“What Makes a Good Class?” - Assessing University Students and Teachers’ Perceptions
Abstract
This study explores the perceptions of university students, teachers, and researchers on what constitutes a ‘good class’ in higher education. Using qualitative data from 733 participants at a large Portuguese public university, the study applies Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model to identify three key systems influencing these perceptions: microsystem, mesosystem, and exosystem. The microsystem highlights the importance of student-teacher interactions, teaching skills, and student engagement. The mesosystem emphasizes pedagogical methods, advocating for interactive and innovative teaching approaches, while the exosystem focuses on structural factors like class size and facilities. The findings reveal the critical role of these systems in shaping class quality, offering insights for improving higher education by aligning teaching practices with the expectations of students and educators. The study also calls for pedagogical innovation to address contemporary challenges and meet diverse student needs, providing valuable guidance for educators and policymakers.
References
[2] Berbegal-Mirabent, Jasmina, Marta, Mas-Machuca, and Frederic, Marimon. (2018). Is research mediating the relationship between teaching experience and student satisfaction? Studies in Higher Education, 43 (6): 973-988. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1212321
[3] Bluteau, Patricia, Lynn, Clouder, and Debra, Cureton. (2017). Developing interprofessional education online: An ecological systems theory analysis. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 31 (4): 420-428. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1301892
[4] Braun, Virginia, and Victoria, Clarke. (2012). Thematic analysis. American Psychological Association.
[5] Bronfenbrenner, Urie. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
[6] Bronfenbrenner, Urie. (1995). The bioecological model from a life course perspective: Reflections of a participant observer.
[7] Carter, N., D. Bryant-Lukosius, A. DiCenso, J. Blythe, and A. J. Neville. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41 (5): 545-547. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1188/14.Onf.545-547
[8] Carvalho, Andreia, Sergio Jesus, Teixeira, Leonilde, Olim, Sancha, de Campanella, and Teresa, Costa. (2021). Pedagogical innovation in higher education and active learning methodologies–a case study. Education + Training, 63 (2): 195-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-11-2020-0368
[9] Cuseo, Joe. (2007). The empirical case against large class size: Adverse effects on the teaching, learning, and retention of first-year students. The Journal of Faculty Development, 21 (1): 5-21
[10] Deslauriers, Louis, Logan S., McCarty, Kelly, Miller, Kristina, Callaghan, and Greg, Kestin. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116 (39): 19251-19257. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821936116
[11] Dicker, Ronald, Michael Garcia, Alison Kelly, and Hilda Mulrooney. (2019). What does ‘quality’ in higher education mean? Perceptions of staff, students and employers. Studies in Higher Education, 44 (8): 1425-1441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1445987
[12] Dumpit, Duvince Zhalimar, and Cheryl Joy Fernandez. (2017). Analysis of the use of social media in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) using the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14: 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0045-2
[13] Felten, Peter, and Leo M Lambert. (2020). Relationship-rich education: How human connections drive success in college. Johns Hopkins University Press.
[14] Freire, Paulo. (2014). Pedagogia da autonomia: saberes necessários à prática educativa. Editora Paz e Terra.
[15] Galeano-Salgado, Andres Mauricio, and María José Álvarez-Rivadulla. (2025). Cross-class interactions and subjective inequality: perceptions, beliefs and distributive preferences at a Colombian elite university. Frontiers in Sociology, 10: 1619937. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2025.1619937
[16] Güvendir, Meltem. (2014). A scaling research on faculty characteristics that higher education students prioritize. College Student Journal, 48 (1): 173-183
[17] Han, Feifei, and Jingpeiyi Yang. (2025). Consistency between self-reported and log data to understand students’ experience of learning in flipped classrooms. Scientific Reports, 15 (1): 34369. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-34369
[18] Johnson, Bruce. (2008). Teacher–student relationships which promote resilience at school: A micro-level analysis of students’ views. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 36 (4): 385-398. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/03069880802364528
[19] Johnson, David W., Roger T., Johnson, and Karl A., Smith. (2024). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25 (3&4): 85-118
[20] Kitchen, Joseph A., Ronald E., Hallett, Rosemary J., Perez, and Gwendelyn J., Rivera. (2019). Advancing the use of ecological systems theory in college student research: The ecological systems interview tool. Journal of College Student Development, 60 (4): 381-400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0035
[21] Law, Nancy. (2014). Comparing pedagogical innovations. In Comparative education research: Approaches and methods, 333-364. Springer.
