Checklist
Course evaluation administration conditions checklist
A checklist for quality offices and programme directors who compare course evaluation scores across lecturers or years. Research going back to Feldman (1979) found that ratings tend to be somewhat higher when students can be identified, when they are told results feed personnel decisions, and when the lecturer stays in the room. The effects are small, but fixing these conditions keeps them out of comparisons. Koji runs evaluations as private interviews students take on their own device, with no lecturer in the room.
What's in this checklist
- Use the same person or system to run every evaluation you compare
- Ask the lecturer to leave the room, or collect outside class
- Give every class the same statement on how results are used
- Choose anonymous or identified collection, and do not mix them
- Collect in the same window of the term for every course
- Note any change in method next to the scores in reports
Use this image
Free to use in your docs, decks and posts under CC BY 4.0, as long as you credit Koji with a link to this page. To embed it, paste this into your page:
html
<a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/course-evaluation-administration-conditions-checklist"><img src="https://www.koji.so/visuals/course-evaluation-administration-conditions-checklist/course-evaluation-administration-conditions-checklist.png" alt="Checklist of administration conditions to standardise before comparing course evaluation scores: who runs it, what students are told, anonymity and timing." width="1200" height="630" /></a>
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/course-evaluation-administration-conditions-checklist">Course evaluation administration conditions checklist</a>, Koji</p>
