|
|||||||||||||||||
* Some students indicated that they would like the surveys to be more frequent. Students were also given the opportunity to make comments. Through these comments it appeared that the issue of most concern to students was that they had no information on whether any action was taken as a result of the surveys. They took them seriously but did not know whether staff did. As the surveys are undertaken in the final weeks of a unit, it is impossible for the existing class to be aware of, or to benefit from any changes made as a result. In fact there is an undertaking to students that, to ensure confidentiality, staff do not receive the results until after the student grades have been finalised. Students have no evidence to show them that staff make any use at all of the results of the surveys. From these comments came the original idea for this research project; given that the timing of student surveys does not allow for feedback on them to be given to the same group of students, what happens when staff give information to the next class on decisions they have made because of feedback from the previous group of students? How do students feel about getting this kind of information, about staff making their teaching explicit in this way? Will it make any difference to the 'culture' of the class or to how students feel about it? Why give feedback to students? The literature which has been published on student evaluations of teaching is vast and many works give detailed reviews of what has been covered. Most studies consider particular aspects - reliability and validity of questionnaires, biases which might occur, etc. Evaluation, however, is always seen as the last step in the process. Few studies look at what happens after the evaluation. What does exist is generally concerned with how feedback is given to staff (Brinko, 1993) how staff deal with it (Busuttil, 1995) or how useful it is (Marsh & Roche, 1994). Ramsden and Dodds (1989) suggest communicating with students on changes that have been made so that students complete the questionnaires seriously. The ultimate purpose of any student evaluation of teaching system is the improvement of teaching, and implicit in that is the improvement of student learning. A prerequisite condition for teachers to make improvements to their teaching as a result of student feedback is that they consider student opinion worth listening to. Respect, care for students and listening to what they have to say on teaching and other issues is considered a fundamental aspect of good teaching (Brookfield, 1986; Centra, 1993; Greene, 1973; Taylor, 1995; Vella, 1994). If we are to construct a model of teaching in which the students' opinions are considered important then, surely, it should be one where the distance between the teacher and student is cut so that the teaching becomes more of a dialogue between equals (Vella, 1994). It should be one where teacher and students co-operate and take on each others' roles (Brookfield, 1986) and where students feel, ultimately, that they are included in the teaching process. When students give feedback to a teacher they are sharing their perspectives of the unit and teaching they have just experienced. If the teacher acts on that information and communicates that action back to students, is he/she ultimately saying 'I am willing to let your views influence and change what I do in my teaching and in this way I am making you a participant in this process'? When teachers open up the process of teaching and improving teaching to students, they are making their teaching 'explicit'. It was this issue of making explicit changes to teaching made as a consequence of student feedback that this study sought to examine. What happens when a teacher teaches 'explicitly' is not an issue which has been investigated deeply in the higher education literature, however it is the kind of action which is part of what we already know about good teaching. Good teaching requires more than simply filling students with information (Biggs & Moore, 1993; Brookfield, 1990; Ramsden, 1992; Rogers & Freiberg, 1994; Taylor, 1994; Vella, 1994). The literature which informs the practice of good teaching in higher education considers the teacher-student relationship to be of paramount importance in the facilitation of learning. Good teachers need to listen to what students have to say, value their opinions and be open to suggestions students may make for change (Brookfield, 1990). They need to be able to view things from the students' position (Hodgson, 1984; Prawat, 1992; Rogers & Freiberg, 1994). Essential to this teacher-student relationship is that students see the teacher as a 'real person' (Brookfield, 1990; Rogers & Freiberg, 1994) who has faults and makes mistakes. By telling students of the changes they have made due to feedback, teachers are admitting to some degree of fallibility in their teaching. They are sharing publicly with a new group of students, information which has been given to them privately by the individuals of a previous class. Brookfield (1990) believes that by being publicly critical of their own work, teachers can eliminate some of the fear that students have of openly challenging the teacher, and thus encourage the students to be more critically reflective. Such assumptions are, however, largely speculative, given that such 'explicit' teaching has not been researched to any extent, particularly in higher education. This study aimed to examine the lecturers' and students' views on giving and being given reasons for certain pedagogical choices made in the unit, including what this may mean in relation to what is already known of aspects of good teaching practice which concern the teacher-student relationship, and to investigate a situation in which students may feel more included in the teaching/learning process. Design of the study Three units of study were chosen to be examined. Criteria for selection were that they should have had a student survey carried out at the previous offering of the unit and that the co-ordinator was considering implementing changes based on this feedback. It had been noted that students reported receiving feedback on feedback was rare. Thus, a group of university teachers who were prepared to engage in some 'explicit teaching', in giving this feedback to students, needed to be recruited for the study. To represent a variety of disciplines, the units selected came from Commerce, Computer Science and History. Changes that were made from the previous offerings included a change of text, a revised assessment structure and reduction in the amount of required reading. One lecturer had received criticism from previous students on the amount of content in the unit. Rather than reduce this, s/he decided to explain the reasons for this and to demonstrate priorities