Harnessing behavioural economics for academic leadership: a case study

CCCU wishes to introduce a single module-evaluation questionnaire, which will be used across all modules, in all Programmes at our University. This session presents a case study of the process used to develop consensus amongst academics staff, students and professional services, which has enabled policy development.

Module review is central to excellence in learning and teaching (Alhija, 2017; Nielsen and Kreiner, 2017; Soffer et al 2017; Utriainen et al, 2018). Module evaluation questionnaires are part of this, allowing students to feedback on their learning experience, which can enhance modules for the next cohort and shape future modules for the responding cohort.

In September 2017, I was appointed Institutional Lead for module evaluations. I was to develop a single questionnaire, to be used by every student at the University, after every module, from Semester 1 2018/19.

Our University has wanted to introduce a single module evaluation questionnaire for many years. Many drafts have been written. None had been approved.

Having worked outside of academia as a Behaviour Change Consultant in a public policy role, I recognised that this was first and foremost a leadership role. My task was less about the creation of the perfect module evaluation questionnaire and more about leading academic and professional services colleagues to collaborate with each other and with our students, to develop a consensus on the purpose of module evaluation questionnaires. It was about finding a way to change practice, not only in how we evaluate our teaching, but also in how we develop policy. It was about changing how we think about module evaluations, from summative to formative, from students as assessors to students as partners. These changes are essential precursors to changing practices in the classroom.

To do this, I needed to understand a pattern of behaviour and to develop an intervention that would interrupt this pattern.

Kahnemann (2011) finds that our greatest error is to assume that humans behave rationally, making and acting upon choices that are informed by rational consideration of perfect information. Kahnemann finds that very few of us are able to behave in this way. We think fast, not slow; our emotional, subconscious, left brain dominates our rational, conscious, right brain. The strongest influences upon our behaviour are not information and argument, but a range of factors, which Dolan et al (2010) summarise into the mnemonic ‘MINDSPACE’. MINDSPACE tells us that, to influence behaviour, we need to consider: perceptions of the Messenger; Incentives (not) to change; social Norms; behavioural Defaults; the Salience of our messages; how we are Primed to act; Affect (emotion); the role of Commitment; and the role of Ego.

I applied MINDSPACE to frame my actions to lead my colleagues towards policy consensus. This case study session will discuss these actions. I will demonstrate the relevance and role of behavioural economics in academic leadership.

The research mentioned in this study was subject to full ethical review.