Course Evaluations ‐ Are We Gaining Insight, or Feeding Egos? Using Novel Evaluations to Uncover Value

Abstract

Assessment is generally the evaluation of student learning and competency. But, when the roles are reversed, and we ask students for their perspective, assessment has the potential to improve a course. Unfortunately in practice however, there are some limitations. In particular, asking students to rate their experience on ubiquitous Likert scale evaluations imposes a ceiling effect, which limits utility. So while top notch evaluations feel great, and often support tenure, promotion and hiring decisions, constructive change seldom results.Over the past 7 years the Education Program in Anatomy at McMaster University has focussed on understanding learner profiles in an interprofessional education (IPE)/anatomy dissection course using multiple evaluation strategies. By employing Likert‐scales, qualitative ratings and Q method, students were asked about what they valued in the course. Specifically through Q method's factor analysis, individuals were grouped based on similarities in their rankings of common preferences/viewpoints: three previously unknown independent learner groups (Anatomy IPE Enthusiasts, Practical IPE Advocates and Skeptical IPE Anatomists) were identified for which common challenges could be addressed. Conversely, qualitative and Likert‐based analyses provided less granular information which was not directly useful for course evolution.With the above study serving as an exemplary template, we will challenge value of current course evaluation practices, and further explore Q methodology as a viable and valuable alternative. In all, session attendees can expect to learn methods for better understanding the types of students in our classrooms which will support strategies for more refined student‐centred learning.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.