In February 2021, the institution formed a Course Evaluation Response Rate Task Force (CERRTF). CERRTF included representation from staff, faculty, and students. Based on literature reviews, consultations with stakeholders, and their own experiences, the group brainstormed multiple potential strategies for improving response rates. Ultimately, CERRTF proposed a 14-step action plan (Table 1) for implementation in AY 2021–2022, setting response rate goals of 60% (threshold), 70% (target), and 80% (stretch) to evaluate success. These benchmarks were based on published literature indicating that response rates in the 60–70% range are generally considered acceptable for drawing meaningful conclusions from course evaluation data [4].

CERRTF regrouped in February 2022 to review the outcomes of the action plan, which were not promising. Response rates for the Fall courses had improved by only 5% for first-year students and continued to decline for second-year students. These results did not meet the task force’s goals and required significant effort from staff and faculty. In response, CERRTF resumed meetings and expanded its consultative efforts, engaging the Student Council, conducting student surveys, and reaching out to other health science programs at the University, as well as the national DR-ED medical education listserv. It became increasingly clear that the simplest and most effective approach would be to make completing course evaluations a required professional expectation of the medical students. Additionally, much of the student body appeared to support this change.

As could be expected, both staff and faculty had reservations about the requirement. Concerns included potential student burnout, declines in overall satisfaction, and the risk of disengaged or frustrated students providing inaccurate data. To mitigate these concerns, CERRTF proposed additional strategies that would be used to support the implementation of the requirement, including allocating dedicated time for evaluations in student calendars and emphasizing the importance of feedback during Orientation, and incorporating some of the changes made previously such as reducing overall survey load to the extent possible and communicating with students about the importance of providing feedback during Orientation (Table 2).

Ultimately, the recommendations were approved in June 2022 and implemented in Fall 2022. The requirement was enforced by asking non-compliant students to meet with the Assistant Dean for Assessment and Evaluation to review the requirement and discuss its importance (these meetings were meant to be informative rather than punitive). The institution tracks whether or not a student has submitted an evaluation, but the contents of students’ individual responses remain anonymous.

In order to align with University policy, avoid issues of coercion, and account for students who may be unable to complete an evaluation, each course evaluation includes an item asking the student if they wish to opt out of the evaluation. Students must open and submit the survey, but they can choose to opt out and still be considered in compliance. To have a more accurate picture of the representativeness of course evaluation data, the institution therefore tracks two numbers for each evaluation: (1) response rate: the total number of surveys submitted, divided by the number of students enrolled in the course; and (2) completion rate: the number of students who completed the survey and did not choose to opt out, divided by the number of students enrolled in the course.