Instructor Feedback Instrument and Rationale

END OF UNIT – STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Module for Certified Dental Assistants

Instructor: _________________________           Date: ______________

Unit: ______________________________

 Purpose: The purpose of this survey is to assess your instructor at the end of each unit

Directions: Please circle the appropriate number in response to the following questions

1 2 3 4 5
Disagree Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Agree Strongly

Preparation:

1. The instructor clearly stated the unit’s objectives and outcome?
1   2   3   4   5

2. The instructor provided a clear unit schedule?
1   2   3   4   5

Instruction:

3. The instructor clearly delivered the theory portion of the unit
1   2   3   4   5

4. The instructor provided time for student questions during the theory portion
1   2   3   4   5

5. The instructor gave concise demonstrations in the clinical portion
1   2   3   4   5

6. The instructor provided time for student questions during the clinical portion
1   2   3   4   5

7. The instructor provided clear responses to all questions
1   2   3   4   5

8. The unit handouts were beneficial to your learning process
1   2   3   4   5

Examination:

9. The instructor provided clear instructions on exams
1   2   3   4   5

10. The instructor provided timely feedback
1   2   3   4   5

11. The instructor provided constructive feedback
1   2   3   4   5

12. The instruction in this unit met learning objectives and outcome
1   2   3   4   5


OPTIONAL
Please use the back of this questionnaire for comments and/or suggestions.

 

Rationale:

  1. Overall purpose of END OF UNIT – STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Module for Certified Dental Assistants (Truant, 2016):

The Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery Module for Certified Dental Assistants is a hypothetical course that I created in PIDP 3210, Curriculum Design. I have been applying it in my current professional practice. The module is intended to introduce the specialty of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery (OMS) to Certified Dental Assistants (CDA’s). It consists of 6 units that are delivered in sequential order, and increases in degree of difficulty. It is important to assess learners before advancing to the next unit in the module; it is equally important to assess instruction as well. This brief student survey is a summative feedback instrument used to assess the instructor at the end of each unit, so that the instructor can address personal discrepancies in delivery when considering a learner-centred environment. Dental assisting has a strict knowledge, skills, and attitudes requirement; it is important that the instructor fosters learner success. The purpose of creating the instrument highlights my overall instructional goals, and addresses how well I am accomplishing these goals. My goal is not how well I know my subject: it is how well I can convey it. A summative feedback instrument distributed at the end of each unit will ensure an improvement in instruction throughout the course.

  1. Layout, formatting, directions:

I want my student questionnaire to be a concise, ‘eye-pleasing’ one page document. The title of the document is clear, the font is professional, and the size of the font is appropriate. The purpose of the questionnaire is underlined, clearly stated, and highlighted with a pleasant font colour. The directions are underlined, clearly stated, and a pleasant, alternative colour is used in the response key scale. The document items are divided into three sections to categorize the items into instructional phases, so that items follow a logical order, and the respondents can reflect on their learning chronologically as well. The margins allow for the items to be on one line with each corresponding response section. The items are double-spaced. The last statement on the instrument gives learners the option of providing comments and/or suggestions to the instructor by using the blank back page of the document (Taylor-Powell, Renner, 2009).

Best practices in constructing items are applied or intended throughout the document:

– Language is clear: STATEMENTS ARE EASIER TO READ THAN QUESTIONS!

– Learner’s knowledge level is considered.

– Items avoid ‘demand’ characteristics.

– Items are unbiased.

– Negatives are avoided.

– Items avoid repetition.

– Items are applicable to instruction.

– Items contain exact adverbs.

– Items are concise.

– Variation in responses are provided.

– Items match responses.

– Items focus on individual learner experience.

– Items avoid ‘or not’ tags.

– There are no hypothetical items.

(Vancouver Community College, 2018).

Lastly, I want to talk about the importance of anonymity on student questionnaires (Pride Surveys, 2015). I will not include allocated space for the learner’s name on my questionnaire; the reason is to solicit honest and un-skewed data that will lead to the overall improvement of my professional practice.

  1. Analysis of individual items (five items):
  2. Purpose of the item.
  3. Type of response required and why.

Item 1. The instructor clearly stated the unit’s objectives and outcome?

a. The purpose of this item is specific. It assesses how well I explain each learning objective as it relates to the goal of the unit: what do my learners need to know and why?

My instructional goals for this item:

– Create a well-informed class.

– Prepare students to learn.

– Reduce learner anxiety.

b. I use a Likert-type scale and phrase the item using a 5-point “level of agreement” (Vagias, 2006). The item’s syntax will correspond with any of the scale’s anchors. I chose a Likert-type scale to measure my learner’s responses because my item is qualitative: I want to know if I clearlyexplain the unit objectives and goal. I want to assign a quantitative measure to my qualitative item, a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response will not be applicable (Business Dictionary, n.d.).

