The student voice in evaluation: different stage – different timbre
Author
Summary, in English
Background
The quality and relevance of the information gathered is paramount when using the student voice to improve study programmes.
Summary of work
In an on-going project we follow three cohorts of nursing students through their three-year programme. Methods used are two validated inventories (DREEM and CLES+T), written “free” comments, focus groups, semester meetings, and interviews with individual students. The purpose is twofold: to improve the programme and to better understand methods of evaluation. Here we report on the latter.
Summary of results
Compared, the different methods paint quite different and sometimes conflicting pictures of the programme. This can partly be attributed to limitations inherent to the methods used, e.g. closed or open questions, anonymity or not, written views or discussions. However, preliminary results suggest that the way in which a particular evaluation or method is framed, along with the inter- and intragroup dynamics it helps to create, will bring certain experiences or agendas to the foreground while pushing others to the side.
Conclusions
In order to better make use of the student voice in programme development we need to improve our understanding of evaluation methods and framing from the students’ point of view.
Take-home message
The quality and usefulness of data from evaluations depends not only on the questions and techniques used to collect student views. Important is also how the stage for evaluation is set and how students perceive the situation
The quality and relevance of the information gathered is paramount when using the student voice to improve study programmes.
Summary of work
In an on-going project we follow three cohorts of nursing students through their three-year programme. Methods used are two validated inventories (DREEM and CLES+T), written “free” comments, focus groups, semester meetings, and interviews with individual students. The purpose is twofold: to improve the programme and to better understand methods of evaluation. Here we report on the latter.
Summary of results
Compared, the different methods paint quite different and sometimes conflicting pictures of the programme. This can partly be attributed to limitations inherent to the methods used, e.g. closed or open questions, anonymity or not, written views or discussions. However, preliminary results suggest that the way in which a particular evaluation or method is framed, along with the inter- and intragroup dynamics it helps to create, will bring certain experiences or agendas to the foreground while pushing others to the side.
Conclusions
In order to better make use of the student voice in programme development we need to improve our understanding of evaluation methods and framing from the students’ point of view.
Take-home message
The quality and usefulness of data from evaluations depends not only on the questions and techniques used to collect student views. Important is also how the stage for evaluation is set and how students perceive the situation
Department/s
Publishing year
2014
Language
English
Links
Document type
Conference paper: abstract
Topic
- Educational Sciences
- Health Sciences
Keywords
- Curriculum Quality Assurance Medical education Evaluation
Conference name
The Association for Medical Education in Europe
Conference date
0001-01-02
Status
Published
Research group
- Integrative Health Research