Any views expressed within media held on this service are those of the contributors, should not be taken as approved or endorsed by the University, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University in respect of any particular issue.
I recently learned of a paper on The Student Voice (likely capitalised, perhaps bolded) that reportedly recommends mandating end-of-course surveys for every course, with completion required in class. Currently, I conclude my courses by sharing the optional survey link, respecting students’ autonomy as adults to choose whether to comment. In-class mandates would likely increase response rates but through coercion, potentially under the instructor’s gaze.
Why are we so desperate to capture ‘The Student Voice’, valorising it as a unified, almost sacred entity, that we demand its use? Why the definite article, which frames ‘the student voice’ as a distinct – perhaps oppressed – construct, rather than diverse ‘student voices’?
Can’t students use their voices to say ‘no thank you’? Can’t we, as educators, also say ‘no thank you’? In-course feedback can help tailor teaching to specific students, and post-course feedback may inform professional judgement about course design (e.g., identifying less engaging or overly complex elements). However, we must surely recognise these are context-specific opinions, not universal truths.
Summary of concerns:
– The capitalised ‘Student Voice’ implies a serious, unified call for agency, but masks that survey responses are mere opinions, not a cohesive, weighty perspective.
– Requiring in-class surveys could limit adult students’ choice to opt out, potentially reducing ‘the student voice’ to coerced responses rather than voluntary expression.
– Surveys might prioritise wants (e.g., satisfaction) over needs (e.g., skills, support), possibly misaligning ‘the student voice’ with educational priorities.
– Heavy reliance on feedback may undervalue professional expertise, potentially positioning ‘the student voice’ as a consumerist check rather than a complement to teachers’ judgements.
P.S. I am reminded of this comment by MacIntyre about the educational value of being unresponsive to the student voice:
Universities have made a similar mistake. They have responded all too readily to an invitation to treat students as consumers to whose demands they ought to be responsive. But it is a primary responsibility of a university to be unresponsive, to give its students what they need, not what they want, and to do so in such a way that what they want becomes what they need and what they choose is choiceworthy (2001, page 15)
References
Alasdair MacIntyre (2001) Catholic Universities: Dangers, Hopes, Choices, in Robert E. Sullivan (ed.) Higher Learning and Catholic Traditions. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 1–21.
(Edvard Munch: Summer Night's Dream (also known as The Voice))
