Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching

Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Procedure (Higher Education)

Policy code: CG1703
Policy owner: Dean, Learning and Teaching (Centre for Academic Development)
Approval authority: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)
Approval date: 14 December 2012
Next review date: 12 December 2025

Purpose
Scope
Legislative Context
Definitions
Actions
Step 1 Review and confirmation of SELT Survey Tool questions/content
Step 2 Preparing for a SELT Tool Campaign
Step 3 Generation and distribution of SELT Survey Tool reports
Step 4 Actioning Student Feedback
Supporting Documents
Responsibility
Promulgation
Implementation
Records Management

Purpose

This procedure supports and mandates the implementation of the Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching (SELT) 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

This procedure applies to students enrolled in Higher Education (HE) by coursework programs and their teachers.

Legislative Context

Definitions

Term Definition
Annual SELT Survey Schedule A pre-determined schedule formalising the evaluation process within the institution.
Director, Learning and Teaching (D,L&T) The D(L&T) is a key leadership position located within each Institute and is an important part of the Institute Executive Group. The D(L&T) 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 Institute. The D(L&T) works closely with the senior Institute staff across the Institute and the institution  
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
Course evaluation The evaluation process primarily concerned with the course structure and its associated components
Course Survey Action Plan (CSAP) This document provides an opportunity for Course Coordinators to reflect on student feedback. It forms a crucial part of continuous quality assurance at the course level. It captures potential challenges and strategies for enhancement. It provides a record as part of scholarship of learning and teaching and should be documented as part of annual Performance Review and Development Program (PRDP).
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
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)
Program Coordinator (PC) A university staff member responsible for the oversight of a program
Institute Survey Action Plan (ICAS) A compilation of the recommended actions of the individual Course Survey Action Plans. This is captured on an the ‘dedicated proforma’ (template listed within this procedure) as an overarching summary of the course continuous improvement strategies.
SELT 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
SELT Teaching survey This survey asks students to reflect and provide feedback on individual teachers involved with the delivery of a course
SELT Tool The online feedback tool for collating, analysing and reporting student feedback on their learning and teaching experiences at the institution and its associated providers.
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)
Teacher evaluation The evaluation process is primarily concerned with the teacher delivering the course in the (HE) sector

Actions

Step 1 Review and confirmation of SELT Survey Tool questions/content

  Activity Responsibility Steps
A Review and confirm SELT Survey tool questions Chair, Learning & Teaching Quality Committee (L&TQC)
  1. Questions will be reviewed in line with policy review dates.
  2. Where feedback is received or statistical data analysis indicates that changes to the questions may be beneficial prior to the next scheduled review date, further stakeholder consultation will be undertaken and recommended changes developed and presented to the L&TQC for endorsement prior to implementation.

Step 2 Preparing for a SELT Tool Campaign

The SELT tool provides students with the opportunity to provide both quantitative and qualitative feedback on their satisfaction with their course delivery and their teacher’s effectiveness in supporting and motivating them to achieve the course learning outcomes.

The survey questions can be accessed through the Supporting Documents section of this procedure.

  Activity Responsibility Steps
A Confirm course delivery and preliminary academic staff planning/delivery alignment Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) or nominee
  1. Before commencement of the semester/delivery period ensure that program coordinators, course coordinators, lecturers and/or teachers and tutors and associated workloads have been assigned to adequately cover program/qualification requirements.
  2. Identify any course codes to be excluded from the data set. Examples of excluded courses include some placement or exchange placeholder unit/course codes.
B Confirm SELT Survey Campaign Schedule Senior Survey and Student Data Officer
  1. Confirm campaign delivery locations and semesters.
  2. Liaise with ITS to identify any technical support needs, upcoming upgrades or scheduled outages that might impact the conduct of the survey campaign.
  3. Prepare and communicate the SELT Survey Campaign Schedule for the specified campaign period.
C Configure academic staff delivery information in the Student Management System Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) or nominee
  1. Ensure that all teacher and tutor details are updated in appropriate fields within the Student Management System platform by the deadline specified in the SELT Survey Campaign Schedule.
D Request to combine courses D(L&T)
  1. Where a course combination is required the D(L&T) should complete a Combined Course Request Form (see supporting documents) and send to Manager (Program Support and Technical Services), Coordinator, Surveys or nominee and timetabling staff by the deadline specified in the SELT Survey Campaign Schedule to communicate this change. D(L&T) will receive an email confirming this has been actioned.
E Validate academic delivery assignment Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) or nominee 
  1. Validate the data extracts for correctness so that individual teacher reports can be accurately produced for all relevant teaching activities within the campaign period.
  2. Make corrections directly in the data set and return to Surveys by the deadline specified in the SELT Survey Campaign Schedule.
F Validate student data Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) or nominee 
  1. Review and confirm students that are to be excluded from the survey instrument distribution. Exceptions include, but are not limited to, students who are excluded, deceased or on approved leave of absence.
G Develop SELT Survey Campaign Communication Plan Senior Survey and Student Data Officer
  1. Work with Student Communication to develop and execute a direct student communication plan to promote the survey at appropriate milestones in the lead up to the campaign opening, during the campaign and as the close approaches designed to optimise student response rates.
  2. Work with D(L&T) and Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) or nominee to develop and execute an academic staff communication plan to promote the survey at appropriate milestones in the lead up to the campaign opening, during the campaign and as the close approaches designed to optimise student response rate.
H Test and release SELT Survey Campaign Senior Survey and Student Data Officer
  1. Compile, test and load campaigns into the survey system.
I Activate the student and staff communication plan to promote the SELT Survey Campaign

