Interviewing Students about What They are Learning to Show Evidence of Teaching Performance How can I produce evidence of student learning for a review? Focus: Ask students what they learned, what had the most impact, and what kinds of connections to other course material they were able to make. Objective of using technique: To determine what the students learned and how well they learned it, in this class. Outcome: A summary memo, for distribution to a chair, divisional committee, peer review committee, or post-tenure review committee. Summary of the Technique: This technique involves interviewing small groups of students (2-3) after the semester is over. Colleagues of the instructor, who are reasonably knowledgeable in the subject matter, conduct the interviews. Before the interviews, the interviewers review the instructor's reflective memo so the interviewers understand what the instructor was attempting in the course. These colleagues also discuss with the instructorwhat might be appropriate areas of discussion with the student groups. The student interviews take place in small groups (2-3); for large classes, it may not be possible to interview everyone, so "random" samples of students might be used. The interviewers take notes regarding the tenor and substance of the student-interviewer discussions, while attempting to ensure all students are heard and all opinions are equally weighted. The interviewers generate a summary memo from their interviews, and meet with the instructoragain to discuss the results of the interviews. For formative evaluation of beginning probationary faculty, the summary memo from the interviewers is given only to the instructor. Others (department chairs, for example) may be informed that this kind of review has occurred, but "results" are not disseminated or recorded. Time Involved: For interviews, 1 hour interviews by 2 peers interviewing 2-3 students at a time; typically all students are interviewed in a 25 student class, so 7-8 hours of interviews; interview material is reviewed along with a reflective memo from the instructor by one of the interviewers. The reviewers write a summary memo based on interviews. Who does it? Colleagues within or outside of a discipline do interviews; senior colleagues create summary. Interviewers may be from outside of unit or institution, allowing for a different perspective on observations. For this review to be taken as a relatively objective one, it may be useful to have one or more reviewers from outside of the instructor's department, or institution. To whom is it done? Faculty in need of documentary evidence of student learning, for evaluation. Format of instruction: Probably best for small lab/lecture but teaching format doesn't seem too important here. Unit of observation: Entire semester; interviews done 2-3 weeks after end of term. Range: A subset of topics covered in the class. A challenge here is to determine a set of questions or topics for discussion that will probe the breadth and depth of student understanding, in a group setting. Documentation: As presented, the result of the review is a summary memo. After review and comment by the reviewed instructor, the memo is transmitted to the appropriate site where it becomes a part of the instructor's dossier. Audience: Interested parties: department chairs, merit review committees, deans, divisional committees. Comments: This is intended as a summative review of a instructor, with focus on what the students have learned in a instructor's class. Pros and Cons: This type of method, interviewing students, can be very informative in terms of issues students can comment on. For investigation of student learning, the skill and approach of the interviewer are also critical. In other applications of this method, for example process evaluation, students might have some perspective on what constitutes "good" process or "bad" process. Definition of what was to be learned, how well it was to be learned, and what would be a measure of learning may unfamiliar to many students. For many topics it may be difficult for the interviewer to accurately assess learning when interviewing a group of students for an hour. Users of this method should define the information sought from the method prior to implementation, to see if students are the best source of this information. The method requires a significant amount of time from students, faculty, and interviewer, but seems to be a direct way of finding out what students have learned. Specific Directions:  When  Instructor Interviewers  Students Early in semester Write reflective memo on objectives and means to achieve objectives of class     Early in semester Distribute reflective memo to interviewers, invite them to come to class if they like Read reflective memo   During semester Teach class   Learn important stuff Before end of semester Organize groups of students, meeting times, places Discuss with instructor areas of discussion with students   After end of semester Discuss with interviewers: reflective memo, areas of discussion with students Discuss with instructor areas of discussion with students   At student meetings   Discuss with students agreed upon elements of course and faculty activity Show up for meetings, discuss with interviewers After student meetings   Generate summary memo from student discussions, deliver to instructor only   After student meetings Meet with interviewers to review summary memo Meet with instructor of discuss summary memo   After student meetings Generate response or comments on review summary to be included with the review memo Provide appropriate parties copy of interviewer summary and instructor response as a package   Reference: Innovative Higher Education 20 pp. 271-276, by Sherri Sheppard, Larry Leifer, and J. Edward Carryer (Stanford)