Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching

Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Procedure (Higher Education)

Policy Code: CG1703

Purpose

This procedure supports and mandates the implementation of the Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Policy, particularly the key principles associated with the collection, reporting, distribution and actions relevant to student feedback. The purpose of this procedure is to affirm the institutional commitment of obtaining student feedback as a legitimate mechanism in ongoing institutional quality assurance regarding learning and teaching. This procedure details processes that relate to the following: collection of student feedback; the analyses process; the report framework structure; the reporting distributed pattern; closure of the student feedback loop and evidence of action relevant to the student feedback.

Scope

To operationalise the Federation University Australia’s online student feedback system, eVALUate, in alignment with the Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Policy.

NOTE: eVALUate is currently the acceptable online, anonymous student feedback mechanism for the Higher Education sector.

Definitions

Term Definition
Evaluation The collection of student feedback, analysis process, reporting and interpretation of data to relevant  staff and students of the institution regarding the quality of learning and teaching
Course evaluation The evaluation process primarily concerned with the course structure and its associated components
Teacher evaluation The evaluation process is primarily concerned with the teacher delivering the course in the higher education (HE) sector
eVALUate The online feedback tool for collating, analysing and reporting student feedback on their learning and teaching experiences at the institution and its associated providers. This is the acceptable evaluation tool for both sectors across the university
Program A program of study/research leading to the granting of an official award or qualification of the University contained in University Schedule 5.1 and the Scope of Registration.  A program contains subsidiary elements variously referred to as courses (higher education) or units of competency (VET)
Course Subsidiary element of a higher education (HE) program
Course Coordinator (CC) A university staff member responsible for the delivery, assessment and structure of a course. This staff member may also teach the course or delegate this responsibility to another university staff member
Program Coordinator (PC) A university staff member responsible for the oversight of a program
Teacher A university staff member responsible for the actual delivery of a course (HE). A course can also be delivered  by more than one teacher (i.e. team teaching)
Faculty Business Manager (FBM) Key administrative university staff member who is responsible for the administrative tasks for all programs within their Faculty
Associate Dean, Learning and Teaching (ADLT) The ADLT is a key leadership position located within each faculty and is an important part of the Faculty Executive Group. The ADLT is a university staff member who plays an integral role in learning and teaching quality assurance, peer review and professional development of all staff within their faculty. The ADLT works closely with the senior faculty staff across the faculty and the institution  
Associate Dean,Student Retention and Success (ADSRS) The ADSRS is a key leadership position located within each faculty. The ADSRS has a specific focuses on student retention, success, attrition and related factors. The ADSRS also works closely with the ADLT within each faculty and the DVC Learning & Quality
Annual eVALUate Schedule A pre-determined schedule formalising the evaluation process within the institution published on the University’s Survey Teams eVALUate webpage, at the commencement of the calendar year
eVALUate Course survey This survey asks students to reflect and provide feedback relevant to the course structure including meeting learning outcomes, assessment, course structure and design
eVALUate Teaching survey This survey asks students to reflect and provide feedback on individual teachers involved with the delivery of a course

Five Domains of this Procedural Document

  1. Preparing for an eVALUate Campaign
  2. Questions within the eVALUate Course and Teaching Survey

  3. Generation and Distribution of eVALUate Reports

  4. Responding to Student Feedback

  5. Evidence of Corrective Action (where required)  

General Information

In order to ensure that data used for survey purposes is accurate and available at the required time, the following must occur:

  • Student Management Team is responsible for the delivery of appropriate professional development (PD) to faculty administrative staff regarding the specific data entry requirements that enable accurate data to be extracted out of the university agreed student database (i.e. myStudent Centre) for the purpose of eVALUate analysis.
  • The Faculty Business Manager (FBM) within each Faculty is responsible for ensuring all administrative staff associated with eVALUate and myStudent Centre system have completed the necessary training and PD required for the successful roll-out of an eVALUate campaign within their faculty. The FBM must be made fully aware of the expectation of the FedUni Survey Team prior to extraction of data for a eVALUate campaign.
  • The FedUni Survey Team is responsible for maintaining and reviewing campaign schedules, processes and communicating with the Associate Dean, Learning and Teaching (ADLT), Associate Dean, Student Retention and Success (ADSRS) and FBM where issues arise with eVALUate collection and distribution.

