Abstract
This paper investigates barriers for using course evaluation as a tool for improving student learning, through the analysis of course evaluation practices at The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), a technical university in Stockholm. Although there is a policy on development‐focused course evaluation at KTH, several stakeholders have expressed dissatisfaction with its poor results. Interviews were conducted with faculty and student representatives to investigate the perceived purpose and focus of evaluation and its current utilization. Results show that evaluation is teaching‐ and teacher‐focused. As course development is not in the foreground, evaluations merely have a fire alarm function. It is argued that course evaluation should be regarded as a component of constructive alignment, together with the intended learning outcomes, learning activities and assessment. Finally, the concept system alignment is proposed, extending constructive alignment to the institutional level.
The evaluation task can generally be said to be:
-
to describe what actually happens in that which seems to happen
-
to tell why precisely this happens, and
-
to state the possibilities for something else to happen.
(Franke‐Wikberg & Lundgren, Citation1980, p. 148)
Acknowledgements
The author thanks the teachers and students who were interviewed; all colleagues at KTH who have participated in the staff development course; course leaders and participants in Strategic Pedagogic Development, supported by the National Agency for Higher Education, especially Åsa Lindberg‐Sand (Lund University) and Anna‐Karin Magnusson (now with the National Agency for Higher Education). Special thanks to Stefan Hallström and Adam Edström.
Notes
1. Oral communication, KTH Human Resource office.
2. Inspiration is taken from sources such as Gibbs (Citation1999) and the investigative tools of the Formative Assessment in Science Teaching project.