Years of filling out Trinity’s “Student Feedback Form” have revealed one truth: The thing most in need of feedback is the form itself.

   The Google Form consists of two broad sections: a list of statements about various aspects of the class to be rated and three open-ended questions about the student’s experience. According to Head of Upper School Tracy Bonday, the former is compiled graphically for administrators to analyze, and the latter is used to identify more specific areas for improvement.

   School policy requires the form to be used at the end of each semester for new faculty members and semester-long courses but only at the end of the school year for all others. This means many teachers only have the chance to gauge how students are feeling once a year — too late for them to course-correct for possible student critiques.

   “It’s important to change your approach based on who’s in front of you, and students change year to year,” Science Department Chair Romina Jannotti said. “You can’t do that if they’re not giving you feedback. Then you’re in an echo chamber.”

   Because teachers cannot see what works for their students until they are already out the door, many students find no tangible impact from their responses and thus give the form little thought.

   “I feel like these only apply to future students, not really my experience in the class,” junior Maddox Langston said. “I fill it out like it’s not for me, because it probably isn’t.”

   This apathy is the biggest threat to any hope of progress. Students’ belief that the form is futile in turn makes the form more futile.

   Bonday stresses that any implementation of the feedback at the administrative level requires evidence of a pattern. A pattern is only credible if the pool of respondents is large enough to show that the concern is significant to the overall student populace.

   “If you want to have a certain level of voice, then the voice has to be … reflective of a larger number of kids,” Bonday said. “You want to see a preponderance of the feedback indicating there’s something there.”

   Even when feedback is provided, it is not always usable. Former English Department Chair Steve Krueger has noticed that students occasionally use the form to vent personal grievances in a way that obscures more objective critiques.

   “Students need to be aware that they play a role in this process of being either constructive or not,” Krueger said. “We should totally have [criticism], but it should be couched, just as I would hope that teachers [do] when they give you feedback on the other side.”

   The anonymous form provides a safe space to express concerns free of perceived power dynamics or judgment. However, since the feedback collection is one-sided, it does not facilitate open, balanced discourse between student and teacher, emboldening some respondents to toss out decency.

   “With the [anonymity] sometimes comes someone who wants to go into a non-constructive ‘attack’ mode,” Krueger said. “Then there’s no give and take, and so there’s no opportunity to clear up any misunderstanding that may exist between you and the students.”

   Regardless of the setup, student feedback has inherent flaws. A 2020 study by Wake Forest professor Justin Esarey and research fellow Natalie Valdes found that student evaluations are frequently biased by perceptions of a teacher’s gender or race. In another study from 2020, psychologist Wolfgang Stroebe found a strong correlation between grade inflation and better student ratings.

   Students who approach the feedback system as a way to improve their grades or exact vengeance are degrading an invaluable tool that could help both them and their teachers come away more successful, educated and satisfied.

   “It really shouldn’t ultimately be about what makes the class easier,” Bonday said. “The takeaway needs to be on what’s best for helping students to learn … because we all need to be learning and improving if we’re going to be able to continue to meet the needs of a changing larger global context.”

   To encourage a more productive feedback loop, the form should be filled out at least once a semester, if not quarterly. A more frequent touchpoint would ensure students’ concerns are being heard instead of pent up.

   Tailoring the questions to specific departments or courses would make feedback more relevant to implementation. A broad question like “What did you enjoy most about this class?” can leave students scrambling to provide something useful. Instead, ask, “How effective were the labs in aiding your understanding?” for science or “How did you feel about the frequency and variety of writing assignments?” for English.

   Additionally, teachers should offer students individualized feedback outlets that best serve their classroom’s needs. For example, Krueger has his students fill out smaller surveys at different points in the course, giving him a constant update on how he can help them. These forms are not always anonymous, but he hopes his students feel comfortable enough to share their honest thoughts.

   “Years back, there were enough students that had mentioned that additional work in the area of research would have been helpful,” Krueger said. “I modified the curriculum personally in light of that, and I had a broader conversation within the department because I was not alone in seeing this suggestion.”

   That success is what all of us — students, teachers and administrators — want to see on our campus. Constructive feedback creates constructive change. Both are long overdue.

   The lead editorial expresses the opinion of the Trinity Voice editorial staff. Please send comments to [email protected].