Using Student Journals for Evaluating Course Experience

English Studies Section, School of Humanities, Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Keywords: Teaching and learning, English Language and Literature Studies, course assessments, higher education.

Article style and source: Peer reviewed, original ultiBASE publication.

Contents

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Dimensions of Course Evaluation in Higher Education
• Student Journals
• Results and Discussion
• Implications and recommendations
• Conclusion
• References

Abstract

The evaluation of students' course experience has been given due importance in the higher education sector as educators realise that effective teaching matters greatly (Ramsden, 1991; Prosser and Trigwell, 1999). The usual data collection techniques are questionnaires, interviews and discussions. This paper discusses the use of student journals as a means of collecting data on the overall effectiveness of teaching in a course of study or degree programme. Students in an English Language and Literature Studies degree programme at the University Science Malaysia in Penang use student journals to record their reflections of their teaching-learning experience in one semester. The course lecturers in the degree programme obtain useful evaluative data from the student journals regarding students' perceptions of the course content, instruction, workload and assessment. The results show that students value effective feedback and clear expectations from course lecturers, an adjusted workload requirement, better content validity in their course assessments and want course lecturers to validate them as persons. The use of student journals as a course evaluation technique provides a longitudinal and insightful perspective of students' perceptions of their teaching-learning context. back

Introduction

In the realm of higher education, there have been concerted efforts worldwide to analyse and evaluate student evaluation of teaching and course experience of students. Like many other multilingual and multicultural countries, Malaysia continues to grapple with multifaceted issues, problems and challenges in her higher education sector. There have been significant changes in policies, organisation, staffing, funding and management of Malaysian universities in the last decade. Lee (1999) notes that by the year 1998, there were 10 public universities, 7 private universities, 6 polytechnics, 33 teacher-training colleges and 415 private universities in Malaysia.

Perry and Smart (1997) observe that higher education will provide an essential infrastructure with which a country can harness its technological and creative potentials. Similarly, educators around the globe emphasise that in today's world of accelerating growth and change, the ultimate goal of education should be lifelong learning (Pederson, 2002; Bajunid & Said, 2002) as lifelong learning is now regarded as an essential element in securing increased economic growth, development of adequate qualifications of the labour force as well as the inclusion of all segments of the population in the rapidly changing labour market and society at large. In this light, it becomes increasingly important to accurately analyse, from the student perspective, how students experience academic life in universities.

The use of student journals is on the rise in different subject areas such as economics, business, education, nursing, design and human resources (Ballantyne and Parker, 1995a). Several researchers use narrative accounts to evaluate student feedback on courses. Connelly and Clandinin(1990:2) suggest that narrative analysis is the "study of the ways humans experience the world". Cooper (2000) describes the use of narrative accounts by students in a final year nursing programme at the University of Sunderland as a form of student feedback of their learning experience. However, there are little recorded descriptive studies considering the use of student journals as a cognitive tool for evaluating course experience in higher education.

The argument that this paper will put forward is that student journals are a very useful source of insightful data for course lecturers and that they provide valuable information to complement other sources of data. Student evaluation is at the heart of undergraduate experience and as such evaluation of students' course experience defines what students regard as important and how they come to see themselves as students and then as graduates. By reading and analysing student journals, course lecturers can obtain valuable qualitative data, which may be unavailable from other sources (Wagner, 1999). This paper will describe a way to collect and analyse journal information for evaluating students' course experience in higher education.

Dimensions of Course Evaluation in Higher Education

Educational researchers contend that course evaluation is not only an essential component in the advancement of scientific knowledge but also in the determination of academic reputation and rewards. Its functions are the appraisal of new knowledge, certification of students, legitimisation of academics, ranking of students and academics, the allocation of rewards, maintenance of common standards within a higher education system and scholastic achievement (Marsh & Dunkin, 1997; Henkel, 1998). Light & Cox (2001) acknowledge the importance of good evaluation in higher education as they realise that there have been two important developments in higher education: the emphasis on generic skills (especially learning to learn) and the change of focus from teaching to learning. They observe that what has been seriously underestimated is the role of evaluation activities in enabling students to understand more about the way they learn from the different styles of teaching and the different environments and the learning resources they encounter. Evaluation research in higher education can help learners become more effective lifelong learners when the constraints and supports of formal courses are behind them and they take full control of their own learning.

