On the Contribution of Student Experience Survey Regarding Quality Management in Higher Education: An Institutional Study in Saudi Arabia

We appraise comparatively and analytical data under Student Experience Survey (SES) to discuss the possible generalizability of related College level differentials in Saudi Arabia. For this, data collected from students of two academic programs namely Bachelor of Dental Surgery, College of Dentistry; and B.Sc. Nursing, College of Nursing, University of Dammam, Dammam, Saudi Arabia, were considered. These data relate to experience of students halfway of respective academic program. The percentage of participation in SES by students was 100% and 94% respectively. Students of neither the programs reported high quality perception about any of the 20 items considered under SES. With a target of satisfaction by at least 50% students, students from College of Nursing expressed better satisfaction than those from the College of Dentistry. Same is true in case of aiming to achieve satisfaction by at least 75% students. However, to gain satisfaction by at least 80% students, each of the 20 items in both colleges need focus of college as well as university administrators towards required improvements. In summary, suitable to its varying environment, each program/college in a university requires specific improvement planning.

[1]  William E. Cashin.  Students do rate different academic fields differently , 1990 .

[2]  William E. Cashin,et al.  Using global student rating items for summative evaluation. , 1992 .

[3]  Donna L. Sundre.  Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and institutional performance , 1995 .

[4]  W. McKeachie.  Student ratings: The validity of use. , 1997 .

[5]  Shortcomings of Research on Evaluating and Improving Teaching in Higher Education , 2000 .

[6]  P. Abrami,et al.  The student ratings debate : are they valid? : how can we best use them? , 2001 .

[7]  M. Theall,et al.  Looking for Bias in All the Wrong Places: A Search for Truth or a Witch Hunt in Student Ratings of Instruction?. , 2001 .

[8]  M. R. Diamond,et al.  The usefulness of structured mid-term feedback as a catalyst for change in higher education classes , 2004 .

[9]  R. Coe,et al.  Effectiveness of Consultation on Student Ratings Feedback: A Meta-Analysis , 2004 .

[10]  L. Hodges,et al.  Translating Comments on Student Evaluations into the Language of Learning , 2006 .

[11]  R. Wright.  Student evaluations of faculty: Concerns raised in the literature, and possible solutions. , 2006 .

[12]  L. Aultman.  An Unexpected Benefit of Formative Student Evaluations , 2006 .

[13]  Herbert W. Marsh,et al.  Do university teachers become more effective with experience? A multilevel growth model of students' evaluations of teaching over 13 years. , 2007 .

[14]  W. Bozeman,et al.  The Value of Student Ratings: Perceptions of Students, Teachers, and Administrators , 2007 .

[15]  Francisco Zabaleta,et al.  The use and misuse of student evaluations of teaching , 2007 .

[16]  M. F. Ramalhoto,et al.  Ordinal Methodology in the Analysis of Likert Scales , 2007 .

[17]  Jonas W. B. Lang,et al.  Regular Feedback from Student Ratings of Instruction: Do College Teachers Improve their Ratings in the Long Run? , 2007 .

[18]  Tanya N. Beran,et al.  What’s the “Use” of Student Ratings of Instruction for Administrators? One University’s Experience , 2007 .

[19]  Mantz Yorke,et al.  ‘Student experience’ surveys: some methodological considerations and an empirical investigation , 2009 .

[20]  Abdullah Al Rubaish,et al.  Using Deductions from Assessment Studies towards Furtherance of the Academic Program: An Empirical Appraisal of Institutional Student Course Evaluation , 2011 .