[22] Means, Barbara, Yukie, Toyama, Robert, Murphy, and Marianne, Baki. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115 (3): 1-47
[23] Mulisa, Feyisa. (2019). Application of bioecological systems theory to higher education: Best evidence review. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 1 (2): 104-115
[24] Müller, Claude, and Thoralf, Mildenberger. (2021). Facilitating flexible learning by replacing classroom time with an online learning environment: A systematic review of blended learning in higher education. Educational Research Review, 34: 100394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100394
[25] Núñez-Canal, Margarita, Mª de las Mercedes de Obesso, and Carlos Alberto, Pérez-Rivero. (2022). New challenges in higher education: A study of the digital competence of educators in Covid times. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174: 121270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121270
[26] O'Connor, Kevin. (2013). Class participation: Promoting in-class student engagement. Education, 133 (3): 340-344.
[27] Olo, Daniela, Leonida, Correia, and Conceição, Rego. (2021). Higher education institutions and development: Missions, models, and challenges. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 12 (2): 1-25.
[28] Pantić, Nataša. (2017). An exploratory study of teacher agency for social justice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66: 219-230.
[29] Pianta, Robert C., Bridget K., Hamre, and Joseph P., Allen. (2012). Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In Handbook of research on student engagement, 365-386. Springer.
[30] Prince, Michael. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93 (3): 223-231.
[31] Redecker, Christine. 2017. European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
[32] Reverter-Masia, Joaquin, and Vicenço, Hernandez-Gonzalez. (2021). Basic abilities a good university teacher should have: case study at the University of Lleida, Spain. Revista Espacios, 42 (3)
[33] Santos, Julia, Amelia Simoes, Figueiredo, and Margarida, Vieira. (2019). Innovative pedagogical practices in higher education: An integrative literature review. Nurse Education Today, 72: 12-17
[34] Shernoff, David J., Stephen M., Tonks, and Brett, Anderson. (2014). The impact of the learning environment on student engagement in high school classrooms. Teachers College Record, 116 (13): 166-177.
[35] Skinner, Ellen A, Nicolette P., Rickert, Justin W., Vollet, and Thomas A., Kindermann. (2022). The complex social ecology of academic development: A bioecological framework and illustration examining the collective effects of parents, teachers, and peers on student engagement. Educational Psychologist, 57 (2): 87-113.
[36] Smith, Brett, Andrew C., Sparkes, and Nick, Caddick. (2014). Judging qualitative research. In Research methods in sports coaching, 192-201. Routledge.
[37] Suyo-Vega, Josefina Amanda, Víctor Hugo, Fernández-Bedoya, and Monica Elisa, Meneses-La-Riva. (2024). Beyond traditional teaching: a systematic review of innovative pedagogical practices in higher education. F1000Research, 13: 22.
[38] Tonkonog, VV. (2025). The analysis of modern problems and challenges of Russian medical education: the sociological survey results. Problems of Social Hygiene, Public Health and History of Medicine, 33 (4): 706-713.
[39] van Dijk, Esther E., Jan van Tartwijk, Marieke F. van der Schaaf, and Manon Kluijtmans. (2020). What makes an expert university teacher? A systematic review and synthesis of frameworks for teacher expertise in higher education. Educational Research Review 31: 100365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100365
[40] NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis Software.
[41] Walder, Anne Mai. (2014). The concept of pedagogical innovation in higher education. Education Journal, 3 (3): 195-202.
[42] Wilson, Janie H, and Shauna B Wilson. (2007). The first day of class affects student motivation: An experimental study. Teaching of Psychology, 34 (4): 226-230.
[43] Xerri, Matthew J., Katrina Radford, and Kate Shacklock. (2018). Student engagement in academic activities: a social support perspective. Higher Education, 75: 589-605.
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.