Publication, access to and storage of eVALUate data:

  • Publication of reports will occur as per the eVALUate Business Rules and Reporting Framework.
  • ITS (Information Technology Services) will be responsible for the secure storage of digital eVALUate data in consultation with Surveys Team and the FedUni Survey systems vendors.
  • Each faculty and recipient of eVALUate reports will be responsible for the secure storage of eVALUate reports.

Actions

Step 1 Preparing for an eVALUate Campaign

The eVALUate Process is for Semester 1 and Semester 2 in various locations including Ballarat, Wimmera and Gippsland. The survey schedule also needs to align to Partner/Centre of University Partnerships (CUP) management reporting requirements. For non-standard teaching periods (i.e. those overseas, Winter Sessions Semesters, Summer Sessions Semesters, Spring Sessions Semesters and Late Summer Semester) and international partner provider teaching periods, campaign timelines will be modified accordingly by the FedUni Survey Team in consultation with the appropriate staff.  The table below describes the time period, faculty responsibilities and the FedUni Survey team responsibilities throughout the Semester 1 and Semester 2 campaign periods.

Time Period Faculty Responsibility FedUni Survey Team Responsibility
Pre-commencement of the semester
  • Organise course coordinators, lecturers and/or teachers, tutors, program coordinators and associated workloads for all staff to adequately cover program/qualification requirements for the scheduled semester
  • Faculty work with Student Management Team to coordinate the necessary professional development between the faculty and Student Administration staff
  • Confirmation of University Survey Schedule
  • Confirmation of Campaign Delivery Location and Semester Schedule
  • Pre-campaign meetings with vendor developer (if required)
Week 1-4
  • All teacher details are updated in appropriate fields (there is an option for more than 1 teacher per course/unit of competency) within the myStudent Centre platform
  • All tutor details are updated in appropriate fields (there is an option for more than 1 tutor per course/unit of competency) within the myStudent Centre platform
  • Appropriate professional development is performed with FBM and key timetabling staff within each faculty
 
