Instruments for obtaining student feedback: a review of the literature

By John T. E. Richardson. 2005

873 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3eae36dffa37d1b0823ca0112082268044ec5c8f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Citations in the corpus

Students’ perceptions of teaching quality in higher education: the perspective of currently enrolled students (2007, background): “The CEQ has a substantial literature addressing its reliability and validity in a variety of settings (e.g. Ramsden, 1991; Trigwell & Prosser, 1991; Richardson, 1994, 2005a, b; Sadlo, 1997; Wilson et al., 1997; Richardson & Woodley, 2001; Lawless & Richardson, 2002; Lizzio et al., 2002; Byrne &…”
Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (2009, positive): “Strong support for the multidimensionality of SETs comes from research based on the Students' Evaluations of Educational Quality (SEEQ) instrument (Marsh, 1982a, 1987, 2007c; Marsh & Dunkin, 1997; Marsh & Hocevar, 1991a; Richardson, 2005).”
Agency as a fourth aspect of students engagement during learning activities (2011, background): “Teachers elicit and obtain student feedback in a number of ways, and it is likely that each of these affords students an opportunity for agentic engagement (for a review of these student feedback techniques, see Richardson, 2005).”
On the Validity of Student Evaluation of Teaching (2013, background): “Most authors agree that SET is correlated with teachers’ self-evaluations, alumni ratings, and evaluations by trained observers (Marsh, 1987; Richardson, 2005; Roche & Marsh, 2000).”
The relationship between engagement in the scholarship of teaching and learning and students’ course experiences (2008, methodology): “The CEQ has been used widely as both a research instrument and as a tool for student evaluation of teaching across the Australian Higher Education sector (for a recent review of CEQ-related research, see Richardson 2005).”
University performance evaluations: what are we really measuring? (2012, background): “Initially this Course Experience Questionnaire included five broad scales, including good teaching, clear goals and standards, emphasis on independence, appropriate assessment and appropriate workload (Richardson 2005).”
Dimensions Driving Business Student Satisfaction in Higher Education. (2015, background): “Student satisfaction is a complex concept consisting of several dimensions (Marzo-Navarro et al., 2005a, b; Richardson, 2005).”
The National Student Survey: development, findings and implications (2007, background): “Richardson ( 2005 ) suggested that quality of instruction was likely to depend upon the competence of individual teachers, whereas the timing and quality of feedback on students' work was likely to depend more upon institutional practices and procedures.”
Can we meet their expectations? Experiences and perceptions of feedback in first year undergraduate students (2013, background): “If students do not have the skills needed to interpret and use the comments given (Burke 2009; Cook, Rushton, and Macintosh 2006; Richardson 2005) then it is not surprising that they see the feedback as being of limited use and so cited their dissatisfaction.”
The measurement of the construct satisfaction in higher education (2009, background): “However, to establish long-term relationships with students it is necessary first of all, to be able to obtain their satisfaction and understand the factors that influence them, since the absence of satisfaction within a student can have baneful consequences for both the university and the student (”
From performativity to professionalism: lecturers’ responses to student feedback (2009, background): “Moreover, a perception held by some lecturers is that students are not competent to assess their skills (Douglas and Douglas 2006 ; Richardson 2005 ).”
Using a research instrument for developing quality at the university (2012, background): “Richardson (2005) argued that the first two formal instruments of student feedback should be criticised because they are focused on either a single course (students’ evaluation of teaching) or the institution as a whole (student satisfaction surveys).”
Disentangling Shape from Level Effects in Person-Centered Analyses: An Illustration Based on University Teachers’ Multidimensional Profiles of Effectiveness (2015, background): “Strong support for the multidimensionality of SETs comes from the Students’ Evaluations of Educational Quality (SEEQ) instrument (Marsh, 1982, 1987, 2007b; Marsh & Hocevar, 1991; Richardson, 2005).”
Doing course evaluation as if learning matters most (2008, background): “It seems difficult to find inspiration elsewhere, as most evaluation questionnaires described in the literature (Richardson, 2005) are quantitative ratings of dimensions of teaching and seem better suited to serve an audit purpose.”