Affiliation:
1. National Research Tomsk State University
Abstract
Student evaluation of teaching (SET) has more than forty years of history as a tool of feedback in North American, Australian and European universities. In Russian universities it is not widespread, although increasing its implementation could solve the problem of Russian students feeling that they are not involved in the management of the educational process and improve the quality of courses and teaching. The barriers to the implementation of SET in the Russian higher education system, among other things, are concerns and prejudices of teachers and students, who see SET more as a problem than an effective tool. In this article, authors analyze the most common faculty concerns about student evaluations of teaching, obtained from ten focus groups in five Russian universities. Authors put collected opinions in the context of the recent methodological discussions about the validity of Student Evaluations of Teaching. The main idea is that SET is an effective tool of getting feedback in higher education and involvement of students and teachers in a dialogue and cooperation in the educational process, but highly questionable as a data source for administrative decisions.
Publisher
Moscow Polytechnic University
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,Education,Philosophy
Reference29 articles.
1. Sukhanova, E.A., Terent’ev, E.A., Barannikov, K.A., Frumin, I.D., Abramova, M.O. et al. (2023). Universitetskaya natsional’naya iniciativa kachestva obrazovaniya: analiz situatsii v kontekste novykh zadach razvitiya sistemy: Analiticheskij doklad [University National Education Quality Initiative: Situation Analysis in the Context of New System Development Challenges: Analytical Report]. Tomsk: Tomsk State University Publ., 32p. Available at: http://docs.io.tsu.ru/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/UNIKO_2023.pdf (accessed 07.06.2023). (In Russ.).
2. Stroebe, W. (2020). Student Evaluations of Teaching Encourages Poor Teaching and Contributes to Grade Inflation: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 276-294, doi: 10.1080/01973533.2020.1756817
3. Zaitseva, E., Santhanam, E., Tucker, B. (2021). Analysing Student Feedback in Higher Education. Routledge Press. 238 p., doi: 10.4324/9781003138785
4. Marsh, H.W. (1982). SEEQ: A Reliable, Valid, and Useful Instrument for Collecting Student’s Evaluations of University Teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 77-95, doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1982.tb02505.x
5. Marsh, H.W. (1984). Students’ Evaluations of University Teaching: Dimensionality, Reliability, Validity, Potential Biases, and Utility. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 76, no. 5, pp. 707-754, doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.76.5.707