There's got to be a better way! Introducing faculty to mid-course formative reviews as a constructive tool for growth and development.

INTRODUCTION

Amid the ever-changing landscape of teaching, there remains one unloved and immovable constant: student evaluations. What can be done to reframe this conversation so that the student evaluation becomes a useful and constructive tool for the growth and development of faculty?

METHODS

This article describes an interactive session where participants shared their thoughts about the helpful and not so helpful aspects of formative student evaluations and feedback. An effective method of gathering constructive formative student feedback, Small Group Instructional Diagnosis (SGID) facilitated by a faculty colleague was introduced to a faculty group at the 2017 Belmont University Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) workshop as a supplement to the university sponsored student evaluation tool and an approved formal peer review template.

RESULTS

The most frequently stated positive outcome (what is working well) was that the student evaluations sometimes provided constructive feedback. The most commonly stated problem (what was NOT working well) was the low response rates received from the students. The most commonly stated suggestion for improvement was to enable the professors to create a course-specific formative evaluation from an available template.

CONCLUSION

The authors feel that this introduction to the SGID provides a lasting impression on a large number of faculty members in a short amount of time. This process can easily be repeated on any college campus, and should produce similar results.