cornerstone of students’ influence over their education. Thus, any doubts of their efficacy, accuracy, or justness should be of great concern. On the one hand, if these doubts were true, course evaluations would represent a major flaw in quality assurance and improvement systems, as well as a false promise of student influence. On the other hand, if these doubts were unfounded, they would nonetheless undermine the value of student input to potential improvements in education.

Keywords. — Student evaluation, course evaluation, quality assurance, higher education.

Disclaimer: The views, information and opinions in the written publications are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect those shared by the Eutopia Student Think Tank (EUSTT) nor the EUTOPIA Alliance.

Bibliography

 

Barth, M. M. (2008) ‘Deciphering Student Evaluations of Teaching: A Factor Analysis Approach’, Journal of Education for Business, 84(1), pp. 40–46. doi: 10.3200/JOEB.84.1.40-46.

 

Cohen, E. H. (2005) ‘Student evaluations of course and teacher: Factor analysis and SSA approaches’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), pp. 123–136. doi: 10.1080/0260293042000264235.

 

D’Apollonia, S. and Abrami, P. C. (1997) ‘Navigating student ratings of instruction’, American Psychologist, 52(11), pp. 1198–1208. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.11.1198.

 

Guthrie, E. R. (1953) ‘The evaluation of teaching’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 53(2), pp. 220–221. doi: 10.1080/0260293840090201.

 

Högskoleutredningen (1992) Frihet, ansvar, kompetens: Grundutbildningens villkor i högskolan (SOU 1992:1). Stockholm: Allmänna förlaget.

 

Liaw, S. H. and Goh, K. L. (2003) ‘Evidence and control of biases in student evaluations of teaching’, International Journal of Educational Management, 17(1), pp. 37–43. doi: 10.1108/09513540310456383.

 

Marsh, H. W. and Hocevar, D. (1984) ‘The Factorial Invariance of Student Evaluations of College Teaching’, American Educational Research Journal, 21(2), pp. 341–366. doi: 10.3102/00028312021002341.

 

Richardson, J. T. E. (2005) ‘Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the literature’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Informa UK Limited, 30(4), pp. 387–415. doi: 10.1080/02602930500099193.

 

Svensk författningssamling (2000) Förordning om ändring i högskoleförordningen (1993:100).

 

Wang, G. and Williamson, A. (2020) ‘Course evaluation scores: valid measures for teaching effectiveness or rewards for lenient grading?’, Teaching in Higher Education. Taylor & Francis, 0(0), pp. 1–22. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2020.1722992.

Karl Kilbo Edlund

PhD student in environmental epidemiology at the University of Gothenburg. He has previously been president of the University of Gothenburg Student Unions and vice president of the EUTOPIA Student Council.