Scope

The department's plan for evaluation with students is based on AAU's principles for evaluation of the four types of evaluation:

1. Evaluation of the start of studies
2. Evaluation of study activities
3. Evaluation of the study environment
4. Evaluation of education courses

At the bottom of this plan for evaluation with students appears a distribution of responsibilities and roles as well as a Flowchart with a timeline for the processing of the evaluations in the study boards. In addition, two workflow descriptions have been prepared in the form of (administrative) additional documents.

Purpose

The purpose of the evaluations is to create an overview of the current situation on the courses and thereby ensure that an assessment is made of whether adjustments need to be made in order to maintain the professional quality and development of the courses. The evaluation takes place through continuous input to the education management, partly in dialogue with the students, partly via supplementary quantitative surveys. Through dialogue with the students, it is possible to intervene together with the students and in the long term ensure the best possible education, just as the ongoing dialogue enables smaller ongoing adjustments to activities in a given semester.

The evaluations are a method combination of dialogue between students, lecturers, board of studies and department management as well as questionnaires.

The purpose of evaluating the study activities, including modules, internships, project-oriented courses and project work, is to continuously assess whether the study activities – academically, pedagogically-didactically and through the practical organization – contribute to meeting the learning goals described in the study plan.

The purpose of evaluating the semester is to continuously take stock of whether students experience sufficient learning outcomes and an appropriate organization of the semester.

The start of studies is evaluated with the aim of ensuring adaptation of the start of studies, so that it is perceived as appropriate for the students.

The purpose of evaluating the study environment is to ensure continuous and systematic follow-up of challenges and development of the study environment.

In addition, all training courses are evaluated in relation to the end of the bachelor's and master's programmes. Here the students assess coherence and progression throughout the programme, including whether the students feel that the competence profile of the program has been met.

Actors

The following actors are involved in the process of processing the evaluation with students.

Vice Head of Department for the study programmes has the overall responsibility for ensuring the organization, implementation and follow-up of evaluations. It is the Vice Head of Department's responsibility to bring any matters of relevance to the head of department. See also below about handling comments about named employees.

In the event of significant criticism of the quality of teaching provided by another department, the deputy head of department is responsible for entering into a dialogue with the department management at the department in question.

The Study Boards and the Chairs of the Study Boards are responsible for preparing the model and plan for carrying out the qualitative evaluations during the semester. For the qualitative evaluations, the Study Board decides who assists with the preparation of notes of the meetings. The Study Board processes the qualitative and quantitative evaluations, and is responsible for any academic changes.

The Study Board is responsible for passing on matters of relevance to the institute management.

The lecturer(s) with the coordinating role during the semester have a central role in relation to the evaluation of study activities. The person coordinates and facilitates the dialogue with the students. The lecturer with the coordinating role for the semester prepares a summary of the quantitative and qualitative evaluations as well as a proposal for any changes to the board of studies.

Lecturers deal with the summary of qualitative and quantitative evaluations prepared by the lecturer with the coordinating role of the semester, and possibly send feedback to him before sending to the board of studies.

See supplementary document at the bottom about Responsibility and role distribution.

Organization

Qualitative evaluation

The qualitative evaluation of the teaching takes place in dialogue with students.

The ongoing dialogue with students takes place on meeting forums between students, relevant lecturers and coordinators. It is up to the individual board of studies to decide how the board of studies will organize the evaluation, including which form of meeting forum (e.g. plenum, semester group meetings, FU meetings, etc.) is most rewarding.

A question guide has been prepared with required themes for the dialogue with the students. However, the Study Board must be aware that some themes must be evaluated qualitatively, while others are optional, cf. the question guide. In order to ensure that the dialogue with students is organized so that it makes sense for and takes into account the size and needs of the individual program and semester, the board of studies decides how the individual program structures the dialogue and which themes are to be included. However, it is a requirement that the start of studies is evaluated both qualitatively and quantitatively for bachelor's and professional bachelor's programmes, while the method is optional for master's programmes. Please note that the quantitative evaluation of the start of studies on the bachelor's and professional bachelor's programs is issued centrally. The study boards must process the results.
The meetings are held at least two and preferably three times a year. semester (that is, the meetings are held semester by semester and not across the programme). The purpose of these meetings is to create ongoing dialogue between students and the academic staff, i.a. in relation to the academic content of the modules, the start of studies, the study environment, the teaching, the organization of the semester and the coherence of the education.

