Publishing student evaluations of lecturers will improve teaching

Teachers will be motivated to improve if internal assessments are made public, says John Colley

October 10, 2013

It is no longer enough to rely on research status and the prestige derived from an institution’s heritage to attract students

A total of 86 per cent of students are satisfied with the teaching of their courses, according to the 2013 National Student Survey - the same figure as in 2012. That sounds pretty good, but looked at another way, it also means that 14 per cent are less than satisfied - a score that would make no business proud. As a number of politicians and educationalists have argued recently, there is still plenty of room for improvement when it comes to how students in the UK are taught.

How might this be achieved? One measure of teaching performance used by some universities is student evaluation of modules (SEM), whereby students assess the value of the experience and the effectiveness of each module they take. The summarised results are usually available to prospective students on university intranets for those specific modules.

Another is student evaluation of teaching (SET). Although the results about individual teachers remain largely confidential, this metric is considered when assessing an individual’s teaching performance.

Unsurprisingly, SET is not universally popular with academics, some of whom yearn for the days when there was no objective way to assess their teaching effectiveness. Some staff are less than cooperative about the process and not all teaching is assessed, but one could argue that SET gives universities access to a tool that could be more fully exploited.

The introduction of such practices has already changed the teaching landscape. Universities are actively attempting to improve their teaching as they seek to attract better students, and their strategies have clearly met with some success as surveyed teaching scores are generally rising.

The trouble is that most universities have little in their armouries to help them deal with poor teachers. Formal performance management or disciplinary action is rarely taken and universities are reluctant to confront good researchers with low teaching scores. In fact, bad teaching is often “rewarded” by programme directors reducing the teaching load on the lecturer. Consequently, poor teaching generally leads to the individual having more time to pursue their research interests. Ironically, this is likely to improve rather than reduce their promotion prospects.

But could the higher education sector take a leaf out of the book of US health practitioners? US surgeons now publish their patient survival rates on websites so that prospective patients are better informed when selecting a surgeon; this practice is also being introduced in the UK in the NHS. In a similar manner, universities might publish the SET data on academics to inform student choice and drive teaching standards.

Such a move might have unintended consequences, of course. Staff might attempt to minimise their teaching or avoid large-class teaching (which often correlates with lower scores), for example. It would also penalise those teaching subjects that are more difficult to teach in an interesting and entertaining manner. But these problems could be addressed and the overall outcome would be that staff would become more likely to devote effort to improving the quality of their teaching.

My view is that publishing SET scores would improve teaching and, as some universities are drifting down the overall rankings owing to poor scores in the NSS, doing so would have obvious benefits. Both SET and the NSS highlight how increased transparency and access to university performance data can drive competition between universities.

It is no longer enough to rely on research status and the prestige derived from an institution’s heritage to attract students. Now is the time for universities to change their tune when it comes to how they reward and motivate good teachers.

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please Login or Register to read this article.

Reader's comments (2)

Well, courses do publish their NSS-UNISTATS data online, don't they, but this doesn't have the potential for cyberbullying that Dr Colley's proposal has. And to me, the US health system is the last place that I would look for exemplary practice. I have been to Dr Colley's website, and he does teach a lot, from languages to strategic management and leadership. I can't see where he is leading by example by publishing his own scores. Nor what his research chops are that make his 'my view is' worth the status the Times Higher has given it.
An arrogant, narcissistic, short-sighted view from someone who has addressed the issue of research-teaching balance apparently by publishing no research. What Dr. Colley ignores is that staff are under unreasonable pressure to "provide excellence" in four separate tasks--research, teaching, administration, and recruitment/raising NSS scores. And this is with no real pay increase in the last half-decade and drastically-cut administrative support. The specious argument of this ill-written piece is that staff are _still_ not slaving away hard enough, and require yet another managerial "metric" to flog them further. This passage is particularly galling: "Some staff are less than cooperative about the process and not all teaching is assessed, but one could argue that SET gives universities access to a tool that could be more fully exploited." Oh yes, there's _so much_ more room for exploitation! How foolish and irresponsible of management boards not to use the full power of fickle student opinion to their best advantage. But, if Dr. Colley is so eager to press his opinion on us, by all means, let him lead the way and provide his full SET scores in the comments, along with the research he has published and his guidance as to how he accomplished all this and still had time left over to write opinion columns in the THE Supplement.


Featured jobs