The field of evaluation studies has a multidimensional perspective and usually requires one to consider the complexity of issues and dimensions of evaluation that would need to be considered in any major research study. Light & Cox (2001: 197) contend that most approaches to evaluation studies attempt to address some of the following varieties of factors:

• Aims/goals of evaluation (How well the teacher/course/programme performs; Which is best? What does it do? What happens? Consequences? etc.)
• Subject of evaluation (teaching/learning processes/materials/course, teaching skills/interaction, learning, institutional environment)
• Status of evaluators (professional/amateur/assistant/inspector)
• Roles of evaluation (development, appraisal, accountability, innovation)
• Clients of evaluation (students, teachers, institutions, government agencies, employers, researchers)
• Ideology and values of evaluation (academic-scholarship, vocational-utilitarian, humanitarian-social, personal growth, cultural-artistic)

The scope of evaluation studies above indicates the variety and range of factors that influence and/or shape the sort of approaches that might be taken towards evaluation research. Although quantitative research is still predominant in evaluating course experience, qualitative enquiry, which gives a deeper impression of the experience of an educational programme, has enabled researchers to appreciate more about the unintended outcomes as well as the achievement of specific objectives. Educators have become more aware of the importance of perceptions and of motivational effects of programmes. Educational research now gives 'qualitative' accounts of the experience of learning and teaching, using the actual words of the staff and students involved. Cooper (2000) reports that the use of narratives (the study of the ways humans experience the world) for gathering evaluative data on learning experiences of students has been researched in several studies (Sarbin, 1986; Connelly & Clandinin, 1990; Cortazzi, 1993). These attempts have led to a deeper appreciation of the different ways in which students learn and value their different course experience.

The literature on student evaluation of effective teaching contains various definitions, descriptions and conceptualisations of the term. Most researchers agree that a discussion on university teaching can cover various dimensions of teaching activity such as gender and diversity among faculty and students, communication and language, faculty attitudes and behaviours, instructional methods, the impact of new technology in teaching and learning and the evaluation of teaching (Boyer, 1990; Forrest, 1998). In this regard, students' evaluation of the instruction, curriculum and assessment matters in their degree programme helps shape the curriculum and embodies the purposes of higher education (Brown & Knight, 1994). Hence, the evaluation of university course experience is a "systematic attempt for making inferences about the learning and development of students …. the process of defining, selecting, designing, collecting, analysing, interpreting and using information to increase students' learning and development" (Erwin, 1991: 15).

Authors like Hettich (1990), November (1996), Wagner (1999) and Barnett (1997, 2000) suggest that one such effective approach is through a systematic inquiry into students' qualitative evaluation of teaching effectiveness. These authors believe that students should be given 'pedagogical space to develop their own voice' (Barnett, 2000: 160) in resolving conflicts that exist in their educational experiences. back

Student Journals

Wagner (1999) states that within the category of journals, there are three main groupings: logs, diaries and reflective journals. A log is a regularly kept record of facts or performance relating to certain occurrences. Diaries are free flowing, spontaneous accounts expressing the writer's thoughts and feelings and are more personal and interpretive. Reflective journals can include both elements - the descriptive notes of the log and the interpretation of the diary. Brookfield (1990: 338) notes that analysis of written autobiographical materials such as learning journals and diaries are "very effective methods of understanding how people learn to learn".

The Journal Activity in the Bachelor of Arts in English Language and Literature Studies

The Bachelor of Arts in English Language and Literature Studies (B.A. ELLS) degree programme is a three-year programme offered at USM to help meet the nation's need for second language and Literature in English teachers. The students comprise adult students (primary school teachers pursuing tertiary education) and young adult students (school leavers who have completed their Higher School Certificate). Students have to complete 100 units of foundation (16 units), major (49 units), minor (16 units), elective (4 units) and university/option (15 units) courses. Forty final year students in the B.A. (ELLS) programme at the School of Humanities in University Science Malaysia (USM) kept student journals for a duration of one semester (15 weeks). For the purpose of this paper, student journals refer to learning journals kept by students over one semester to record and reflect on their perceptions of teaching effectiveness in evaluating their course experience in their core and foundation courses only in their degree programme. To make their journal entries more focussed, students were requested to record their reflections in one Literature and one Linguistics course in that semester. This was done so that a balanced perspective could be sought, as the degree programme comprises both Linguistics and Literature in English components. Besides writing dated weekly entries of unspecified length on these two courses, students were also encouraged to provide a narrative account (2-3 pages) of their perceptions about their teaching-learning experiences in the previous five semesters. Permission to carry out this study was sought from the Programme Chairperson and course lecturers of the English Section at the school.