The lecturer with the coordinating role ensures systematic feedback to the board of studies in the form of a memo after each meeting.

The teacher with the coordinating role asks relevant teachers to relate and contribute to the summary of the qualitative and quantitative evaluations in the semester.

Notes from the meetings are processed in the study boards, so that an ongoing dialogue and coordination between coordinators and study boards is ensured.

The ongoing dialogue with students ensures the corresponding ongoing feedback to students about matters relating to the education and any actions that are carried out on the basis of their evaluation.

Quantitative evaluation

Surveys are carried out for the study environment, semesters, start of studies for bachelor's programmes, projects, internships, project-oriented courses and education courses.

The quantitative evaluations illuminate the information from the qualitative evaluations and other themes that do not appear in the qualitative evaluations.

Handling of evaluations of named employees

Positive and negative criticism of named employees, which appears in the quantitative evaluations, must be handled, so that there is partly the possibility of continuing to emphasize the positive in contexts of merit, for example, and partly the possibility of assessing the needs to adjust and qualify the teaching. It is necessary to be aware that the qualitative evaluations should not deal with the teacher's qualities or lack thereof, but if it is brought up in the qualitative evaluations, then it must be handled as with the quantitative evaluations.

In the handling of comments about named employees, there is a significant responsibility for all actors in the process, especially when the criticism is negative.

In the case of negative comments about a named teacher, students are encouraged to be referred to the teacher in question with a view to discussing the criticism. If the criticism is assessed to be of a nature or extent where such a dialogue is not fruitful, the lecturer with the coordinating role is obliged to pass the criticism on, initially to the chairman of the study board. If it is assessed that the criticism is linked to the academic content of the teaching, the chairman of the study board discusses the criticism with the teacher in question with a view to possible adjustment of the content and form of the teaching. In the case of continuous criticism, the chairman of the study board ensures that this is passed on to the Vice Head of Department.

If it is assessed that the criticism does not only concern academic matters, it is brought to the deputy head of department, so that a dialogue can be initiated between the employee and department management about the relevance of and options for meeting the criticism, including opportunities for competence development. If it is considered relevant, the chairman of the study board is naturally involved in these discussions.

The quantitative evaluations, including positive and negative comments about named employees, are sent to the board of studies, the lecturer with the coordinating role for the semester and the deputy head of department, who is subject to confidentiality in relation to any personally sensitive information that may appear in the evaluations.

Positive and negative comments about named employees from the quantitative evaluations are collected here in an overview by the administration, which is forwarded to the Vice Head of Department. The purpose is partly to have an overall overview of the positive evaluations, and partly to ensure that any continuous and significant criticism across courses is discussed with named employees with a view to identifying opportunities for meeting the criticism, including opportunities for competence development.

Documentation and processing

The Study Board regularly receives notes from the dialogue-based meetings, a final summary of the qualitative and quantitative evaluations as well as a recommendation on possible adjustments from the lecturer with the coordinating role during the semester. These notes, summaries and recommendations are attached as appendices to the study board meetings prior to consideration.

In addition, the evaluations from project-oriented courses/internships as well as evaluations for the internship sites are also included in the study board's processing, where this is relevant. These are treated similarly to the other evaluations by the lecturer with the coordinating role in the relevant semester.

The censor chairmanship's annual report must also be discussed and dealt with in the Study Board. Other information from the censors (e.g. censor reports), the quality system does not require to be processed by the Study Board.

The Study Board continuously processes the qualitative and quantitative evaluations at Board of Studies meetings. The study board's processing of the evaluations is documented via the study board reports, where it must be clearly stated what the study board has discussed and concluded as well as any actions or adjustments that are carried out on the basis of the evaluations.

Study board minutes can be accessed on the Study Board's website.