Week 5
  • ADLTS must request the FedUni Survey Team to combine courses (where it is appropriate). Any request received after week 6 will not be added
  • An email will be sent to the FBM and timetabling staff alerting them to the eVALUate process
Week 6/7
  • An appropriate query needs to be run through the myStudent Centre platform to check the validity of data at this early stage
  • Faculties are instructed on how to run a pre-campaign  test to ensure their data entry in week 1 – 4 is accurate
  • If inaccuracies are identified at this stage, the FBM or nominee is required to trouble-shoot this issue
  • Return validated data file with updates to the FedUni Survey Team
  • An email is sent to the ADLT/ADSRS alerting them that the eVALUate process is about to commence;
  • Ask that all Faculty staff and student cohorts are primed for survey campaign. This communication email should also contain links to current eVALUate webpages. Staff and students are encouraged to access the existing resources on the university website. This promotion process should be led by the ADLT within the faculty.Click here for resources/tools.
  • Data Validation – Check data extract against the progressive tally.  Faculties are alerted of inconsistencies and are responsible for making appropriate changes in myStudent Centre
Week 8
  • ADLT/ADSRS, & lecturers and/or teachers need to access eVALUate webpage and familiarise themselves with the eVALUate learning and teaching resources
  • SELT Policy
  • SELT Procedure
  • Refer to the short instructional video and pdf documents on the eVALUate website. Click here for the resources.
  • Correct any final errors detected by the Data Validation test sent through from the Fed Uni Survey Team
  • Internal checks performed prior to going live
  • Compile test and load campaign in to survey system
  • Advise ADLTS of Survey Go Live
  • Compile, load eVALUate campaign for the correct teaching semester
Week 9
  • Course coordinators, program coordinators, lecturers and/or teachers need to encourage students to participate in the eVALUate online surveys to ensure student feedback is part of the quality assurance cycle
  • Remind students to check FedUni student email accounts
  • Refer to the short instructional video and pdf documents on the eVALUate website. Click here for the resources.
  • Advertise on FedUni News
  • ‘Go Live’ with campaign
  • eVALUate campaign is released and students receive an email link which directs them to their dashboard (full list of course and teacher surveys are available on their dashboard)
Week 10
  • Encourage students to participate
  • Remind students to check FedUni student email accounts
  • Refer to the short instructional video and pdf documents on the eVALUate website. Click here for the resources.
  • Re-advertise on FedUni News
  • Weekly response rate updates to ADLTS                           
  • Reminders and follow up issues to students
Week 11
  • Encourage students to participate
  • Remind students to check FedUni student email accounts
  • Refer to the short instructional video and pdf documents on the eVALUate website. Click here for the resources.
  • Re-advertise on FedUni News
  • Weekly response rate updates to ADLTS                           
  • Reminders and follow up issues to students
Week 12
  • Encourage students to participate
  • Reminder to check FedUni Student email accounts
  • Refer to the short instructional video and pdf documents on the eVALUate website. Click here for the resources.
  • Re-advertise on FedUni News
  • Weekly response rate updates to ADLTS                           
  • Reminders and follow up issues to students
Week 13
  • Encourage students to participate
  • Reminder to check FedUni Student email accounts
  • Refer to the short instructional video and pdf documents on the eVALUate website. Click here for the resources.
  • Re-advertise on FedUni News
  • Weekly response rate updates are provided to the ADLTS                           
  • Reminders and follow up issues to students
Week 14
  • Encourage students to participate
  • Reminder to check FedUni Student email accounts
  • Re-advertise on FedUni News
  • Weekly response rate updates are provided to the ADLTS                           
  • Reminders and follow up issues to students
Week 15
  • Encourage students to participate
  • Reminder to check FedUni Student email accounts
  • Re-advertise on FedUni News
  • Weekly response rate updates are provided to the ADLTS                           
  • Reminders and follow up issues to students
Friday of Week 15  
  • Survey campaign is closed
  • Week 15 does not include the lecture breaks. The end of week 15 is the end of the exam period
  • Download Consolidated Reports and Data Validation and Variable Checks from eVALUate platform
  • Weekly response rate updates are provided to ADLTS
After results are published
  • Relevant faculty staff are required to reflect on the student feedback and provide evidence of internal quality control to appropriate committee structures and line managers as specified in this procedure
  • Forward reports to appropriate staff
  • Refer to domain number 3 within procedure
After results are published  
  • Campaigns wrap up and finalise checklists in preparation for the next cycle

Step 2 Questions within the eVALUate Course and Teaching Surveys

eVALUate Course/Survey

The eVALUate course survey has eleven quantitative and two qualitative items. Eleven quantitative items ask students to report their level agreement with statements about what helps their achievement of course learning outcomes (items 1 to 7), their motivation and engagement in learning (items 8 to 10) and their overall satisfaction (item 11).

Students may indicate Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D), Strongly Disagree (SD) or Unable to Judge (UJ) for each item.

Where appropriate data may be grouped and presented in the summary reports. For example:

  • % Agreement  = SA and A,
  • % Disagreement  =  D and SD and
  • % Unable to Judge = UJ

Results of the survey are also reported as percentages.

Students are asked to judge their level of agreement with the following eleven statements:

1. The learning outcomes in this course are clearly identified.

The learning outcomes are what you are expected to know, understand or be able to do in order to be successful in this course.

2. The learning experiences in this course help me to achieve the learning outcomes.

The learning experiences could include: face to face lectures, tutorials, laboratories, clinical

practicums, fieldwork, directed learning tasks, and online and distance education experiences.

3. The learning resources in this course help me to achieve the learning outcomes.

Learning resources could include print, multimedia and online study materials, and equipment

available in lectures, laboratories, clinics or studios.

4. The assessment tasks in this course evaluate my achievement of the learning outcomes.

Assessment tasks are those which are rewarded by marks, grades or feedback. Assessment tasks

directly assess your achievement of the learning outcomes.

5. Feedback on my work in this course helps me to achieve the learning outcomes.

Feedback includes written or verbal comments on your work.