All students were given a guideline, in the form of a printed worksheet, so that students had some suggestions on what to write in their journals. Before writing their weekly journal entries, students were requested to write a 2-3 page narrative account, highlighting their educational background and work experience, if any, and factors that helped or hindered their academic progress. The guidelines include suggestions for the following categories of evaluating effective teaching gathered from Ramsden's (1991) Course Experience questionnaire:

• good teaching
• clear goals and standards
• appropriate workload
• appropriate assessment
• generic skills (this category replaces the 'emphasis on independence' category)

Students were encouraged to follow the suggested guidelines and were asked to seek the researcher's help if they needed further clarification. To ensure that students wrote and kept journal entries each week, the researcher met with the students in Week 3 and Week 7 of the semester. These focus group meetings with the students proved useful, as students were able to discuss their experiences in keeping journals to record their course experience. Students were encouraged to write freely and openly about their perceptions as they were assured that their names were not required on the cover page of their journals. Instead, they only had to record information pertaining to their age, gender and ethnicity. For instance, if the student is an adult Malay male, he would just need to write "Adult Malay Male Student" on his student journal cover sheet. In this paper, the term 'adult student' refers to students aged 25 years or older who are following a full-time first-degree programme at university and the term 'young adult student' refers to students aged 24 years and below who are following a full-time first-degree programme at university.

At the end of the semester, students had to submit their journals to the researcher and students were assured that the information contained would only be used for the purpose of the research and that their anonymity would be assured. Students were asked if they would give consent for their journals to be used as data for evaluating course experience and all students agreed to sign a consent form allowing the researcher to analyse and use the data for research purposes. Collecting information from student journals has the advantage that the data were not written specifically for course evaluation. Researchers claim that journals help integrate theory and practice, stimulate critical thinking and reflection on practice and promote professional development (Ballantyne & Packer, 1995a; Wagner, 1999). back

Results and Discussion

The student journals of the 40 students were analysed to investigate how students recorded their reflections and perceptions of their course experience in two courses over one semester. Since students had to provide a narrative account of their academic experience as well as weekly journal entries, each student was expected to have approximately 15 journal entries at the end of the semester. Before the analysis procedures were carried out, each journal entry was coded for easy referencing according to week number. For example, 'JE 1' meant 'journal entry for Week One' whereas 'JE 12' meant 'journal entry for Week 12' and 'NA' meant 'narrative account'. Since students were encouraged to write entries on other aspects of their course experience, some students had more information recorded in their journals than other students. As the student sample comprised the demographic factors of age, gender and ethnicity, each journal entry was identified using these three constructs. The following symbols were used to refer to the various ethnic groups of students: 'ML' for Malay, 'C' for Chinese, 'I' for Indians, 'IG' for Indigenous groups from East Malaysia (such as Kadazans, Ibans, Melanaus and others) and 'MG' for minority groups such as Eurasians. For instance, the code 'JE 4: YA-F-ML' referred to recorded perceptions of a 'Young Adult Female Malay' student in his journal entry for Week 4, the code 'JE 6: A-M-C' referred to recorded perceptions of an 'Adult Male Chinese' student in his journal entry for Week 6 and the code 'NA: A-F-I' referred to recorded perceptions of an 'Adult Female Indian' student in her narrative account.

The student journals were read a few times in order to get a holistic picture of how students perceived their course experience in their degree programme, specifically on aspects of instruction, curriculum and assessment. Each student journal was subjected to both macro and micro level analysis and this process yielded useful descriptive and reflective data. Descriptive data was mostly gleaned from students' narrative accounts and weekly journal entries and covered details of course lecture and topic covered by the course lecturer. Reflective data yielded information pertaining to students' responses towards teaching methodology employed by their lecturer in conducting lectures and tutorials. It includes students' feelings and perceptions towards their lecturers' behaviour such as the lecturers' personal and professional attributes, clarity of course content, assessment procedures, volume of work, assessment practices and generic skills learned from the course. Thus, reflective data not only covered students' perceptions of their course/educational experience in the present semester but also their academic experience in previous semesters.

