Midsemester feedback pilot finds varied student experiences of change

Updated Sep 07, 2026

Updated, 7 September 2026: This briefing uses the publisher’s abstract and accessible methods, results and limitations passages. We could not review the complete paper.

What the pilot found

Jeya Amantha Kumar, Hala Sun, Jeremy Van Hof and Natalie Vandepol studied feedback at a Midwestern US university. Although 134 students submitted midsemester feedback, the analysis used follow-up responses from five instructors and 13 students.

Visual reports were returned within a week; AI helped group anonymised comments. Instructors described practical revisions and validation of existing teaching. Student experiences varied: some noticed clearer instructions or changed study habits; others perceived little benefit. Time pressure and ambiguous comments complicated interpretation.

The small, voluntary follow-up is vulnerable to selection and non-response bias. It does not establish learning gains, validate AI analysis, or show that midsemester feedback outperforms end-of-module surveys. The authors suggest that end-of-term workload affected participation; the design cannot establish why non-respondents did not take part.

Planning a local pilot

Our suggestion is to define a question that staff can act on during the module, then agree who will interpret the responses and communicate decisions. Keep an account of changes, deferred requests and reasons. Assess whether students noticed those changes separately from whether staff found the report useful.

If automated analysis is involved, specify human checks and access to supporting comments in advance. Our governance checklist offers planning questions. A one-week turnaround in this study is not a delivery promise for another institution or product.

Reference

Kumar, J. A., Sun, H., Van Hof, J. and Vandepol, N. (2025). Midsemester course feedback from students as reflective practice: A pilot exploratory study on instructors’ and students’ insights. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. Paper.