Item 2. The instructor provided a clear unit schedule?  

a. The purpose of this item is specific. It assesses how well I am informing learners of the class schedule. The schedule includes the time frame and methods of delivery for the theory, and clinical portions of the unit, and how and when the learners will be assessed.

My instructional goals for this item:

– Maximize effectiveness of lesson plan.

– Maximize learner success in evaluation.

– Maximize class attendance and participation.

b. I use a Likert-type scale and phrase the item using a 5-point “level of agreement” (Vagias, 2006). The item’s syntax will correspond with any of the scale’s anchors. I chose a Likert-type scale to measure my learner’s responses because my item is qualitative: I want to know if I provide a clear unit schedule.I want to assign a quantitative measure to my qualitative item, and a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response will not be applicable (Business Dictionary, n.d.).

Item 5. The instructor gave concise demonstrations in the clinical portion?

a. The purpose of this item is specific. It assesses how well I introduce and demonstrate hand-on skills. Just because I have performed a skill countless times, and can perform it without thinking, I want to make sure that the steps are clear to my learners. “Concise directions increase student motivation and eliminate confusion” (Thornton, 2013, para. 3).

My instructional goal for this item:

– Visibly introduce delegated duties of a CDA in a concise manner.

– Highlight mistakes (mine and my learners) as learning moments.

– Allow time for practice and mastery.

b. I use a Likert-type scale and phrase the item using a 5-point “level of agreement” (Vagias, 2006). The item’s syntax will correspond with any of the scale’s anchors. I chose a Likert-type scale to measure my learner’s responses because my item is qualitative: I want to know if I provide concise clinical demonstrations.I want to assign a quantitative measure to my qualitative item, and a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response will not be applicable (Business Dictionary, n.d.).

Item 8. The unit handouts were beneficial to your learning process?  

a. The purpose of this item is semi-specific; I like to create my own supplemental reference material for my learners, and while I find this practice rewarding, it is also very time-consuming. The analysis of this item will determine if my efforts are worthwhile.

My instructional goals for this item:

– Highlight important information that learners will need ‘at their fingertips’.

– Provide links so that learners can do their own research on a topic.

– Have learners create a handbook for their own future professional practice.

b. I use a Likert-type scale and phrase the item using a 5-point “level of agreement” (Vagias, 2006). The item’s syntax will correspond with any of the scale’s anchors. I chose a Likert-type scale to measure my learner’s responses because that is how I want to assess all the items on my questionnaire, in keeping response anchors consistent for my respondents; I probably could have used a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response to this item.

Item 12. The instruction in this unit met learning objectives and outcome?

a. The purpose of this item is purposely non-specific. I want to assess how well my instruction contributed to the overall unit objectives and goals.

My instructional goals for this item:

– Prompt learners to reflect on my instruction.

– Prompt learners to reflect on the unit.

– Prompt learners to take advantage of submitting ‘optional’ comments and/or suggestions.

b. I use a Likert-type scale and phrase the item using a 5-point “level of agreement” (Vagias, 2006). The item’s syntax will correspond with any of the scale’s anchors. I chose a Likert-type scale to measure my learner’s responses because that is how I want to assess all the items on my questionnaire, in keeping response anchors consistent for my respondents.

I want to add that I chose a 5-point Likert-type scale with all my items, to provide sufficient variation in responses, to increase response rate, and to decrease the frustration of having too many choices (Research Gate, n.d.).

  1. Plan for analysis and implementation of results:

I plan to share my questionnaire with colleagues and request professional feedback before I assign it to my learners: I want my questionnaire to be effective in collecting data. I also want to explain to the participants how I will use the data collected, and that their input is valued. The Likert-type scale places a quantitative measure on the quality of my instruction. I do not think it is necessary to apply the principles of a confusing statistical analysis on this student survey, especially when I simply want an overview of how my students rate my instruction. This is the first survey I have created: I believe that my items are valid, and I trust myself not to take the results personally; they will help me be a better instructor!

The items I created are issues that are important to me. For example, I have firsthand experience of the lack of value that learners have placed on topics that I thought I had well-explained. I must continue to figure out how to translate my knowledge most effectively, and I am hoping that questionnaires can give me some clues. I realize that learners are individual, and that responses may be varied, and that questionnaires are a “participant’s perceptions at one point in time” (Taylor-Powell, Renner, 2009, p. 8), but I’m hoping to see patterns emerging if I am consistent in distributing the questionnaires to my learners.

Finally, I think it is important to share the results of student surveys with the learners themselves to reinforce the value that I place on their participation, and hopefully they will witness observable results in subsequent units throughout the course. I also think it is important to share the results with any stakeholders in the learning process. My survey is an end-of-unit summative questionnaire, and if I use the information that my learners have provided, I am hoping that stakeholders appreciate my level of commitment in training competent CDA’s entering OMS.

@ Please refer to my Resources page for works cited