Student evaluation of teaching and student centeredness in the Humboldtian and Emirati tribal traditions of higher education

Figures & data

Table 1. Trajectories of SET in universities in Germany and the UAE.

	Germany	UAE
Educational influences	Humboldtian; vertical hierarchy historically traced to the chair structure with academics organized below the authority of a Professor	A mixture of practices influenced from abroad through academics and foreign education; hierarchy derived from tribal social organization
Starting SET implementation	2000–2013	2001–2011
Forces	Coercive and normative: HE framework law and regional HE laws; supported by the Quality Pact for Teaching (2011–2016 and 2016–2020). Mimetic: local universities	Coercive: CAA Standards for Licensure and Accreditation Mimetic: universities copying the oldest universities Normative: universities seeking international accreditation and consultation
Uses	In public universities, monitoring through implementation on some courses, but with a ritualistic character and no evidence of the use of feedback. In private universities, monitoring and in GU5 and GU6 results communicated to students	Monitoring through implementation for all courses, with no pressures for lecturers’ active use of feedback. Legitimacy in front of students, but results not communicated to them. Control through use in the termination of contracts in U8 and U9
Administrative isomorphism	Questionnaire of circa 32 questions applied to some courses, except in the newest universities, where they are applied to all courses	Questionnaire of circa 18 questions applied to all courses in all universities accredited by the CAA
Pedagogical isomorphism	Student centrism in all universities and in the newest private ones in terms of the position of students as being clients	Student centrism, with less emphasis in U2 and U5

Table 2. Emphasis of evaluation forms in Germany and the UAE.

Demographics		Emphasis of the evaluation form		Questions
Case	Sector	Title of the evaluation form	Number of questions in which there was an emphasis on student-centeredness
GU1	Pr	Course evaluation	17 (30%): high	56
GU2	Pu	Student course evaluation	4 (17%): medium	24
GU3	Pu	Student survey	5 (42%): high	12
GU4	Pu	Student course evaluation	4 (10%): low	41
GU5	Pr	Student course evaluation	8 (44%): high	18
GU6	Pr	Lecturer and seminar evaluation	2 (5%): low	38
U1	Pu	Course evaluation survey	4 (20%): medium	20
U2	Pr	Student course evaluation	2 (10%): low	20
U3	Pr	Faculty evaluation	3 (20%): medium	15
U4	Pr	Course evaluation survey	1 (14%): medium	7
U5	Pr	Student course evaluation	2 (15%): low	20
U7	Pr	Instructor and course evaluation survey	4 (20%): medium	20
U8	Pr	Instructor and course evaluation	4 (20%): medium	20