We present reflections on student evaluation of teaching (SET) in the context of recent higher educational research that assesses SET, as well as concurrent and/or subsequent student performance.
Conclusions:
In a sense, there is in-built cynicism in SET, with more favourable SET for easier assessment. There is emerging evidence that SET is inversely proportional to the performance of students in subsequent courses, i.e. the higher the ratings, the poorer the students perform in subsequent studies. It is proposed that SET should be combined with contemporaneous formative and summative assessments of student performance in medical school settings, especially in psychiatry education.
NaidooRJamiesonI. Empowering participants or corroding learning? Towards a research agenda on the impact of student consumerism in higher education. J Educ Policy2007; 20: 267–281.
2.
LooiJCAndersonKJ. Between SET and ASP: balancing the scales of student evaluation of teaching (SET) and teachers’ assessments of student performance (ASP) for medical school education in psychiatry. Australas Psychiatry2018; 26: 659–661.
3.
Curtis-BartonMTEaglesJM. Factors that discourage medical students from pursuing a career in psychiatry. Psychiatrist2018; 35: 425–429.
4.
StroebeW. Why good teaching evaluations may reward bad teaching: on grade inflation and other unintended consequences of student evaluations. Perspect Psychol Sci2016; 11: 800–816.
5.
JohnsonVE. Grade Inflation: A Crisis in College Education. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag New York, 2003.
6.
YunkerPJYunkerJA. Are student evaluations of teaching valid? Evidence from an analytic business core course. J Educ Business2003; 78: 313–317.