The researcher's intention was not to use predetermined categories but to read through students' journals several times until broad themes emerged. Key words and phrases were used to identify and classify students' comments. In analysing the journals, several main categories were identified and some of the categories were closely similar to Ramsden's (1991) categories of effective teaching: good teaching, clear goals and standards, perceptions of academic skills, assessment, workload and generic skills acquired. The following section highlights some examples from student journals to help contextualise issues in discussing and evaluating students' course experience in higher education. back

Good Teaching

In discussing the aspect of good teaching in their degree programme, there were differing views expressed by students as gleaned from the student journals. Within this domain, students wrote about how they felt their lecturers were instrumental in some of the following instructional tasks: motivate them to do their best work, put a lot of time into commenting on students' work, make a real effort to understand student difficulties, give helpful feedback on their progress, are good at explaining things to them and worked hard to make their subjects interesting.

When students' responses in the journals were analysed, only nine students (22.5%) rated this aspect of teaching quality positively and some of the comments are listed below:

"On the whole, I am satisfied with the teaching quality. Most of my lecturers are good in their field and I have a lot of respect for them" (JE 10: A-M-C)

"I respect all my lecturers and they are all very dedicated and helpful. I hear grouses here and there but I have not encountered any problems. Mostly, the lecturers are understanding and they try to help as far as possible" (JE 9: A-F-C)

The positive comments were mostly on lecturers' ability to teach well, deal with students in a friendly manner and being courteous. The negative comments, on the other hand, highlighted the behaviour exhibited by some course lecturers and the quality of feedback received on graded material and presentations during tutorials. The personal characteristics of some lecturers included 'treating students in a cold manner' (JE 3: A-F-C), 'having a sour facial expression when I seek clarification for our course assignment' (JE 6: YA-F-ML), 'having a condescending attitude towards our input during tutorials' (JE 4: A-F-I), 'I resent the way this lecturer scolds us' (JE 5: YA-F-ML) and 'snubbing us when we seek advice on how to go about doing a course assignment' (JE 9: A-F-C).

A major area of dissatisfaction concerning the domain of good teaching was in the area of feedback to students. Almost three quarter of the students (74.3%) had negative views on this aspect of teaching quality in their undergraduate degree programme. Below are some extracts from student journals:

"what's the point of doing an assignment when you don't get it back until after the final exam? Shouldn't the lecturer mark it earlier and give it back to us before we sit for the final exam?" (JE 14: A-M-ML)

"I'm not happy with the type of feedback I get in some of my tutorial classes. The lecturer just sits there and randomly asks us questions - the questions are just randomly asked. When we answer, we are not even told if our answers or responses are correct! I find this frustrating as I'm here to learn". (JE 9: A-F-I)

"When I get back my course assignments, I find it distressing just to see an alphabetical grade on it with absolutely NO written comments from my lecturer. I prefer to get a written commentary on how or where I went wrong because that would be a meaningful learning experience for me". (JE 14: A-F-MG)

Ramsden (1992:99) suggests "of all the facets of good teaching that are important to them, feedback on assessed work is perhaps the most commonly mentioned". As seen from the student comments above, giving helpful feedback on students' work is an essential commitment in any teaching-learning situation as it is clearly related to teachers' accessibility to students. Students see effective feedback as being critical for them as it helped to build their confidence and helped them know the bench marks so they know what standard of work is expected of them in their formative assessments or tutorial presentations.

Clear Goals and Standards

Within this category, students were asked to comment on their lecturers' ability to organise and present course information and knowledge in a clear manner so that students can have a clear understanding of the overview of the course comprising course content, instruction and assessment. A significant percentage of students (67.5 %) recorded positive perceptions for this category of effective teaching. Below are some sample extracts from student journals:

"most lecturers are very professional in this area. They tell us in the very first week of the semester what they expect of us". (JE 2: YA-M-C)

"most courses have a clear course structure and we know how we will be assessed, right from the beginning; so course lecturers make their course goals clear". (JE 3: A-F-I)

In the student journals, most students preferred to write about their lecturers' expectations of their academic ability. Most students felt their English language proficiency hindered their academic progress and felt that this inadequacy "made me afraid of Literature courses" (JE 6: A-F-M). Some students who come from Chinese-medium schools explained in their narrative accounts that "most of my Literature lecturers expect us to have better proficiency in English and they clearly expect us to have good writing ability but they don't understand that some of us did not study English Literature when we were in secondary school" (NA: YA-F-C). Almost all discussion on this area involved students making the link between their English language proficiency and understanding of their lecturers' expectations in most of their academic courses.

