article · Curationis
A study investigated nursing students' perceptions and experiences of the student-lecturer evaluation system at the Rundu Campus of the University of Namibia. Using a qualitative, descriptive design, researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with fifteen purposively chosen students to understand how these evaluations influence teaching and learning. The analysis identified three main themes and nine subthemes. Participants recognised the system's potential to improve the standard of teaching. However, they reported significant operational challenges that undermine its success. Key obstacles included an absence of feedback, fear of negative consequences, poor communication, late notifications, and inadequate transparency. The findings indicate that while student evaluations remain a valuable mechanism for educational enhancement, their practical effectiveness depends on resolving administrative, logistical, and communication hurdles to build trust, accessibility, and accountability within university feedback processes.
Student feedback mechanisms are central to maintaining high standards in higher education, yet they fail if students lack trust in the process. Identifying barriers such as fear of reprisal and insufficient feedback helps universities address administrative weaknesses. Fixing these issues ensures student evaluations lead to meaningful improvements in curriculum delivery, instructional quality, and institutional transparency.
The abstract does not indicate a direct commercial application pathway, as it presents early-stage qualitative academic research on internal university procedures. However, the identified operational issues, such as poor communication, missing feedback loops, and concerns regarding anonymity, could inform functional requirements for educational technology developers designing secure, closed-loop student evaluation software for tertiary education institutions.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
BACKGROUND: In higher education, the student-lecturer evaluation (SLE) system is a critical mechanism for enhancing teaching quality and fostering student-centred learning. Despite its importance, limited research exists in Namibia on students' perceptions and experiences of this evaluation process, particularly regarding its effectiveness in improving teaching and learning outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to explore and describe nursing students' perceptions and experiences regarding the SLE system at the Rundu Campus of the University of Namibia (UNAM). METHOD: A qualitative, explorative, descriptive and contextual design was employed. Fifteen students were purposively selected to participate in the study. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data and identify emerging themes and sub-themes. RESULTS: Three main themes and nine subthemes were identified from the data analysis. This study explored nursing students' perceptions and experiences regarding the use of SLE as a strategy for improving teaching and learning at the UNAM. Participants highlighted both the benefits and challenges of SLE, including its potential to improve teaching quality, as well as barriers such as lack of feedback, fear of reprisal, poor communication, late notifications and limited transparency. CONCLUSION: The study concluded that while SLEs have significant potential to improve teaching and learning, their effectiveness is constrained by administrative, logistical and communication challenges. Addressing these barriers and implementing students' recommendations can enhance the credibility, accessibility and impact of evaluation systems.Contribution: The findings provide valuable insights for universities to develop ongoing strategies and targeted interventions to improve the implementation of SLEs, foster accountability and promote continuous enhancement of teaching and learning quality.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.4102/curationis.v49i1.2875
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