6. The workload in this course is appropriate to the achievement of the learning outcomes.

Workload includes class attendance, reading, researching, group activities and assessment tasks.

7. The quality of teaching in this course helps me to achieve the learning outcomes.

Quality teaching occurs when knowledgeable and enthusiastic teaching staff interact positively with

students in well‐organised teaching and learning experiences.

8. I am motivated to achieve the learning outcomes in this course.

Being motivated means having the desire or drive to learn, to complete tasks and to willingly strive for goals.

9. I make best use of the learning experiences in this course.

I prepare for and follow up on the learning experiences offered in this course.

10. I think about how I can learn more effectively in this course.

I take time to think about how I can learn more effectively.

11. Overall, I am satisfied with this course.

Overall, this course provides a quality learning experience.

Qualitative items invite students to make constructive comments (limit of 600 characters):

12. What are the most helpful aspects of this course?

13. How do you think this course might be improved?

eVALUate Teaching Survey

The eVALUate teaching survey asks students to report on aspects of teaching performance. It has seven quantitative and two qualitative statements.

Students may indicate Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Disagree (D), Strongly Disagree (SD) or Unable to Judge (UJ) for each item.

Where appropriate data may be grouped and presented in the summary reports. For example:

  • % Agreement  = SA and A,
  • % Disagreement  =  D and SD and
  • % Unable to Judge = UJ

Results of the survey are also reported as percentages.

Students are asked to judge their level of agreement with the following nine statements:

1. Appears knowledgeable in this subject area.

The teacher seems to have a good understanding of the subject.

2. Is enthusiastic in teaching this course.

The teacher makes the subject interesting and conveys his or her enthusiasm for the subject.

3. Is well organised.

The teacher has material prepared on time, is punctual and structures activities in ways that help learning.

4. Communicates clearly.

The teacher is easy to understand in face‐to‐face, online, written and other formats and explains concepts clearly.

5. Is approachable.

The teacher encourages students to ask questions and seek help.

6. Provides useful feedback.

The teacher provides timely and helpful feedback so you can learn.

7. Is an effective teacher.

Overall, this teacher helps you to learn.

Qualitative items invite students to make constructive comments (limit of 600 characters):

8. Please comment on [this teacher]'s teaching strengths.

9. Please comment on how you think [this teacher] might improve the teaching and learning in this course.

Step 3 Generation and distribution of eVALUate reports

The Fed Uni Survey Team are responsible for the creation of reports based on the eVALUate data.  The purpose of the data is to ensure an internal and external quality assurance process to maintain the integrity of learning of teaching across the institution.   The reports will:

  • assist staff to engage in a scholarly review of their teaching by reflecting on course/unit of competency design, delivery, student engagement, and assessment;
  • provide data to benchmark learning and teaching quality within and cross institutional with other providers utilising the eVALUate system;
  • provide evidence for teaching staff to use as indicators of teaching performance when discussing Performance Review Development Program (PRDP) and workloads  with line managers;
  • provide evidence for academic staff promotion, performance management processes, and teaching portfolios.

Using Data to measure performance: Exemplar Performance and Quality Assurance Improvement

Metric 1 : Level of Student Agreement

The eVALUate data to be summarised in such a way that both course and teaching key statement evaluations fall into 3 subcategories outlining performance. The 3 subcategories are based on the following:

  • Outstanding category (Green traffic light indicator: >80% of responses Agree or Strongly Agree with all the quantitative statements),
  • Noteworthy category (further improvements are required to meet targets: 60 -79% of responses are Agree or Strongly Agree all the quantitative statements) or
  • Further Action Required category (Red traffic light indicator: <60% of responses Agree or Strongly Agree with all the quantitative statements).
% of responses Subcategories outlining performance
> 80% Outstanding
60%-79% Noteworthy (further improvement to reach the > 80% agreement)
< 60% Further Action required

Metric 2: Level of Student Response

Metric 2 focuses on student response rates. The target student response rate is > 80% (i.e. Greater then > 80% of students in an enrolled single course or equivalent actively respond to the course and/or teacher survey). Many factors influence student response rates including lecturer/teacher support and encouragement, reminders to students, closure of the feedback mechanism to students and marketing strategies. In circumstance approved by the ADLT, the course survey feedback responses (qualitative and/or quantitative) of one or more courses may require combining (refer actions for preparation of survey campaign week 5).

