Interim evaluation
How is it going so far? Do the students understand the material?
You can get an answer to these questions with a interim evaluation. You can choose to have your interim evaluation supported by the evaluation team or prepare one yourself.
If you choose to automate your interim evaluation with the help of the evaluation team, you will by default get three questions and the opportunity to add more yourself. You will receive a report the day after the evaluation has ended - just as you know it from your end of course evaluation. Only the course coordinator at the course in question will be able to see the evaluation results.
Three standard questions
These are the three standard questions that you can supplement with questions after your liking
- I rate the overall outcome of the course as:
(Very significant outcome | Significant outcome | Some outcome |Limited outcome | No outcome) - What would you like to highlight about this course? (open)
- How do you think the course could be improved? (open)
The Delphi method
On a piece of paper, each student lists three positive things about the course and three things which could be improved. Afterwards, the papers may circulate between the students until they return to the author. When the students receive a piece of paper, they read the statements and put a mark next to the ones they agree with. The results are a series of statements about the teaching and an indication of how many students agree with the individual statements.
Finally, the class and the lecturer may proceed to discuss the result. Choose the statements which most students agree with - in both the positive and less positive category - and discuss them. This means that not all statements will be discussed, and it could be a good idea to conclude the session by asking the students if there are any other topics they wish to comment on. In large classes, the students may be divided into groups who each circulate their papers among the group members. The advantages of this method are that the students contribute to setting the agenda via their statements, and that all students must consider and take a stand on all statements.
Interview
The students interview each other in groups, starting from a broad question such as: “What is your personal learning outcome of the teaching? Does it live up to your expectations, and why/why not? What can be done better?” Each group composes a short written summary. Together, the lecturers and the students attempt to elaborate and discuss the possible consequences and follow-ups.
Continuous evaluation: One-minute papers
During the last minutes of the lesson, the students write down their immediate and spontaneous reaction to the teaching. The method can be applied systematically after each lesson or when the need occurs.
The teacher can ask the students to write down the answer to something the teacher would like to know in particular, for example whether the students are able to see the connection between the finished lesson and the objectives of the course, whether the presentation of the subject matter is appropriate, whether there is an appropriate interaction between the lecturer and the students, or whether the students have any unanswered questions.
Questions or problems can be addressed at the beginning of the next lesson. In this way, the students are able to see the coherence of the lessons, and any misunderstandings can be prevented.
Continuous dialogue I: Lecturer and steering group
At the beginning of the course, the lecturer and the class choose a group of students who will make up the steering group. The other students can give their feedback to the steering group who then pass the feedback on to the lecturer.
The steering group can be composed in various ways, but it is important that the group represents all students and not just the most persistent ones. Students who are not comfortable giving personal feedback to the lecturer may ask the steering group to pass on their feedback instead.
Continuous dialogue II: Lecturer and selected students
At the beginning of the semester, the lecturer selects two or three random students who must give their own informal feedback on the teaching, either during the breaks or after the lessons. In this way, the lecturer receives immediate feedback on the teaching even though the level of activity in the lessons might be low.