Perceptions of Academic Skills

In most cases, students wrote objectively about their perceptions of their academic skills and most of them linked their perceptions accurately to their academic achievement. Students who felt they possessed better oral and written skills commented that they achieved good grades in academic courses that highlighted these skills. From the journals, it was observed that adult students perceived their academic skills to be better than young adult students especially in the skill areas of reading, oral communication, writing and completing assignments by the due date.

Most students highlighted that they perceive the skill of 'completing assignments by the due date' to be the most useful skill and most student journals commented on this aspect of their academic responsibility. The other commonly utilised skills were 'reading in English', 'comprehending lectures in English', oral communication in English' and 'taking notes during lectures'.

Workload

In this domain of effective teaching, students were asked to comment on the workload requirement in their academic courses. Students were asked to write about how they perceived the workload, if they were given enough time to understand the course content, if there was a lot of pressure on them as students and if they could comprehend and follow the course. Most student journals used the following adjectives to describe their perceptions: 'heavy', 'demanding' and 'a lot of pressure on us as students'. Below are some sample extracts from student journals:

"workload was hectic in my first and second year as I had a lot of mental and physical strain in trying to read up for my courses and in trying to write up my assignments". (JE 5: A-F-ML)

"throughout my semesters, I was kept busy with my hectic schedule. I didn't have much time to meet and discuss with my coursemates. I also got frequent tension headaches during the time we had tests and final exams". (JE 9: A-F-C)

"I find the workload for some Linguistics courses heavier than Literature courses because every week I have to seriously prepare for my tutorials". (JE 10: YA-M-C)

"most lecturers give their course assignments at around the same time. All assignments come at the same time and this really makes me anxious and I get all tense and worried". (JE 9: A-F-I)

Several students found their first semester at university 'overwhelming' but their second semester 'more manageable' as "by then, we know what our lecturers expect of us and we strive to understand their expectations and make the necessary adjustments in our academic life, like getting our priorities right and looking for resources and setting up our discussion groups" (JE 6: A-F-C). Other students wrote:

"from the second year onwards, we begin to become familiar with our lecturers' style of teaching and most of our initial apprehension wears off and things become more manageable" (JE 9: YA-M-ML).

Several students commented about the workload for some Literature courses:

"some of our Literature courses are really crammed - we have so many literary works to read in one semester! I feel there should be better restructuring of content topics" (JE 10: A-M-I); "having to read so many texts just for one course can tense up anyone. It's enough to cause me great anxiety" (JE 7: A-F-ML); "the volume of work for one Literature course alone can be quite frightening. What this does to me is that I get panicky and I read the texts sketchily so that I know just enough to pretend that I have read the novel. Sometimes I hardly understand the plot or story line and I have to depend on my friends to give me an overview of some of the novels" (JE 11: YA-F-ML).

Overall, the student comments indicate that the workload requirement in the degree programme can be slightly altered to accommodate some of their specific requests pertaining to heavy demands on their time spent to read several literary texts in some of their Literature courses. back

Assessment

In this domain, students were asked to comment of their perceptions of assessment tasks in their academic courses: if assessment tasks merely assessed their ability to remember facts or required them to use their critical and analytic abilities, if the assessment tasks were appropriate. Below are some extracts from student journals:

"I like the way the assessment details are explained in some of my courses. In some cases, we are allowed to negotiate assignment topics or project areas with our lecturers. Most lecturers follow the university's guidelines in setting their assessment tasks and I have no complaints" (JE 12: A-M-I)

"I consider myself to be a high achiever in all my academic courses. Some final exam questions are very direct and all it requires of one is to memorise and remember facts and present them in the final exam. I prefer challenging questions that require me to apply what I have learned" (JE 14: A-F-I)

"I don't like lecturers who repeat final exam questions. What is the purpose of doing that? It doesn't test our ability to comprehend course material competently". (JE 15: A-F-M)

"Some lecturers really limit their scope when asking questions in the final exam. Why limit the scope? Shouldn't one be concerned about the content validity of the test?" (JE 11: A-F-C)

