Student evaluation of courses and study programmes
The purpose of quality work at course level and study programme level, is to reveal aspects seen from the perspective of students and employees, that need to be improved, but also to identify qualities that should be maintained.
The individual student is expected to take an active part in evaluation of courses and programmes in which they are enrolled. Student representatives have a special responsibility for student participation.
Student evaluation of courses In consultation with the student representative, the study programme manager/PhD programme manager stipulates the method of evaluation and whether the courses should have a mid-term or end-of-term evaluation (normally carried out as a mid-term evaluation).
Normally, one of the following methods will be used in student evaluation of courses:
Digital questionnaire with ensuing dialogue between the person responsible for the course and the student representative.
Plenary conversation with ensuing dialogue between the person responsible for the course and the student representative.
Dialogue between the person responsible for the course and the student representative.
Dialogue between the study programme manager/PhD programme manager and the student representative.
The University Academic Affairs Committee has stipulated a checklist for evaluation of courses. A possible digital survey will be carried out in Canvas. The questionnaire has been stipulated by the Vice-Rector for Education, quality of education and learning environment.
A summary of the dialogue-based student evaluation is written up by the student representative. The summary is published for the students in Canvas.
Student evaluation may be carried out for each course or jointly for courses in the same semester.
If mid-term evaluation is arranged, it will normally be in week 41 in the autumn semester and week 10 in the spring semester.
Student evaluation of practice There is to be at least one student evaluation for each practice period. In consultation with the student representative, the study programme manager/Head of Study stipulates the method of evaluation and whether periods of practical training should have a mid-term or end-of-term evaluation.
The University Academic Affairs Committee has stipulated a checklist for evaluation of practice.
Evaluation of doctoral supervision Evaluation of doctoral supervision is carried out through progress reports submitted at least once per year by the candidate and the supervisor.
Student evaluation of exchange After completed period of exchange, a digital evaluation is carried out. The main focus is on facilitation from both UiA and the exchange institution, academic content and relevance to the study programme at UiA.
Student evaluation of study programmes Annual evaluation of the study programme is carried out in the Study Programme Committee/PhD Programme Committee for all degree programmes as well as for the Postgraduate Certificate in Education. At least one student representative per student year group for bachelor’s and master’s programmes participates. In the case of PhD programmes, the student representative and at least one other candidate participate. Student representatives may bring input from fellow students to the meeting in the Study Programme Committee/PhD Programme Committee.
Minutes from the meeting in the Study Programme Committee with proposals for changes and other possible measures is part of the basis for the annual study programme report.
Periodic programme evaluation Periodic programme evaluation is to be carried out at least every sixth year for all study programmes. As part of the evaluation a panel is to be appointed. The panel includes student representatives and external members.