A Comparative Appraisal of Timings for Program Evaluation Survey and Related Institutional Results in Saudi Arabia: Quality Management in Higher Education
- 1
Abstract
The periodic evaluation of academic programs is mandatory for quality management in higher education world-wide. This paper reports a unique setting in which each student performed two such evaluations using structured question-naires, viz.:(a) “Student Experience Survey” (SES) for their learning experience halfway through their academic pro-gram, and (b) “Program Evaluation Survey” (PES) at end of the program. A comparative appraisal of these two sets of data from students doing the Bachelor of Dental Surgery, College of Dentistry, University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia, aims to see if it is valid to generalize the observed related differentials in Saudi Arabia. The percentage of students’ participation was 100% in both SES and PES. In the students’ perceived cumulative experience, none of the total 20 items in SES was reported to be of either “high” or “acceptable” quality. By contrast, in the PES, one of the 13 items common to both questionnaires was reported to be of “high quality (“what I have learnt in this program will be valu-able for future”)”. Again, one of nine additional items in PES (“Developed knowledge & skill for my chosen career”) emerged to be of acceptable quality. In summary, irrespective of timing for PES, the results suggest the need of im-provements in relation to almost every item confirming ongoing developmental phase.
- P. Gravestock and E. Gregor-Greenleaf, “Student Course Evaluations:Research, Models and Trends,” Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario, Toronto, 2008.
- A. Al Rubaish, “On the Contribution of Student Experience Survey Regarding Quality Management in Higher Education: An Institutional Study in Saudi Arabia”, Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, 2010, pp. 464-469.
- L. P. Aultman, “An Expected Benefit of Formative Student Evaluations,” College Teaching, Vol. 54, No. 3, 2006, pp. 251. doi:10.3200/CTCH.54.3.251-285
- T. Beran, C. Violato and D. Kline, “What’s the ‘use’ of student ratings of instruction for administrators? One University’s Experience,” Canadian Journal of Higher Educatuon, Vol. 35, No.2, 2007, pp. 48-70.
- L. A. Braskamp and J. C. Ory, “Assessing faculty work: enhancing individual and institutional performance,” Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1994.
- J. P. Campbell and W. C. Bozeman, “The Value of Student Ratings: Perceptions of Students, Teachers and Administrators,” Community College Journal of Research and Practice, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2008, pp. 13-24. doi:10.1080/10668920600864137
- W. E. Cashin and R. G. Downey, “Using Global Student Rating Items for Summative Evaluation,” Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 84, No. 4, (1992), pp. 563-572. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.563
- M. R. Diamond, “The Usefulness of Structured Mid-Term Feedback as a Catalyst for Change in Higher Education Classes,” Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 5, No. 3, 2004, pp. 217-231. doi:10.1177/1469787404046845
- L. C. Hodges and K. Stanton, “Translating Comments on Student Evaluations into Language of Learning,” Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2007, 279-286. doi:10.1007/s10755-006-9027-3
- J. W. B. Lang and M. Kersting, “Regular Feedback from Student Ratings of Instruction: Do College Teachers Improve Their Ratings in the Long Run?” Instructional Science, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2007, 187-205. doi:10.1007/s11251-006-9006-1
- H. W. Marsh, “Do University Teachers become More Effective with Experience? A Multilevel Growth Model of Students’ Evaluations of Teaching over 13 Years,” Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 99, No. 4, 2007, pp. 775-790. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.775
- R. J. Menges, “Shortcomings of Research on Evaluating and Improving Teaching in Higher Education. In K. E. Ryan (Ed.), Evaluating Teaching in Higher Education: A Vision for the Future,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Vol. 83, 2000, pp. 5-11.