From the journal entries above, it can be seen that some students have slightly negative perceptions of their lecturers' abilities in testing their content knowledge in some academic courses. It seems clear that students want better content validity in their final exams and they want exam questions to be phrased unambiguously and they want questions that test their ability to comprehend concepts learned. Gibbs & Lucas (1997) note that assessment is one of the most powerful levers teachers have to influence the way students respond to courses and behave as learners. In addition, Brown & Knight (1994) suggest that assessment is a source of efficiency in teaching and that assessment strategies can promote quality learning outcomes among students. back

Generic Skills Acquired

Discussion in this category was revealing since little information is routinely collected in course evaluations about what skills students actually learned from a course. In the guideline provided, students were asked to comment on some of the following generic skills: problem-solving skills, working as a team member, tackling unfamiliar problems, planning own work, written communication skills and analytic skills. In general, students had very positive perceptions about the skills they acquired from the degree programme. Most students expressed their satisfaction in learning these generic skills in their academic courses and attributed it to their lecturers. Below are some sample comments:

"What skills did I learn? I would say mostly useful generic skills that I can easily use when I return to teach secondary school students. Some skills were already emphasised during my college days (like problem-solving, time management, writing skills) but some I learned from this course, such as analytic skills, resourcing information, writing a good proposal etc." (JE 15: A-F-I)

"Of all the generic skills, I learned to hone my written communication skill the most. For that, I have to thank some of my lecturers as they drummed into our heads the vital importance of this skill" (JE 12: A-M-C)

"I really improved my analytic and written communication skills as I was given a lot of practice in these two skills and I feel I have really benefited" (JE 13: A-F-ML)

The above student comments are indeed encouraging as it shows that students value the acquisition of these useful skills in their academic journey. In many cases, students highlighted the importance of continually upgrading their generic skills as most students saw the acquiring of these skills as useful skills that will continue to help them in their working lives. back

Implications and recommendations

The use of student journals as an additional means of analysing students' course experience yields useful information that has some pedagogical implications for university teaching. The findings indicate that qualitative student evaluation has crucial implications for the teaching-learning environment. Implications for the evaluation of teaching mainly include the identifiable sets of characteristics that students look for in distinguishing good from bad teaching. Although it is difficult to make generalizations about the degree of match between what dimensions and qualities students feel are important indicators of good teaching, it is clear that students seem to be able to see the dimensions of effective teaching as being contributory towards their learning experience in higher education.

One of the major recommendations that arise from the student journals seem to be the aspect of providing effective feedback on students' work. Students perceive quality feedback as being lacking and appear to link the provision of feedback with academic support from lecturers. Students were also able to recognise the personal and professional characteristics of good and bad teachers. The professional characteristics include being knowledgeable, being well prepared and well organised, being able to communicate well, caring about students and being enthusiastic about teaching. Personal characteristics include: being warm towards students, caring about students, having a good attitude towards one's work, being courteous to students, friendly and having a good sense of humour. It is interesting to note that the comment 'caring about students' is seen as being both a personal as well as a professional attribute of good teachers. This is probably due to the fact that both adult and young adult students want their teachers to "validate them as persons" (Slotnick et. al, 1993: 55).

Another recommendation gleaned from the student journals is the expectation that staff should communicate clear expectations to their students and should state those expectations early so that students can plan their schedules with confidence. The logic for this expectation is clear: anything that imposes changes on students' schedules demands additional time and energy. Students were also able to suggest the following recommendations concerning the workload requirement in their course: reduce the reading requirement for literary works in some Literature courses, hand out compulsory reading lists a few weeks before the new semester starts, have less content in some core courses as fewer core topics would enable students to 'really understand' course content and structure course themes differently so there will be no rushed teaching.

Yet another recommendation is the precept that staff should consider the needs of both adult and young adult students in the degree programme. Implicit in this recommendation is the precept well known to good teachers: good teachers know their students. This means not only learning their names but also knowing about their backgrounds and goals for the course they are taking. This latter point includes both the things they expect of instruction and the ways they will use what they learn in their personal and professional lives. The student journals of many adult students highlighted the fact that they were uncomfortable with group learning activities such as group assignments. This discomfort might indicate that adult students prefer to write up essays on their own as time constraints might imply that scheduling group activities will be difficult and adult students seem to have a marked intolerance of group members not appearing to be doing their share: "I don't like group assignments as an assessment technique as there are always some students who won't do their share of work. I prefer doing an individual assignment, as this is when I really feel I'm learning something useful and practical; something that will help me develop. Being married, I don't have the time to return to campus in the evenings to discuss" (JE 4: A-F-I). This implication of understanding students' background variables is that students exhibit different learning behaviours and have different prior experiences. This perspective indicates that students' awareness of their own prior experience and learning preferences help shape their motivation or intention when they undertake academic courses. back

