An examination of a course-integrated evaluation system in a junior college class toward a learner-centered evaluation of instruction

The feedback obtained from the end-of-course Student Ratings of Instruction (SRIs) is commonly used in higher education institutions for personnel decisions, such as promotion, tenure, and salary raises. However, SRI data are not systematically used to improve instruction, and the responsibility to interpret and act on the feedback is that of the individual instructor. If the ultimate purpose of student ratings is to improve the quality of instruction based on student feedback, then there is a need for evaluative systems that channel that feedback in systematic ways that are timely, ongoing, and supportive of effective instruction.; The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of the ongoing evaluation of instruction on the learning environment in a junior college freshman English class. Of special interest were the ramifications of using a course-integrated system for obtaining student feedback on a regular basis, and how the instructor and students who implemented the system perceived the effect of the exchange of feedback on the quality of instruction, two-way communication, and classroom environment. The system was based on a dialogic assessment model in which student feedback was collected through four phases, using questionnaires at the beginning, middle, and end of a course, and on a regular basis, using classroom assessment and learning journals.; An examination of the data generated by the model revealed that the instructor perceived the model to have a positive impact on learner-centered instruction, two-way communication, and plans for professional development but a mixed effect on the teaching environment. Data analysis also revealed that the majority of students perceived the regular exchange of feedback to have a positive effect on the quality of instruction, two-way communication, and the learning environment. Only 10% of the students in the sample expressed indifference to or dissatisfaction with the effect of the regular exchange of feedback on the quality of instruction and the learning environment.