Reward and recognition of exemplar performance

Course and teacher eVALUate reports which meet metric 1 specific to > 80% student agreement to the all quantitative questions (Very good category) and also meet metric 2 (> 80% of entire student cohort response rate) (see note 1) should be recognised at the faculty level and institutional level and receive a letter of commendation from the DVC Learning and Quality (or equivalent) Refer to Note 1.

A summary of this data should be made available to ADLT to assist with this process (for example within FSP-CSR eVALUate Heat Maps). This information can also be useful in identifying individual staff, teaching teams and programs who should be nominated for faculty and/or institutional and/or national learning and teaching awards and/or encourages to apply for grants through the (for example Vice Chancellor Awards). Letters should be sent to appropriate staff and CC to the Executive Deans and Director, CLIPP.

Note 1: To receive a recognition of exemplar performance, the total number of students enrolled in the course must be greater than ten (10).

 Quality assurance improvement strategies

Where course and/or teacher evaluations in metric 1 are <60% (Further Action Required category), this needs to be captured as specified in Section 5: Evidence of Corrective Action. Course Coordinators are responsible for completing a Course Survey Action Plan as detailed in this procedure. A summary of the details in the Course Survey Action Plan will also be captured in the Faculty.

For further information, please refer to Section 5: Evidence of Corrective Action within the SELT Procedure.

3.1 Course/Level Reports

A summary of the reports produced following a course/unit of competency eVALUate campaign are detail below.  

Summary of Generation and Distribution of Course/Unit of Competency eVALUate feedback reports
Name of report Information provided Business rules for report generation Access

Full Course Report (FCR)

 

 

  • All quantitative and qualitative student feedback unless enrolment is less than 5 students
  • Combined courses report (as per week 5 requirement for faculties where ADLTS have made a request to the Survey Team)
  • Must be five or more students enrolled in the course and/or a combined course must have greater than five students. If there are less than five students enrolled in a course, no FCR is available. The purpose of this is to protect student anonymity. A minimum of 1 response needs to be obtained to generate a FCR
  • The FCR will be published/distributed only after student final course grades have been published
  • Feedback is described using sample numbers and relative percentage
  • Course Coordinators (Qualitative feedback and quantitative data)
  • Course Coordinators must be able to access all Full Course Reports regardless of the campus and delivery mode
  • An aggregated Full Course Report is captured in the FSP-CSR Heat Map
  • The Full Course Reports will be made available to Course Coordinators within 1 week of the released published results

Faculty/ School-Program/ Course Report Heat Map (FSP-CSR Heat Map)

 

 

 

  • Percentage (%) agreement with the 11 quantitative items for each course in which a student in that course is enrolled
  • Any elective course chosen by student will also appear
  • This report captures % agreement
  • For a course to be included in this summary, it must meet the requirements as specified for a FCR
  • The FSP-CSR Heat Map will be published/distributed only after student final course grades have been published and within 2 weeks of the campaign closure 

There are 3 layers to this document;

Level 1 captures course %agreement information directly from the FCR

Level 2 captures a collective of the course information and is presented at the Faculty Program level

  • The FSP-CSR indicates areas of strength and areas needing further investigation.  Where the response rate and course size is robust, percentage (%) agreement of 80% or above is very good, 60-79% is noteworthy, and anything below 60% is cause for further investigation
  • Although the % disagreement and % Unable to Judge is not reported, this overarching document allows a brief overview of response and identifies the course which requires closer examination

Level 3 reporting is a capture of all qualitative data specific to courses within programs. This data is also extremely important when interpreting quantitative data

  • Head of Schools/ Deputy Heads of Schools (to be distributed to relevant committees) (Qualitative feedback can be made by request by direct line supervisors)
  • ADLT/ADSRS can also request Qualitative feedback from the course coordinator and/or FedUni research team
  • Faculty Business Manager
  • Chair of Learning & Teaching Committee
  • Chair of Curriculum Committee
  • To be tabled at Program and Assessment Committee agenda and shared across the relevant faculty
  • To be tabled at Faculty Board agenda and shared across the relevant faculty

