Enabling student course evaluation in quality enhancement

There is an implicit expectation that change and improvement will happen as a result of evaluation. However, research found that student evaluation of teaching (SET) is barely used in educational development but rather for administrative purposes, accountability and control. Moreover, the discussion of SET is filled with claims about bias, low response rates and low use in educational enhancement. By approaching evaluation as a pedagogical practice, educational developers have a central role in highlighting the potential SET has for dialogues about educational quality and in educational enhancement. The authors are educational developers from two Scandinavian universities who strive to embed an enhancement focus in SET. Nonetheless, we meet resistance and skepticism towards SET with reference to existing research. Methods With this resistance in mind, we conducted a critical literature review of research on SET from United Kingdom (UK) and North America versus Scandinavia and are in this paper discussing the findings with reference to the different educational contexts. Results We found that research on SET from North America and UK is dominated by quantitative studies e.g., bias in evaluation practice, response rates, validity and reliability of surveys and evaluation use. These studies describe challenges with evaluation practice and conclude that SET is used for administrative purposes and control. Research from Scandinavia is dominated by qualitative studies, many challenging low use of SET in educational enhancement. We understand this diversity in relation to big differences in the educational contexts, particularly a private dominance in Anglo-Saxon institutions where students pay high tuition fees and are regarded as customers. This, in contrast to public education in Scandinavia where SET is mandatory and regarded to empower student’s voice. We see that these two research traditions are different but perhaps with similar implications. While research from North America and UK traditionally is investigating validity in measures and professionalism in procedures, potentially leading to an evaluation practice alienated from academic teachers and students. The Scandinavian tradition on the other hand may lead to a fragmented view on SET with a potential risk of being perceived as an unscholarly practice without a critical edge, done simply because it is mandated. This leaves academics and students unengaged, where foremost the former may consider SET merely as an administrative practice without scholarly ethos. Discussion As educational developers from contexts different from where most of research on SET originates from, we consider it as necessary to respond to how the diversity in educational contexts contribute to resistance and skepticism towards SET for enhancement purposes. Moreover, as educational developers in Scandinavia, we consider it as an obligation to visualize these differences and contemplate the transferability of research from one setting to another. Further, educational developers should take an active role as change agents in strengthening SET's potential in educational enhancement.