in the material. Data were collected through interviews with students and staff. Seven groups, a total of twenty-three students, were interviewed. Students were asked to comment on their experience of and attitude to completing student surveys, how they thought staff view the surveys and what their reaction was to the feedback on changes made because of what other students had said. The benefit of group interviews is that a reflective process might be encouraged, where the participants can reflect on their own views and react to the views of others in the group. This is particularly useful in a situation such as this where it was thought that students may not have given much thought to what the lecturer had said about feedback from previous students. Student volunteers were requested from each class, rather than a random sample being selected, to maximise the 'richness' of the data by including the views of students who may be particularly interested in the issues under discussion, especially in student surveys of teaching. Apart from the initial meeting to describe the project, staff were interviewed on two occasions. Firstly, at the end of the semester to gain their initial perceptions on the experience of 'teaching explicitly', and secondly, after they had received a summary of the student interviews from their unit, on their views of what the students had said. What the students said Students were asked for their views on student surveys of teaching, on what they thought staff felt about them and on their reactions to being given feedback on changes made based on feedback from previous students, ie on the 'explicit teaching'. Surveys of teaching and perceptions of staff views. Students, generally, considered the surveys to be their 'voice' on the unit, in many cases, the one opportunity they have to give their opinions. They were particularly appreciative of the chance to comment anonymously on the unit and teaching. The students interviewed were in their second or later year of study and had come to consider the completion of a survey as 'normal'. They did, however, point out that having a 'voice' is of little use if no one is listening, and they had very little idea of their lecturers' attitude towards student feedback. As one student said - When [the lecturer] actually said this is what people have said, that's the first time I have ever heard, you know, any comeback on what was filled in. Diane, Commerce. To some extent the students' views of surveys were coloured by their experiences in previous units, some negative and some positive. We hope that it will make a difference, but in reality I mean I've got to admit, I question because I have seen courses that continued to run the same way when I know that um, the majority of students have found things, some things really disturbing and have commented on them and they've continued the next semester......I want to be able to fill these forms out but I want to know that these forms actually make a difference and my observations have been that they don't seem to be impacting because people do the same things semester after semester...... Jill -History I filled in one for, actually it was last semester, for W_____. I think it helped her a lot, with the comments and the feedback she improved a lot. To certain lecturers it is helpful. Melanie -Computer Science Reaction to 'explicit teaching' Overall the students were very positive towards staff giving them feedback on what other students have said and what changes they have made as a result. Initially they commented on the lecturer's honesty - Yes it was good, at least he was honest and up-front. Colin -Computer Science I thought she was being very honest, you know and like she was going to make a serious effort you know to make sure these changes were effected throughout the class. Polly -History As the discussion developed, more in-depth responses emerged. These response could be categorised under five headings -
While these categories are not in any way mutually exclusive, they are hierarchical. All the students interviewed commented that giving them the feedback on the previous class's feedback showed that students were being listened to. This impression of listening and considering gave students the view that the lecturer was interested in them and in structuring his/her teaching towards what would help students learn. Well it shows that he's trying to orient it towards not making it hard for us. Like he's trying to help us sort of get where we are wanting to go sort of thing. Oh just generally you would feel that okay they are trying here, they're not totally against us, they're trying to help us through. Fiona -Commerce Lecturers who 'listened' were seen by the students to be more approachable generally, and in particular would be more sympathetic if there were problems in the unit - And he's listening to what the students are saying, which shows that I mean, as we progress along hopefully if we go up to him and say look you know this is a bit dodgy is there anything I can do about it at least you feel like he might listen whereas some of them it feels like I'm talking to a brick wall. Elizabeth -Commerce While all of the students agree that the 'explicit teaching' had made them feel that they were being listened to and considered and that it made the lecturer more approachable, only a few had considered the deeper issues of being on a more equal footing, of being 'included' or of engaging in a conversation. The Commerce lecturer had told his students that he was nervous during lectures and this had made some students feel that he was 'a regular kind of person'. Yes that's right and it sort of evens out a bit more like he's not quite as ---(indicates lecturer on a higher level - student on a lower lever - and evens out the difference). Fiona -Commerce Another student looked at this from a negative perspective, relating her experience of teachers who seemed unwilling to pay attention to student feedback. I'm here [shows higher level], I've done this and and how can this student who's here [shows lower level] teach me this. Jill -History One group of students from the History class were all 'mature-age', and these were the only students who verbalised the idea that receiving this information from the lecturer had augmented their feelings of inclusion, participation and ownership of the unit. And it also brings the students into the course from the very beginning. It makes them feel like they are part of this process of the course rather than them being on the outside. I think it's quite a good tool um for making the students feel like they have some say as to what's going on..... Yes, well I just think, my way of looking at it is that you feel that you have some ownership of the course. If they do that then you actually have some ownership of the