Reframing student feedback: from evaluation to dialogue

In Swedish higher education, student evaluations of teaching (SETs) have become a central instrument for quality assurance and pedagogical revision. While student feedback can provide valuable insights into their lived experience of courses, an overreliance on such evaluation risks elevating satisfaction over learning and sidelining the professional judgment of university teachers who understand curricular progression across multiple study years. Grounded in research-based pedagogy and long-term program coherence, this paper argues for a balanced approach that integrates student perspectives with the expertise of educators. Drawing on Biggs’ theory of constructive alignment, Bernstein’s pedagogic device, and Bourdieu’s field theory, the study develops a dialogic model of curriculum development that explains how academic judgment mediates between learning experience and teaching expertise. The discussion is situated within the Swedish context, which rests simultaneously on democratic and scientific ideals. It also generates implications for higher-education policy and teaching practice internationally.