(Based on quantitative data only unless otherwise stated)

University Aggregated Course and Teacher Report (UACTR)

Major reporting time lines follow this calendar reporting schedule:

Refer to Table 1: Sessions and UACTR Reporting

  • University name, location, faculty level
  • Participation rates, quantitative results
  • Percentage (%) agreement with the 11 quantitative items for each course and the 7 quantitative items in which a student in that course is enrolled
  • Data Analysis and Reporting publishes the UACTR half yearly reports in April and October
  • This document shows aggregated % quantitative analysis at the University, location and faculty/school level. This report will be used by the University, and particularly by senior management, to monitor continuous improvement in teaching and learning
  • Executive Deans/Directors
  • Chair, Academic Board
  • Chair of Learning & Teaching Committee
  • Chair of Curriculum Committee
  • ADLT/ADSRS
  • Six monthly suggested review period

3.2 Teacher Level Reports

This report is available when there is more than five students enrolled in a course and when there were at least two student responses for that teacher within that course (This is to preserve student anonymity).

While it is expected that in the qualitative items, students will only comment on the teaching of the nominated teacher, a student could feasibly name and comment on a different teacher. In this case, the participating teacher (who is the only recipient of this report) is under obligation to treat comments about other staff as confidential. As students were not invited to comment on teachers other than the participating teacher, any comments about non-participating teachers should not be passed on to anyone.

Note: Student feedback which may be considered offensive or defamatory (this includes racist or sexist comments, personal or abusive comments, or allegations of criminal activity) may NOT be passed on to any staff member, or any student, by either the Course Coordinator or Head of School/Faculty. Under no circumstances will a comment be tracked to identify any student.

Summary of Generation and Distribution of Teaching eVALUate feedback reports
Name of report Information provided Business rules for report generation Access
Teaching Evaluation Report (TER)
  • All quantitative and qualitative student feedback unless otherwise specified in the “Access” column
  • As per week 5 instructions in preparing for the campaign
  • This report is available when there are five or more students enrolled in a course and when there are at least two student responses (This is to preserve student anonymity).
  • The TER will be published/distributed only after student final course grades have been published
  • The TER includes the percentage (%) agreement with the quantitative items and all verbatim (unedited) student responses to the qualitative items
  • The teacher(s)  who were evaluated (Quantitative and qualitative data)
  • Head of Schools/ Deputy Heads of Schools (Quantitative and qualitative data)
  • Executive Dean or equivalent
Teacher Heat Map (THM)
  • Percentage (%)agreement with the 7 quantitative items for each teacher surveyed
  • It is acknowledged that there may be more than one teacher involved in delivering a course
  • This report captures % of agreement in the ‘agree’and ‘strongly agree’responses for each of the statement
  • The Teacher Heat Map can be divided into faculties, programs and course
  • Head of Schools/Deputy Heads of Schools (Quantitative and qualitative data)
  • Executive Dean or equivalent
  • Faculty relevant ADLT/ADSRS

Step 4 Responding to Student Feedback

Expectations of Course Coordinators/Teachers

The distribution of reports will allow for improved quality assurance processes across the institution. It will also improve accountability and committee of staff within learning and teaching practices across both sectors.

Course Coordinators and teachers play a key role in using the feedback to improve their learning and teaching outcomes from the perspective of the student.  Course Coordinators and teachers should look for trends rather than focusing on isolated comments and reflect on what can be done to maintain the strengths and improve learning for students.  Student feedback gathered via eVALUate must be documented in annual PRDP reviews.  Where data is not collected (within reason and at the discretion of the supervisor) this may negatively impact on the review process including salary increment outcomes. 

As evidence of participation regarding closing the course-student feedback loop, all Course Coordinators/Teachers need to ensure future students have access to comments relevant to the ongoing improvement of a course. For all Higher Education courses, the Course Description template section specific to addressing student feedback and "Closing the Loop", must be appropriately completed prior to the next delivery of the course.

