Finding the Needle in the Haystack: Can Natural Language Processing of Students' Evaluations of Teachers Identify Teaching Concerns?
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 39167336.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1007/s11606-024-08990-6 and PMC identifier 11780028.
- Licence recorded as CC BY.
- The licence permits redistribution, so the abstract is shown in full and the full text is available from the publisher.
Abstract
Institutions rely on student evaluations of teaching (SET) to ascertain teaching quality. Manual review of narrative comments can identify faculty with teaching concerns but can be resource and time-intensive. To determine if natural language processing (NLP) of SET comments completed by learners on clinical rotations can identify teaching quality concerns. Single institution retrospective cohort analysis of SET (n = 11,850) from clinical rotations between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018. The performance of three NLP dictionaries created by the research team was compared to an off-the-shelf Sentiment Dictionary. The Expert Dictionary had an accuracy of 0.90, a precision of 0.62, and a recall of 0.50. The Qualifier Dictionary had lower accuracy (0.65) and precision (0.16) but similar recall (0.67). The Text Mining Dictionary had an accuracy of 0.78 and a recall of 0.24. The Sentiment plus Qualifier Dictionary had good accuracy (0.86) and recall (0.77) with a precision of 0.37. NLP methods can identify teaching quality concerns with good accuracy and reasonable recall, but relatively low precision. An existing, free, NLP sentiment analysis dictionary can perform nearly as well as dictionaries requiring expert coding or manual creation.
Medical subject headings
- Natural Language Processing
- Teaching
- Students, Medical
- Faculty, Medical