Student Evaluations of Teaching in Universities of Pakistan: Analysis from the Perspective of Closing the Feedback Loop
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26710/reads.v4i2.402Keywords:
Student evaluations of teaching, feedback loop, engagement with feedback, quality assurance, Pakistani HEIsAbstract
Internationally, centralized systems for collecting students’ feedback have become an increasingly common practice in higher education institutions [HEIs] for monitoring quality of teaching as well as for professional development of faculty members. The collection, analysis and reporting of evaluation results are carried out systematically in many HEIs across the globe. However, how to effectively close the feedback loop with students as well as teachers on the results of student evaluations of teaching [SETs] remain an issue to be addressed. Consistent with global trend, HEIs in Pakistan are also supposed to conduct SETs. In this context, the main intention of this study was to determine whether the cycle of teaching evaluation process is completed, and feedback loop proceeds effectively towards closing around the SETs or not in Pakistani HEIs. To achieve the objective, the triangulation design was used in which an online search was carried out in 130 Pakistani HEIs’ official websites to collect qualitative data. Concurrently, a questionnaire comprising 13 close-ended items, with “yes-and-no” scale, was administered in online format to collect quantitative data from a sample of 507 faculty members and 110 administrators from 130 Pakistani HEIs. Based on content analysis of documents and descriptive analysis of participants’ responses, this paper concludes that universities in Pakistan are bound by HEC to collect feedback from students using central system of Quality Enhancement Cells, but limited attention has been placed to close the feedback loop with students and teachers to inform improvements. Finally, this paper recommends the need for universities in Pakistan to genuinely listen to students’ voices and to act on their feedback as part of quality assurance.
References
Batool, Z., Qureshi, R.H. & Raouf, A. (2010). Performance evaluation standards for the HEIs. Islamabad: Higher Education Commission, Pakistan.
Blair, E., & Noel, K. V. (2014). Improving higher education practice through student evaluation systems: Is the student voice being heard? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 879–894.
Catano, V. M., & Harvey, S. (2011). Student perception of teaching effectiveness: Development and validation of the Evaluation of Teaching Competencies Scale (ETCS). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(6), 701– 717.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Goos, M., Salomons, A. (2016). Measuring teaching quality in higher education: assessing selection bias in course evaluations. Res High Educ 58: 341– 364. DOI 10.1007/s11162-016-9429-8
Grebennikov, L., & Skaines, I. (2009). University of Western Sydney students at risk: Profile and opportunities for change. Journal of Institutional Research, 14(1), 58–70.
Harvey, L. (2003). Student feedback. Quality in Higher Education, 9(1), 3-20.
Hativa, N. (2013). Student ratings of instruction: A practical approach to designing,operating, and reporting. Oron Publications.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Hsieh, Hsiu-Fang & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15 (9), 1277-1288.
Johnson, R. (2000). The authority of the student evaluation questionnaire. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(4), 419–434.
Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010). Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE—A case study. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 1-20.
Kondracki, N. L.,&Wellman, N. S. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34, 224-230.
Krause, L. K., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493-505.
Leckey, J., & Neill, N. (2001). Quantifying quality: The importance of student feedback. Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), 19-32.
Moskal, A. C.M., Stein, S. J. & Golding, C. (2016). Can you increase teacher engagement with evaluation simply by improving the evaluation system?Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 419(2), 286-300.
Nair, C. S., Mertova, P., & Pawley, D. (2010). Quality in action: Closing the loop. Quality Assurance in Education, 18(2), 144-155.
Nelson, K. J., Smith, J. E., & Clarke, J. A. (2012). Enhancing the transition of commencing students into university: An institution-wide approach. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(2), 185–199.
Price, K., & Baker, N. S. (2012). Measuring students’ engagement on college campuses: Is the NSSE an appropriate measure of adult students’ engagement? The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(1), 20–32.
Scott, G. (2006). Accessing the student voice: using CEQuery to identify what retains and promotes engagement in productive learning in Australian higher education. Canberra: DEST.
Shah, M., Cheng, M. & Fitzgerald, R. (2017). Closing the loop on student feedback: The case of Australian and Scottish universities. Higher Education, 74(1), 115-129.
Shah, M., & Nair, C. S. (2009). Using student voice to improve student satisfaction: Two Australian universities—The same agenda. Journal of Institutional Research (South East Asia), 7(2), 43–55.
Shah, M., & Nair, C. S. (2013). Enhancing student feedback and improvement systems in tertiary education. CAA Quality Series No. 5 (Vol. June, pp. 16– 33). Abu Dhabi: Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research.
Smithson, J., Birks, M., Harrison, G., Sid Nair, C., & Hitchins, M. (2015). Benchmarking for the effective use of student evaluation data. Quality Assurance in Education, 23(1), 20–29.
Stein, S. J., Spiller, D., Terry, S., Harris, T., Deaker, L., & Kennedy. J. (2013). Tertiary teachers and student evaluations: Never the Twain shall meet? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38 (7), 892–904.
Symons, R. (2006). In their own words: Finding out what students think about their university learning experience. Synergy, (23), 34?35.
Tucker, B. (2013). Student evaluation to improve the student learning experience: An Australian university case study. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(7), 615–627.
Tucker, B., Jones, S., & Straker, L. (2008). Online student evaluation improves Course Experience Questionnaire results in a physiotherapy program. Higher Education Research and Development, 27(3), 281-296.
Watson, S. (2003). Closing the feedback loop: Ensuring effective action from student feedback. Tertiary Education Management, 9(2), 145–157.
