Mid-term Course Evaluation

Mid-term course evaluations provide student feedback and perspectives on the effectiveness of teaching strategies and other aspects of a course before the traditional end-of-term feedback is given. Because mid-term evaluations are not used for retention or promotion purposes, instructors can use the information solely for developing their courses (Taylor et al. 2020). By asking students about aspects of the course during the early/middle stages of the course (usually within the first 4-6 weeks of a semester course), instructors can adjust their course to benefit student learning (Diamond 2004, Bubb et al. 2013).

By incorporating student suggestions from mid-term evaluations, instructors increased student learning and their own teaching effectiveness (Bubb et al. 2013, Taylor et al. 2020) while also building stronger teacher-student relationships (Diamond 2004, Taylor et al. 2020). It is critical to address the main concerns students present in mid-term evaluations, to explain any changes to the course based on the student evaluations, and to clarify which aspects of the course are remaining the same and why (Bubb et al. 2013). This post-evaluation conversation ensures student voices are heard and realigns the instructor and students’ expectations going forward in the course. Instructors that use mid-course evaluations also report receiving higher end-of-term evaluations (Diamond 2004, Bubb et al. 2013, Taylor et al. 2020).

Mid-term course evaluations can take many forms and vary in length. The simplest mid-term evaluation consists of three or four questions with open-ended responses that are answered on paper during class or through online surveys (Diamond 2004, Taylor et al. 2020). The most common questions are:

1. What aspect of the course is most beneficial to your learning?
2. What aspect of the course is least effective for your learning?
3. What can the instructor do to improve your learning?
4. What can you do to improve your learning?

In addition to these common questions, instructors can incorporate Likert scale questions (providing a statement and then a 1-5 scale of agreement/disagreement), multiple-choice questions, or other questions formats to elicit student responses to specific questions. For example, an instructor could ask how effective a list of common classroom practices (lecture, group work, discussions, assignments, etc.) are for student learning using Likert scales for statements on each classroom practices or alternatively using a set of multiple-choice questions (e.g., Which of the following was most/least beneficial to your learning?).

Alternatively, instructors can use a facilitator (usually an instructional designer or educational developer) to conduct an interactive evaluation with students during a class session (Holt and Moore 1992, Diamond 2004, Taylor et al. 2020). The facilitator meets at the classroom and holds a discussion with the students while taking note of students’ comments, suggestions, and other feedback. The facilitator then consolidates these comments and meets to discuss the student feedback with the instructor. During the meeting, the instructor and facilitator develop a plan for implementing course changes and determine a method for explaining the changes to the students (Holt and Moore 1992, Diamond 2004, Taylor et al. 2020). Overall, facilitator lead evaluations provided instructors with alternative instructional strategies to meet student learning objectives, increased instructor motivation to implement new techniques, and promoted future modifications to other courses (Diamond 2004, Taylor et al. 2020).

This page was authored by Michele Larson and last updated May 24, 2022