Skip to main content
University of Florida

 

Encourage Student Participation

Student perceptions of teaching provide valuable insights that can inform instructional improvement. Instructors play a critical role in shaping these perceptions by setting expectations, communicating purpose, and modeling openness to feedback. Evidence consistently shows that small, intentional faculty actions—such as making time for evaluations or explaining how feedback is used—can significantly increase student engagement. The strategies below highlight evidence‑based ways faculty can influence student engagement and encourage constructive participation in course evaluations.

On-Campus/Face-to-Face Courses

What Faculty Can Do?
  • Set aside 10–15 minutes at the start of class during the evaluation window for students to complete course evaluations.
  • Show students how to access evaluations using the GatorEvals website, Canvas navigation menu, or email invitation.
  • Remind students in advance to bring a laptop, tablet, or mobile device to class.
  • Block this time on the course calendar (syllabus, Canvas calendar, or course schedule).
Why This Matters?
  • Embedding evaluations into class time signals that student feedback is valued and increases the likelihood of participation.

Online Courses

What Faculty Can Do?
  • Direct students to GatorEvals in Canvas, where evaluations appear in the course navigation menu.
  • Activate and reference Canvas communication tools, such as:
    • Popup messages
    • Announcements
    • Calendar reminders
    • To‑Do items
  • Post the evaluation timeline in the syllabus and relevant Canvas modules.
  • Remind students during the evaluation window through brief Canvas announcements or messages.
Why This Matters?
  • Consistent, instructor‑led messaging keeps evaluations visible and reinforces their importance in asynchronous environments.
What Faculty Can Do?
Why This Matters?
  • Sharing progress reinforces transparency and creates a shared sense of responsibility, motivating additional participation.
What Faculty Can Do?
  • Explain how course evaluations are used, including who reviews them and why they matter.
  • Share examples of how student feedback has led to changes or improvements.
  • Clarify what constructive feedback looks like, emphasizing specificity and relevance.
  • Normalize feedback as part of the learning process, not just an end‑of‑term task.
Why This Matters?
  • When students understand the purpose and impact of evaluations, they are more likely to participate and provide thoughtful responses.
What Faculty Can Do?
  • Share examples of changes you have made based on prior student feedback.
  • Explain which aspects of a course cannot be changed, and why (e.g., curriculum, accreditation).
  • Model constructive feedback by highlighting helpful versus vague comments.
  • Revisit feedback themes at key points during the course.
Why This Matters?
  • Closing the feedback loop builds credibility and reinforces the idea that student perspectives are heard, valued, and acted upon.
What Faculty Can Do?
  • Explicitly encourage students to complete course evaluations using a brief, personal message from you rather than relying solely on automated emails.
  • Frame evaluations as a normal and expected part of the course, similar to assignments or reflections.
  • Reinforce participation through multiple touchpoints, such as:
    • A short in‑class announcement
    • A Canvas announcement during the evaluation window
    • A brief reminder near the end of the term
  • Assure students that their responses are anonymous and cannot be linked back to them.
Why This Matters?
  • Research consistently shows that instructor endorsement is one of the strongest predictors of student participation. When faculty clearly communicate expectations, normalize participation, and explain anonymity, students are significantly more likely to respond. Multiple, instructor‑authored reminders signal legitimacy and importance in ways system‑generated messages cannot.

Faculty are encouraged to promote strong participation in course evaluations, but any incentives offered must align with university policy and maintain the integrity of the evaluation process. Incentives that directly impact a student's course grade are not permitted, while those that provide added value without influencing grades may be acceptable. The examples below illustrate common practices and clarify which approaches are allowed, not allowed, or may be permissible when used appropriately.

 

Incentive Examples for Course Evaluations

Incentive Description

Status

Offering bonus points on the final exam to any student who completes the course evaluation.

❌ Not Allowed

If the class reaches a 75% response rate, all students will receive extra credit points added to their final grade.

❌ Not Allowed

Dropping the lowest quiz grade for any student who completes the course evaluation.

❌ Not Allowed

If the class reaches a response-rate goal, a supplemental study guide, practice questions, or review materials will be released to the entire class.

✅ May Be Allowed

If the class reaches a 70% response rate, an optional bonus review session will be hosted before the final exam.

✅ May Be Allowed

If the class reaches a 75% response rate, the final exam review guide will be reduced from 100 items to 90 items; if the class reaches 85%, it will be reduced to 80 items.

✅ May Be Allowed