Conclusion

From the above student extracts, it can be seen that student journals can offer much in the way of qualitative data which can be used to complement other data collected for evaluating course experience, such as questionnaires and interviews. The main advantage of using student journals for evaluating students' course experience in higher education is that it was not specifically written for the course lecturer as an audience, so it not shaped by that expectation (Wagner, 1999). Another advantage is that student journals provide a wealth of information that other evaluative data would not be able to glean from students. It offers a valuable insight into students' qualitative experience of how they perceive their academic experience as it offers an unusual freedom of expression not warranted by traditional course evaluation tools. Student journals are cognitive tools that generate much reflection and objectivity on respondents' part as it allows them to discuss issues close to their hearts and yet warrants them the confidentiality they consciously seek. The use of student journals for evaluating course experience of students can leave a powerful impact on researchers as it helps them experience something unusual-a collection of insightful and reflective journals which allows respondents individuality to shine through as they discuss their holistic academic experiences and perspectives on learning. back

References

Bajunid, I.A. & Said, H. (Eds.). (2002). Integrated Approaches to Lifelong Learning:
Papers Presented at the ASEM International Conference on Lifelong Learning.
(Preface: pp. iv-vi). Kuala Lumpur: Asia-Europe Institute, University of Malaya.

Ballantyne, R. & Parker, J. (1995a). Making Connections: Using Student Journals as
a Teaching/Learning Aid. Canberra: Higher Education Research and Development
Society of Australasia.

Barnett, R. (2000). Realising the University in an Age of Supercomplexity.
Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate.
Princeton, New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Learning.

Brookfield, S.D. (1990). Expanding knowledge about how we learn. In R. M. Smith
and Associates (Eds.) Learning to Learn Across the Lifespan. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Brown, S. & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing Learners in Higher Education. London:
Kogan Page.

Connelly, F.M. & Clandinin, D.J. (1990). Stories of experience and narrative inquiry.
Educational Researcher, 19 (5): 2-14.

Cooper, N.J. (2000). Facilitating learning from formative feedback in level 3
assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25 (3): 279-292.

Cortazzi, M. (1993). Narrative Analysis. London: The Falmer Press.

Erwin, T.D. (1991). Assessing Student Learning and Development. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

Forrest, J.J.F. (Ed.). (1998). University Teaching: International Perspectives. New York: Garland Publishing.

Gibbs, G. & Lucas, L. (1997). Coursework assessment, class size and student
performance 1998-94. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 21 (2): 183-195.

Henkel, M. (1998). Evaluation in higher education: conceptual and epistemological
foundations. European Journal of Education, 33 (3): 285-298.

Hettich, P. (1990). Journal writing: old fare or nouvelle cuisine? Teaching of
Psychology, 17 (1): 36-39.

Lee, M.N.N. (1999). Private Higher Education in Malaysia. Penang: School of
Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Light, G. & Cox, R. (2001). Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: The
Reflective Practitioner. London: Sage Publications.

Marsh, H.W. & Dunkin, M.J. (1997). Students' evaluations of university teaching: A
multidimensional perspective. In R.P. Perry & J.C. Smart (Eds.) Effective Teaching in
Higher Education: Research and Practice. (pp. 241-320). New York: Agathon Press.

November, P. (1996). Journals for the journey into deep learning: A framework.
Higher Education Research and Development. 15 (1): 115-127.

Perry, R.P. & Smart, J.C. (1997). Effective Teaching in Higher Education: Research
and Practice. New York: Agathon Press.

Prosser, M. & Trigwell, M. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching: The
Experience of Higher Education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher
Education and Open University.

Ramsden, P. (1991). A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education:
The course experience questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education, 16: 129-150.

Sarbin, T.R. (1986). Narrative Psychology: The Storied Nature of Human Conduct.
New York: Academic Press.

Slotnick, H.B., Pelton, M.H., Fuller, M.L. & Tabor, L. (1993). Adult Learners on
Campus. Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.

Wagner, Z.M. (1999). Using student journals for course evaluation. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education, 24 (3): 261-273. back

About the authors

Sarjit Kaur
English Studies Section
School of Humanities
Universiti Sains Malaysia

Email: sarjit@usm.my