View in EDS

Beyond numbers: the merit of routine student evaluation for starting academic teacher development.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Beyond numbers: the merit of routine student evaluation for starting academic teacher development.
Authors: Levelt, Lisa1 (AUTHOR) e.levelt@uu.nl, Tick, Nouchka T.1 (AUTHOR), van der Smagt, Maarten J.2 (AUTHOR)
Source: Journal of Further & Higher Education. Mar2026, Vol. 50 Issue 2, p381-399. 19p.
Subject Terms: *Student evaluation of teachers, *Teacher development, *Higher education, *Educational evaluation, *Mixed methods research, *Psychology teachers, *Effective teaching
Abstract: Despite its controversy, Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) remains a potentially central tool to inform academic teaching skills development. This study evaluated a SET procedure that was developed by starting academic teachers seeking to inform and monitor their teaching skill development. The procedure involves administering a SET twice per year, generating scores and open-ended feedback that are discussed with supervisors to aid interpretation and use. Mixed methods were used to evaluate whether the procedure serves its purpose. Analyses of evaluations from 5050 students for 42 starting Psychology teachers provided some support that aggregating the evaluations per measurement occasion can offer teachers reliable and structurally valid feedback. While data visualisations showed changes in specific teaching skills over time for certain teachers, overall, there was little significant development in scores across teachers, with notable between-teacher differences in trajectories. Interviews with 16 teachers indicated a general perception that the SET procedure was insightful and useful for their development, but individual experiences varied. We conclude that contextualising scores with visualisations of development over time and open-ended feedback can result in a meaningful tool for teacher development. A more qualitative and individualised approach is recommended when using SET in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Further & Higher Education is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:Despite its controversy, Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) remains a potentially central tool to inform academic teaching skills development. This study evaluated a SET procedure that was developed by starting academic teachers seeking to inform and monitor their teaching skill development. The procedure involves administering a SET twice per year, generating scores and open-ended feedback that are discussed with supervisors to aid interpretation and use. Mixed methods were used to evaluate whether the procedure serves its purpose. Analyses of evaluations from 5050 students for 42 starting Psychology teachers provided some support that aggregating the evaluations per measurement occasion can offer teachers reliable and structurally valid feedback. While data visualisations showed changes in specific teaching skills over time for certain teachers, overall, there was little significant development in scores across teachers, with notable between-teacher differences in trajectories. Interviews with 16 teachers indicated a general perception that the SET procedure was insightful and useful for their development, but individual experiences varied. We conclude that contextualising scores with visualisations of development over time and open-ended feedback can result in a meaningful tool for teacher development. A more qualitative and individualised approach is recommended when using SET in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:0309877X
DOI:10.1080/0309877X.2025.2604705