MEDEV

School of Medical Sciences Education Development

February 2009, UCL

The second national conference on student evaluation welcomed over 50 delegates from all over the United Kingdom to this one day event including academics, quality officers and students predominantly but not from health related subjects.

This year’s conference widened its collaborative network to include Hull York Medical School (HYMS), and built on a well-established working partnership between Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry and University College London (UCL). It received financial support from the MEDEV Subject Centre.

The opening plenary sessions highlighted the central and expanding role of the student in evaluating and contributing to educational quality within Higher Education. Our first keynote speaker, Lord Young of Norwood Green, Minister for Students (Department for Innovations and Universities and Skills), told us about the advances being made in hearing directly from students and amplifying their voice within government. He talked of the Student Listening Programme and other developments which facilitate contact with the ‘grass roots’. Aaron Porter, Vice President (Higher Education) National Union of Students (NUS), spoke next about the union’s work to empower students to co-author their educational experience and the implications of greater involvement for Students Unions. The afternoon plenary had representatives fromthe GeneralMedical Council, (KirstyWhite, Head of Quality Assurance and Tom Foley, student visitor) and The Quality Assurance Agency (Derfel Owen, Developments Officer). All three speakers discussed the philosophy behind embedding students in pivotal evaluations of educational quality (including Institutional Audit and programme reviews). They gave realistic tips on how we could support robust direct student involvement at our own institutions.

The workshops provided practical and interactive opportunities to build on the theme of the day. Professor Murdoch-Eaton presented her research around students’ perceptions of feedback, highlighting that students often did not recognise when they were being given feedback or being asked to provide it and she facilitated a discussion around how we can raise students’ awareness. Dr Berlin’s workshop debated the notion of greater involvement of students within the academy. Using a case study her workshop highlighted the tensions inherent in democratising the quality arena. Jerry Booth’s workshop focused on the innovative work done at Hull York by which students generate evaluation reports about clinical placements. Students work together in groups to write a collectively agreed letter to their tutors about their teaching. PeteWalker, Ann Griffin and Lynne Magorrian ran a workshop to look at the complex choices involved in making meaningful reports and demonstrated the features of the Bristol On Line Survey tool that could help in this process.

The conference fostered animated debate and discussion, and extremely good feedback. The key message from the conference was:

“If evaluation systems are to be effective at gathering data and prompting change there needs to be enhanced communication between the academy and students about the purposes, design and impact of such systems.”

Three main conclusions were identified.

• Involving students in external and internal review panels offers significant added value.
• Reviewing and redefining the role of student representatives may allow them to make a more robust contribution to quality enhancement.
• Providing timely, accessible information to students on how to give feedback, how their feedback has been used and why it sometimes is not or cannot be heeded may strengthen their confidence and involvement in the process.

Thank you to everybody who contributed to this event and the support of Ann Glasser, Tom Olney, and the MEDEV Subject Centre team.