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, School responsibilities and the FedUni Survey team responsibilities throughout the Semester 1 and Semester 2 campaign periods.

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:

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:

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.

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:

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:

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 School 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 School 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 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 School.

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.  

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. Under no circumstances will a comment be tracked to identify any student.

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 School Course Action Summary and submitting it to the university Learning and Teaching Committee (LTC) as evidence of quality assurance and continuous improvement. The School 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:

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:

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 School 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 School PAC meeting. The purpose of these discussions is to ensure School 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 School 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 School 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.

Course Feedback

Teacher Feedback