course. Jill -History You feel a part of it don't you. George -History Yes you do. You feel like you are actually being consulted to some degree. Jill -History It was these students also who introduced the metaphor of a conversation. As long as we're allowed to say well you've told us all this and you've set this up you know, but have you thought about this, this doesn't work for us. As long as allow us to have a say. It's it's no good if it's a one sided conversation, if it makes them feel good when they've told us everything that's terrific, but if it doesn't actually benefit us, we need to be able to have, to then approach them and say this is terrific but what about this. Jill -History Perhaps with a lot of them, well some of them certainly, they they don't feel comfortable um in their teaching methods, where they hide, they use the podium then, they hide behind it or they hide [behind] the overhead projector. Eh, they don't even make eye contact with the students, like we're not really there, the one sided conversation. George -History What the teachers said One of the most interesting aspects was the reactions of the two lecturers, in History and Commerce, who had never before given feedback to students in this way. Before reading the interview summaries they were unaware of any difference in the units. Any changes in the 'culture' of the class they attributed to improvements they made each year, or to increased contact with the students. Their attitudes changed somewhat on reading the results from the interviews. As a result of the students' views, both these lecturers intended to continue this practice. This reinforces what the students said in the interviews regarding the lecturers listening and responding to students. The Computer Science lecturer had been teaching in this way for some time but had not asked for students' opinions of this. What they said had reinforced his view that this was part of 'best teaching practice'. Discussion When these teachers informed their students of changes made in response to feedback from previous students, the overall effect was a positive one. All respondents reported that being given this information had, in some way, enriched their experience of studying in the unit. The most salient issues for the students were that it made them feel that they were being listened to and considered by the lecturer. To the students this meant that the lecturer was taking student views, initially those expressed through a survey form, seriously. In this way the students could see that their ideas were being considered. It made them feel that the lecturer was approachable, was concerned about his/her teaching and about students and how they learn. Students in these classes felt empowered to make changes because they believed their views would be considered. This study examined three units in three different disciplines. While the results show that there were no differences in the responses of the students in the different subject areas, this is not intended to imply that the findings will be generalisable across all disciplines. Also the three units studied were ones in which the teachers had already shown themselves to be interested in and concerned about teaching and learning. This is shown, in part, by their attitude to collecting feedback from students in the past, and by the computer science lecturer's previous practice of being 'explicit' in his teaching. While previous students had indicated that some changes in the units were needed, any problems which had existed were not insurmountable. Further research with units where greater problems had existed may provide rather different results. Teaching is a multi-faceted activity and to look at one discrete aspect of it is very difficult. The 'culture' of a class is also made up of many inter-related aspects, including the behaviour of the teacher and his/her attitude to the students. In these classes, the 'explicit' teaching was one aspect of this 'culture'. The students had a positive attitude to the teachers overall, but this is not necessarily only as a result of the 'explicit' teaching. It would be simple to suggest that all staff who obtain feedback from students should follow this practice which, importantly in this era of diminishing resources to higher education, is cost-free. Many lecturers, however, may find the process of opening up to their students and exposing faults identified by past students, somewhat threatening. It is, however, a small intervention which is within the capabilities of every teacher to undertake to some extent. References Biggs, J. B., & Moore, P. J. (1993). The process of learning. (3rd ed.). Sydney: Prentice Hall. Brinko, K. T. (1993). The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 64 (5), 575-594. Brookfield, S. D. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brookfield, S. D. (1990). The skillful teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Busuttil, A. (1995). A study exploring the linkage between student evaluation of teaching and teaching development. Unpublished Master of Higher Education Thesis, University of New South Wales. Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Greene, M. (1973). Teacher as stranger. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Co. Hodgson, V. (1984). Learning in lectures. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwhistle (Eds.), The experience of learning . Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press. Marsh, H. W., & Roche, L. A. (1994). The use of students' evaluations of university teaching to improve teaching effectiveness. Canberra: DEET, Higher Education Division, EIP, AGPS. Prawat, R. S. (1992). Teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning: a constructivist perspective. American Journal of Education, 100, 354-395. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge. Ramsden, P. (1995). A major new study of university teaching., Education Report . Australia: ABC, Radio National. Ramsden, P., & Dodds, A. (1989). Improving teaching and courses: a guide to evaluation. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne. Richlin, L. R., & Cox, M. D. (1991). The scholarship of pedagogy: a message from the editors. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 2, 1-8. Rogers, C., & Freiberg, H. J. (1994). Freedom to learn. (3rd Ed. ed.). New York: Macmillan College Publishing Company. Taylor, P. G. (1994). Characteristics of quality learning. In P. Nightingale & M. O'Neill (Eds.), Achieving quality learning in higher education (pp. 53-75). London: Kogan Page. Taylor, P. G. (1995). Initial teacher education: the pedagogy is the message. South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 2(2), 207-216. Vella, J. (1994). Learning to listen, learning to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
