Closing the feedback loop
Responding to student feedback, or ‘closing the feedback loop’, is an important process that demonstrates that student opinions and experiences of teaching & learning are valued. Improved communications around feedback will help to build students’ sense of belonging to the academic community, which can also lead to improved student engagement and agency towards their academic studies. Below we provide more information and guidance for Closing the Feedback Loop.
We have also created a short guide for Closing the Feedback Loop: Top tips
The process of closing the feedback loop
Engaging with students in a meaningful way to close the feedback loop also helps in building a sense of community and to improve general satisfaction of the overall student experience. When closing the feedback loop is viewed as a dialogic process then there is potential benefit for both staff and students, as together they are able to work in partnership with a common goal of improving learning (Cooke-Sather et al, 2014).
Continuing the conversation: Enhancing practice
Levels of working with students
| Getting the basics in place | Enhancing practice | |
| SSP Groups
(Student Staff Partnership Groups) |
|
|
| Mid-module evaluations |
|
|
| End of module evaluations |
|
|
| Programme evaluation |
|
|
What level are you currently working at?
What can you do to move to the next level?
Continuing the conversation: UoR Examples
What are our colleagues doing? Examples from around the University of Reading
Module & Mid-Module Feedback
Biomedical Engineering
- Continuing the Conversation with: Module Evaluations
- What is being done: The module convenor uses blackboard to post responses to student comments made in the Module Evaluation. Students are also e-mailed these responses directly.
- The impact of doing this: Students have e-mailed the module convenor to express their appreciation for being kept informed.
- What was learned through this process:Responding openly demonstrates that we do actually read student comments and try to take them into account. It also allows for explanation of why various suggestions from students can’t actually be undertaken.
English Literature
- Continuing the Conversation with: Module Evaluations
- What is being done: Module convenors are required to respond to module evaluations on the module’s Blackboard site for the following year. Module convenors also use the first lecture of the year to highlight any changes they have made in response to module evaluations; Welcome-Back sessions for part 2 & 3 students are used as an opportunity to talk about student feedback and how it has been responded to; Termly ‘Town Hall Meeting’ for all English Lit undergraduates are used to inform students what we’ve been asked about at SSP Groups and how we’ve responded to their requests and comments; The ‘Together we have’ posters are used to summarize recent examples of student feedback being acted upon. They stay up over Spring and Summer terms.
Pharmacy
- Continuing the Conversation with: Module Evaluations, Staff-Student Partnership Groups (SSP Groups)
- What is being done: For the SSP Groups the Year Tutors meet with the student reps and arrange a brief session at the start of a lecture for the reps to report back the outcomes/actions from the SSP Group meeting; Welcome week at the start of the academic year is used to discuss with students the actions undertaken as a result of module evaluations.
- The impact of doing this: The Reps have indicated that students appreciate the efforts made to keep them informed of actions taken as a result of student feedback.
- What was learned through this process: It is important to ensure continual dialogue between the Reps and the student body about what has been done in response to their feedback (whether it affects them directly, or the year below).
Agriculture, Policy & Development
- Continuing the Conversation with: Mid-module Evaluations
- What is being done: Students complete at least three post-it notes in class; 1) things to keep 2) things to improve 3) things they need help with. Responses are collated into single document with the module convenor providing answers, making suggestions, and making changes where appropriate. This document is posted on Blackboard in a dedicate Module Evaluation tab and students in that module are sent an email to let them know where to find it.
- The impact of doing this: Within a week of posting this document the majority of the students had read the responses and seemed happy with progress. No further queries were raised other than by students who had missed the initial exercise; The module convenor has also seen an increase in the number of students seeking help and support – something which had been encouraged in the feedback to students.
- What was learned through this process: Not all students engaged with this activity; Students don’t always know where to find things on Blackboard so it helped the module convenor identify any gaps and improve my labelling on BB to accommodate this; Module convenor has been able to provide additional reassurance to all students which will help with stress levels and help them to keep on track; Early turnaround of responses to students is appreciated.
Staff-Student Partnership Groups (SSP Groups)
Archaeology
- Continuing the Conversation with: Staff-Student Partnership Groups (SSP Groups)
- What is being done: Meeting minutes include an “Actions” table with a summary of progress on each action. This table is circulated to all Reps, tabled at each meeting and posted on Blackboard
- The impact of doing this: The Actions Table signals a continuous process of listening and responding to student voice; There are positive comments (at departmental level) on the NSS that student concerns are being addressed.
- What was learned through this process: It is critical to find a way of clearly conveying to students that their comments are being acted on, as opposed to just doing so but with students not knowing about it!
Pharmacy
- Continuing the Conversation with: Module Evaluations, Staff-Student Partnership Groups (SSP Groups)
- What is being done: For the SSP Group meeting the Year Tutors meet with the Student Reps and arrange a brief session at the start of a lecture for the Reps to report back the outcomes/actions from the SSP Group meeting; Welcome week at the start of the academic year is used to discuss with students the actions undertaken as a result of module evaluations.
- The impact of doing this: The Reps have indicated that students appreciate the efforts made to keep them informed of actions taken as a result of student feedback.
- What was learned through this process: It is important to ensure continual dialogue between the Reps and the student body about what has been done in response to their feedback (whether it affects them directly, or the year below).
Architecture
- Continuing the Conversation with: Staff-Student Partnership Groups (SSP Groups)
- What is being done: There is a careful grading of urgency and priorities arising out of each SSP Group meeting; Year groups are given quick responses to key issues.
- The impact of doing this: There is a general feeling of trust from students to how the school responds.
- What was learned through this process: The studio system in architecture facilitates easy contact with key students to provide informal feedback and to clarify any queries raised at SSP Groups.
Construction Management
- Continuing the Conversation with: Staff-Student Partnership Groups (SSP Groups)
- What is being done: Students requested through the spring term SSP Groups of the 2017-2018 academic year, more consistency in the days and deadlines for assignment submissions. Working with the students and the T&L Team at the support centre, it was agreed on Tuesday to Thursday submissions for all modules with a 12noon deadline. This was rolled out at the beginning of the 2018-19 academic year and it has now become standard practice.
- The impact of doing this: The agreed submission days and times resulted in more consistency across the board for students and staff.
- What was learned through this process: Acting on student feedback does not always have direct impact on those students who provided it i.e. changes may only apply to succeeding cohorts. Therefore constant evaluation is important.
References
- Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
- Shah,M., Cheng,M., Fitzgerald, R. (2017). Closing the Loop on Student Feedback: The case of Australian and Scottish Universities. Higher Education 74(1) Springer, Dordrecht
- Spiller,D. (2011) Student evaluations: do lecturers value them and use them to engage with student learning needs? Conference paper accessed 20/11/19 from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/16999/ on 20/11/2019
- Tschirhart, C., & Pratt-Adams, S.D. (2019). Closing the loops: An evaluation of student-led module feedback at one UK higher education institution, International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(2).