Article: Mid-Semester Surveys Can Improve Your Classes
by Walter Milner, Instructional Designer IV, Learning and Educational Center
Feedback from students can be an important source of information about what is working or not working in a course. Most often, student feedback comes in the form of a summative course evaluation. Here at NSU, students fill out course evaluations at the end of each semester. While these evaluations have value, they also carry limitations. For one, questions are often not open-ended, and therefore are limited in the ability for students to communicate the nuances of their experience. They are also delivered only once at the end of the semester. This allows for adjustments to future courses, but it doesn’t allow for immediate changes in the current semester. If instructors conduct formative evaluation surveys or questionnaires during the semester, either at the midpoint or at various times during the semester, in addition to the formal summative evaluations, it allows for opportunities to gather different kinds of valuable information in real time when immediate shifts can take place. These surveys can be quick, informal, and anonymous.
End-of-semester evaluations have been shown to contribute to significant improvements in teaching, and research supports the value of these evaluations in higher education (Murray, 1997). While they are valuable, they are limited in the types of information they provide (Murray, 1997). Furthermore, these evaluations are summative, so they don’t add value to current students in a class or motivate instructors to take immediate action (Kessler & Nadjm-Tehrani, 2002 as cited in Sozer et al., 2019; Diamond, 2004). They also don’t allow instructors the opportunity to clarify responses from the same students who gave them (Diamond, 2004).
If instructors develop their own surveys or questionnaires and present them to students either mid-semester, or at various points during the course, it opens up opportunities to gather more comprehensive and immediate information on course design and student perceptions of their own learning outcomes. These informal surveys would be best designed with open-ended questions, that allow for more elaborate and nuanced feedback compared with the types of questions, such as Likert-style questions, that are typical of end-of-semester-evaluations (Sozer et al., 2019). Students can answer anonymously, freeing them up to be open and forthcoming. For instructors, these surveys are free from the pressures that may be associated with end of course evaluations, such as promotions and renewal of contracts (Sozer et al., 2019; Diamond, 2004). From both points of view therefore, student and faculty, these types of surveys can be seen as constructive and meaningful without further implications. The communication remains completely between students and instructors within a current course offering.
Studies support the use of mid-semester evaluations. Both students and instructors have been shown to have positive perceptions of these types of formative evaluation surveys (Brown, 2008). These perceptions include the belief that these surveys help improve both student and instructor performance and attitudes toward a class (Brown, 2008). Students’ perceptions of their own learning increase significantly when faculty ask for their suggestions and take action based on those suggestions (McGowan & Osguthorpe, 2011). Understanding the student experience in a course helps faculty identify concerns and misunderstandings, along with other barriers to learning, and gives faculty motivation to implement changes in the way they conduct their classes, design assessments, and evaluate student work (Diamond, 2004). Students have been shown to be eager to give feedback to faculty on their learning experiences (McGowan & Osguthorpe, 2011). It helps them feel that their professors care about student success, the student point of view, and shows they are committed to teaching and doing it well (Brown, 2008). In a study of award-winning online college courses, one of the elements that were highlighted in differentiating these courses from others, was the use of these types of surveys to elicit feedback on student perceptions of the instruction, whether learning objectives are being met, and overall student satisfaction (Kumar et al., 2019).
Informal surveys can be delivered in both face-to-face and online formats. They can be done as exit tickets on paper (a quick question you ask students to answer before leaving class, often used to see if they understood the lesson) or they can use online tools. A tool such as Poll Everywhere, for example, which is available for free to all NSU faculty, has options for both open ended questions and anonymous responses. Of course, other types of poll or survey questions – aside from open-ended responses – can also be used to survey students. Students can be asked about the design of assessments, the level of feedback they receive, the perceived value of course materials, and any other general or specific questions that an instructor is interested in getting feedback on. They can be asked questions specific to content, related to whether they understood the material or needed more instruction. They could also be asked if they are intimidated by an upcoming project or assessment. These types of questions can give valuable insight to instructors in real time, letting them know if they need to review certain material again or give students more guidance on an assignment.
Informal surveys or questionnaires given at various points during a course lead to increased communication between students and their instructors. They can serve to help students feel that they have a voice and more agency in their education. They also can give faculty valuable information they can use to improve their courses, both in the current term and in future terms. The majority of faculty who carry out these types of surveys end up implementing changes in their courses (Diamond, 2004). Increased communication and feedback can only be a net plus for our student community, assuring them that their input is valuable. These types of surveys can serve to be another piece in the puzzle of how we fulfill our core mission here at NSU.
References
Brown, M. J. (2008). Student perceptions of teaching evaluations. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(2), 177-182.
Diamond, M. R. (2004). The usefulness of structured mid-term feedback as a catalyst for change in higher education classes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(3), 217–231.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787404046845
Kumar, S., Martin, F., Budhrani, K., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2019). Award-winning faculty online teaching practices: Elements of award-winning courses. Online Learning, 23(4).
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i4.2077
McGowan, W. R., & Osguthorpe, R. T. (2011). 12: Student and faculty perceptions of effects of midcourse evaluation. To Improve the Academy, 29(20210331).
https://doi.org/10.3998/tia.17063888.0029.016
Murray, H. G. (1997). Does evaluation of teaching lead to improvement of teaching? International Journal for Academic Development, 2(1), 8–23.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144970020102
Sozer, E. M., Zeybekoglu, Z., & Kaya, M. (2019). Using mid-semester course evaluation as a feedback tool for improving learning and teaching in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(7), 1003–1016.