The Course Coordinator is responsible for completing the Course Description section “Closing the Loop” regarding student feedback and where appropriate, complete the Course Survey Action Plan. The Course Survey Action Plan template allows for staff members to review eVALUate feedback and provide clear reflection regarding the level of student agreement against the course statements, The ADLT is also responsible for completing the Faculty Course Action Summary and submitting it to the university Learning and Teaching Committee (LTC) as evidence of quality assurance and continuous improvement. The Faculty Course Action Summary is an excel spread template which demonstrates closure of student feedback mechanism to the university LTC.

At the end of each teaching semester/delivery, it is the responsibility of Course Coordinators to review the feedback received from students through a variety of mechanisms, including eVALUate. The following 4 key prompts are designed to provide Course Coordinators with guidance on structuring a summary statement of student feedback when completing the “Closing the Loop” section of the university endorsed Course Description:

  1. Acknowledgement of key issues identified through such feedback:
  2. Summary of improvements or course modifications as a result of the student feedback, peer review and/or course review:
  3. Summary of how key issues will be addressed in the future delivery of the course:
  4. An estimated time when any resulting changes will be included in the course:

These same prompts must be used when a Course Coordinator is required to complete a Course Survey Action Plan for submission to their ADLT.

Sharing student feedback is subject to the following guidelines:

  1. Comments which are general in nature (that is, in which staff are not identifiable) may be shared with all staff teaching in the course.
  2. Comments which identify, or could identify, staff can be shared only with the identifiable staff member.
  3. Student feedback which is considered offensive or defamatory (e.g. racist, sexist, personal or abusive, or allegations of criminal activity) may NOT be passed on to any staff member, or any student, by any staff member.

Course Coordinators and teachers receiving student feedback have the responsibility to ensure the information is utilised in an effective, ethical manner and should conform to the University's Staff Code of Conduct Policy and Information Privacy Policy. Misuse of data from eVALUate reports will be dealt with in accordance with official University Policies and Procedures. If you suspect that data from eVALUate reports have been shared inappropriately, report the matter directly to your supervisor in the first instance, or if this is not appropriate, your Head of School/Deputy Head of School. Parties must be aware of the consequences if there is a breach of confidentiality, which may include disciplinary action. 

Expectations of Program Coordinators/Program Leaders      

Program Coordinators/Program Leaders are expected to reflect on the findings and use the data to plan improvements to a program. Program Coordinators/Program Leaders are expected to lead this discussion with the Course Coordinators and seek guidance from the ADLT/ADSRS or CLIPP support staff (where required).

Program Coordinators and the ADLT/ADSRS can also utilise data to identify Course Coordinators or teachers who require added support in a variety of areas and also celebrate exemplar learning and teaching. Where support is required, the ADLT/ADSRS and their supervisor may need to be involved to identify what support best suits the situation (i.e. peer review, mentoring etc).

Once the Course Survey Action Plan is complete, Course Coordinators must submit these to the relevant faculty Program and Assessment Committee (PAC). Program Coordinators must be familiar with the Course Survey Action Plans relevant to courses within their programs. The ADLT must be able to speak to these Course Survey Action Plans at their faculty PAC meeting. The purpose of these discussions is to ensure faculty wide awareness of matters which directly relate to the curriculum, student engagement and student feedback. This is also a process to identity exemplar courses within the faculty and those that require further investigation and corrective action. It is the responsibility of the ADLT to capture a summary of the discussions at the PAC specific to the Course Survey Action Plans and using the Faculty Course Action Summary, submit a report to the university Learning and Teaching Committee.

Expectations of a Supervisor to the Course Coordinator

It is an expectation of supervisors to discuss eVALUate feedback with Course Coordinators during the PRDP process.  This discussion needs to be documented at the annual PRDP process including a focus on corrective action (if required). This process should allow for setting appropriate goals related to learning and teaching performance and quality assurance.

