Mystery Shopper Lecture Feedback Programme a collaborative project between staff and students at a graduate entry medical school

Hannah Maxfield, John Flemming, Logan Mills, Katherine Owen


The pilot study described is an innovative model which ensures that lecturers receive relevant and tailored feedback from students in order to improve their delivery of lectures, ultimately improving student education.

The current method of lecture feedback at Warwick Medical School asks students to comment on a whole terms worth of lectures at once consequently feedback is often non-specific and unconstructive.

This project has been rolled out by a collaborative team of four medical students and one Faculty member. The project team designed a training event to instruct 10-15 students from each year group to deliver constructive and useful feedback to lecturers. The project team designed the online feedback form, which is completed by the trained students after observing a lecture. Students sign up to review lectures via a digital platform managed by the project team. Once the feedback form is submitted, it is quality-control-assessed by a Faculty member before being sent anonymously to the lecturer.

This project allows medical students to provide lecturers with meaningful information about what they did well and how they can improve. Initial feedback from lecturers has been positive; they have valued the constructive criticism and the suggestions they have been given for improving future lectures.


Feedback; co-production; medical student

Full Text:



Abeysekera, L. and Dawson, P. (2015) ‘Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research.’ Higher Education Research and Development, 34, 1-14. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Afonso, N. M., Cardozo, L. J., Mascarenhas, O. A. J., Aranha, A. N. F. and Shah, C. (2005) ‘Are anonymous evaluations a better assessment of faculty teaching performance? A comparative analysis of open and anonymous evaluation processes.’ Family Medicine, 37, 43-47. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Coffey, M. and Gibbs, G. (2001) ‘The evaluation of the Student Evaluation of Educational Quality Questionnaire (SEEQ) in UK Higher Education.’ Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 89-93. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Garrison, D. R. and Kanuka, H. (2004) ‘Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education.’ The internet and higher education, 7, 95-105. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Gibson, K. A., Boyle, P., Black, D. A., Cunningham, M., Grimm, M. C. and McNeill, H. P. (2008) ‘Enhancing evaluation in an undergraduate medical education programme.’ Academic Medicine, 83, 787-793. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Kogan, J. R. and Shea, J. A. (2007) ‘Course evaluation in medical education.’ Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 251-264. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Leamon, M. H., Servis, M. E., Canning, R. D. and Searles, R. C. (1999) ‘Student and resident evaluations of faculty- how dependable are they?’ Academic Medicine, 74, S22-4. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

McKenzie, W. A., Perini, E., Rohlf, V., Toukhsati, S., Conduit, R. and Sanson, G. (2013) ‘A blended learning lecture delivery model for large and diverse undergraduate cohorts.’ Computers and Education, 64, 116-126. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Rannelli, L., Coderre, S., Paget, M., Woloschuk, W., Wright, B. and McLaughlin, K. (2014) ‘How do medical students form impressions of the effectiveness of classroom teachers?’ Medical Education, 48, 831-837. Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).

Schiekirka, S. and Raupach, T. (2015) ‘A systematic review of factors influencing student ratings in undergraduate medical education course evaluations.’ BMC Medical Education Available at: (Accessed: 25 September 2017).



  • There are currently no refbacks.