Image Shutterstock After the exam period, students are always given a chance to evaluate the courses they took — anonymously. Some students abuse that anonymity by slamming the teachers. After the teachers got their course evaluations back for period 2, the discussions about this kind of feedback flared up again on the intranet. Peer van Duppen and Lieke Huls, who both teach organic chemistry, think a change is needed.
You both recently experienced students misusing the course evaluations. What was that like?
Huls: ‘I’d had a long day and I thought I would just briefly check the course evaluations. They’d always been positive up till then, so I was expecting to be able to end my working day feeling good. But this time there were several negative comments that were really personal. When you read comments like “this person should never be allowed to teach again” or “the university should take action against the people responsible for this disastrous course”, you don’t exactly go home on a high.’
Van Duppen: ‘I’ve worked in secondary schools. Young people there often give their opinions bluntly without any nuances. That could be tough, but fortunately we had a lot of peer reflection groups where we could discuss it. Now I try not to let it get to me. Apparently someone needed to vent their anger. But it’s still completely unacceptable. Even if you think we aren’t up to the task, there are still rules of decency.’
Are course evaluations the right way to get feedback on the teaching?
Huls: ‘Neither of us have been teaching for that long, and constructive feedback is important for us. First-year students often find it hard to give proper feedback, that’s something they have to learn. I think such evaluations are more useful in the Master’s courses, when students are better able to formulate their feedback.’
‘I know from my time on the degree programme committee in Nijmegen that some teachers don’t even look at the course evaluations any more. The evaluations often include blunt opinions — which we also got this time — and precious little in the way of useful feedback. Those teachers decide they have better things to do with their time.’
Van Duppen: ‘Of the 120 students who took the course, 23 filled in the evaluation form. That mainly seems to have been the students who hated the course; they are often the ones most likely to complete the evaluation forms. That’s why in the last period I handed out my own questionnaire about my didactic skills during tutorials. Then everyone fills it in and you get a more nuanced picture of what the average student thinks of you.’
In a previous article on this topic, the suggestion was made to give study associations a role as an alternative for course evaluations. They would discuss the course with students and share their findings with the teachers. Is that a good plan?
Huls: ‘That would be a good option. Or let the programme committees screen the course evaluations first before sharing the conclusions with the teacher.’
How important is the anonymity of the course evaluations?
Huls: ‘Of course, there is something to be said for making the evaluations anonymous. You don’t want to run the risk of a student suffering personally because of their feedback. But students should look critically at their comments: how do they think the teacher will feel on reading them? And is the feedback constructive in helping the teacher to improve?’
Van Duppen: ‘University should be a place where people feel free to say what they think of something. Our task is to teach young people to do that in the right way. Course evaluations are a good opportunity for practising that. If you make them anonymous, you are telling students they don’t need to take responsibility for what they say. Where a student genuinely feels that they can’t safely voice their criticisms under their own name, of course there should be some way of doing so anonymously. But I think WUR is sending the wrong message by making all evaluations anonymous.’
Study associations should not be in charge of course evaluations. Different associations have different sizes/committee members, and membership to them fluctuates over the years, affecting their ability to do the job. MSc students are often less involved with them as well, meaning their insights would likely be less suitable in their evaluations than for BSc courses. Ultimately the course coordinators & program committee of the studies are responsible for content & quality of the education, and therefore even if they request support should not depend on the student groups to make sure evaluation is done (well).
As course coordinator I once received a review where one of my lecturers, who is generally appreciated very much, received an unjustified personal attack of the type described in this dilemma.
I discussed this issue with the course evaluation staff at university and the study advisors of the relevant program (and of course the lecturer who was on the receiving end of the personal attack).
The course evaluation staff reviewed the remarks and agreed they were out of bounds so they removed the entire student from the evaluation (even as it is anonymous to them, they can remove the case).
The study advisors also agreed this was not ok and they created a workshop for this cohort where they discussed what you should and should not do in evaluations.
I learned that if an evaluation is truly unfair there may be people that can help . While this was still impactful for my lecturer (and myself as coordinator), the support we received did a lot of good.