Step 5 Evidence of Corrective Action (where required)

Course Feedback

  • Where the overall performance of a course has achieved <60% student agreement, further evidence of corrective action is required. All staff who are addressing corrective action must also comply with the FedUni Staff Code of Conduct. A Course Coordinator may choose to meet with their line manager, their ADLT/ADSRS or another colleague to discuss student feedback and reflect on suggestions moving forward. Course Coordinators need to document evidence of corrective action in the three following locations:
    1. Within the next Course Description (already in the Course Description template)
    2. Within the Course Survey Action Plan (which will be tabled at the Faculty Program and Assessment Committee by the ADLT). Note: If the student response rate is <5% of the total cohort, the Course Survey Action Plan response can be determined by the faculty in consultation with the ADLT.
    3. Within their PRDP cycle (discussed with their line manager)
  • ADLT/ADSRS may also be involved in the corrective action process through the Course Survey Action Plan and the Faculty Course Action Summary templates.
  • The Course Coordinator reviews the strategies within an acceptable time frame (within 8 weeks of receiving the feedback) and actions any improvement deemed necessary by their line manager/ADLT/ADSRS. The impact of the new strategies is reviewed in a timely manner as part of the continuous quality assurance cycle.

Teacher Feedback

  • In the instance that student feedback regarding a teachers’ performance needs addressing, a teacher must meet with their line manager to discuss the feedback.
  • The teacher is responsible for identifying key area(s) of improvement and providing a strategy to improve performance. This is documented within their PRDP cycle and if appropriate in the Course Description section relevant to student feedback. This is also discussed with the Course Coordinator and/or teaching team (where appropriate). The strategies need to be approved by the line manager and may include peer review by the faculty ADLT/ADSRS or others as deemed appropriate.
  • The teacher reviews the strategies within an acceptable time frame (within 8 weeks) and actions any improvement deemed necessary by their line manager. This is measured after the next cycle of delivery as part of the continuous quality assurance cycle.

Supporting Documents

Extracts From University Documents

Extract 1: Student Evaluation (Academic Employee)

Student evaluation of teaching is central to the achievement of the University's mission, values and goals. The University will continually strive to create a work environment that attracts, develops and supports outstanding and committed academic employees who add value to a learning and teaching organisation. Student evaluation of teaching will be used predominantly in a formative way as part of the Performance Review and Development Program, and may be used in this way for other developmental activities. Student evaluation processes, however, may be used in a summative way where the performance of an employee is being reviewed, such as under the probation process, the academic promotions policy or pursuant to disciplinary or performance procedures.

(Reference: Section 5; Part 41; Page 35, Title: Federation University Australia Union Collective Agreement 2015-2018)

Forms

Responsibility

The Chair, Learning and Teaching Committee is responsible for:

  • Implementation and compliance monitoring of this procedure.
  • Ongoing review and use of eVALUate as an internal evaluation tool.
  • The Executive Deans and ADLTS are responsible for ensuring compliance with this Procedure within faculties.
  • IT Services will be responsible for the secure storage of digital eVALUate data in consultation with Survey Team and FedUni Survey Systems vendors.
  • Owning organisational units and recipients of eVALUate reports are responsible for the secure storage of eVALUate reports

Promulgation

The Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Procedure will be communicated throughout the University via:

  • Specific advice to Partner Providers and Faculties;
  • General advice on the University Website;
  • Inclusion on the FedUni Policy and Procedure Website; and
  • Specialised marketing and information materials.

Implementation

The Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Procedure will be implemented throughout the University via:

  • Administration and reporting of the eVALUate Survey via the Survey Team, Data Analysis and Reporting.
  • Continuous improvement of courses and programs through the application of feedback and reflective practice.
  • Discussions at faculty and institutional level meetings and with key faculty stakeholder.
  • ADLT reminder emails to faculty staff.
  • Student Futures Programs reminders to students to engage with the process

Records Management

Owning organisation units and recipients of eVALUate reports are responsible for the secure storage of eVALUate reports

Title Location Responsible Officer Minimum retention period
Course Survey Action Plan

Faculty Drive

Submitted to Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee or equivalent on a cyclic basis

ADLT Destroy two years after organisational use has concluded
Faculty Course Action Summary

Faculty Drive

Submitted to FedUni Learning and Teaching Committee on a cyclic basis

ADLT Destroy two years after organisational use has concluded

The Policy Unit | Email:  policy@federation.edu.au | Phone: 53276262 | URL: www.federation.edu.au/policy