Abstract
Student evaluation of modules is central to quality management and enhancement within higher education. However, the manner in which questionnaires are designed may inadvertently bias responses. Fifty-seven level 1 undergraduate students (45 women, 12 men) were randomised to evaluate an introductory psychology module on either bipolar (−2 to +2, n = 29) or unipolar (1 to 5, n = 28) scales. Consistent with previous research, ratings on bipolar scales generally elicited more positive evaluations than ratings on unipolar scales. The effects of the numeric values of rating scales were most pronounced when more abstract questions (e.g. ‘overall, how enjoyable was the module?’) than when more concrete questions (e.g. ‘how much did you contribute?’) were asked. Implications of the research for theory and practice in higher education are discussed.