{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025839793281653745, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00516795865633075, 'mean_word_length': 5.958083832335329, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Collecting student feedback: a comparison of questionnaire and other methods

A study was conducted comparing the feedback received from students about teaching obtained using different instruments. Twelve first‐ and second‐year undergraduate modules were selected from seven different schools within a single university. Students studying each module were allocated to ‘questionnaire’ and ‘comparator’ groups. ‘Questionnaire’ students completed the standard end‐of‐module questionnaire, whilst ‘comparator’ groups evaluated the modules using ‘rapid feedback’, ‘H form’, focus group and reflective diary methods. The responses of 335 students to questionnaires were compared with those of 160 using the other methods; no results were obtained from the reflective diary students. Only a minority of the issues raised by students using the comparator methods were covered by the questionnaire, and the comparator methods showed different rankings of the issues in common. The key difference between questionnaire and comparator methods was the use of closed and open questions respectively, with comparator methods being more appropriate for formative evaluation.