Senior Survey and Student Data Officer Student Communications Officer, D(L&T), Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) or nominee
  1. Advise Student Communications of go live and activate the student communication plan
  2. Advise the D(L&T)  and Manager (Program Support and Technical Services) of Survey Go Live and activate the academic staff communication plan.
J Provide weekly campaign updates Senior Survey and Student Data Officer
  1. Provide response rate updates on a weekly basis to D(L&T)
  2. The higher the response rate the better. At a minimum, response rates should be at least 25%.
K Review weekly campaign response rates and identify and initiate further targeted promotional activity where required D(L&T)
  1. Where response rates are low, work with the Coordinator, Student Engagement and Experience Surveys and Student Communications to review the survey communication plan and identify and initiative further targeted promotional activity designed to increase participation.
L Close Campaign Coordinator, Student Engagement and Experience Surveys
  1. Turns off campaign in survey platform and consolidates data ready for reporting.

Step 3 Generation and distribution of SELT Survey Tool reports

  Activity Responsibility Steps
A Provide dashboard reports and/or Course Heat Maps Senior Survey and Student Data Officer
  1. Provide dashboard reports and/or Course Heat Maps that identify the level of Student Response and Student Agreement. These Course Heat Maps are developed into Institute Course Heat Maps for wider distribution. The heat maps provide the following visual interpretation:
    1. Outstanding category (Green traffic light indicator) indicates that 80% or more of responses ‘Agree or Strongly Agree’ with all the quantitative statements for course-related questions and ‘Most of the time’ and ‘Always’ for teacher-related questions.
    2. Noteworthy category (Orange traffic light indicator) indicates that between 60 -79% of responses ‘Agree or Strongly Agree’ with all the quantitative statements for course-related questions and ‘Most of the time’ and ‘Always’ for teacher-related questions.
    3. Further Action Required category (Red traffic light indicator) indicates less than 60% of responses ‘Agree or Strongly Agree’ with all the quantitative statements for course-related questions and ‘Most of the time’ and ‘Always’ for teacher-related questions.
  2. Prepare to release the heatmaps/dashboards to the Institute Directors (Learning and Teaching) after the release of grades
  3. Provide the Director (Learning and Teaching) at least 10 business days to review dashboards
  4. Develop and use the pre-release script that accompanies heatmaps/dashboard sharing to the broader university audience
  5. Prior to release of heatmaps/dashboards to the broader university audience, confirmation from the Director (Learning and Teaching) must be received.
B Provide Full Course and Teacher Evaluations including qualitative comments Senior Survey and Student Data Officer
  1. Course Evaluations: Once students' final course grades have been published and where there are at least five responses, generate and distribute Course Evaluations. Partners use their evaluations for management meetings before semester closes. Reports should be delivered in Partner Provider Week 12 with an embargo until after results have been published. All qualitative comments should be shared regardless of response rates with prior review for appropriate language use.
  2. Teacher Evaluations: Once students' final course grades have been published and where there are at least five students enrolled and two students responded, Teacher Evaluations will be generated and distributed. Partners use their evaluations for management meetings before semester closes. Evaluations should be delivered in Partner Provider Week 12 with an embargo until after results have been published. All qualitative comments should be shared regardless of response rates with prior review for appropriate language use.
  3. Course Evaluations: quantitative and qualitative) are to be provided to the Course Coordinator (for all campuses where the course has been taught), Program Coordinator and Discipline Leader.
  4. Teacher Evaluations: (quantitative and qualitative) are to be provided to the teacher, Program Coordinator, Discipline Leader, Deans, D(L&T)s and relevant primary Partner Provider Business Partner as provided by Global Professional School (GPS) and/or relevant Pro Vice Chancellor (PVC).
  5. Institute Course Heat Maps: are disseminated to the following stakeholders: Tabled at LTC through the Chair, all LTC members, Deans, Deputy Deans, D(L&T)s, Discipline Leader, Program Coordinators and primary Partner Provider Business Partners (as provided by GPS/PVC). Partners use their reports for management meetings before semester closes. Reports should be delivered in Partner Provider Week 12 with an embargo until after results have been published.
  6. For the purpose of Academic Promotions, the Executive Officer of the committee can request Teacher Evaluations (quantitative and qualitative) and Course Evaluations (quantitative and qualitative) from the Coordinator, Student Engagement and Experience Surveys based on information provided by the applicant (ie course code, title, mode of delivery and semester offering). Where Course Evaluations are requested, an appropriate time period should be specified.
C Sharing student feedback contained in reports All staff
  1. 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 SELT Survey Tool reports will be dealt with in accordance with official University Policies and Procedures which may include disciplinary action.
  2. Staff suspecting that data from SELT Survey Tool reports has been shared inappropriately, should report the matter directly to their supervisor in the first instance, or if this is not appropriate, their Director, Academic Operations.
  3. Comments which are general in nature (that is, in which staff are not identifiable) may be shared with all staff teaching in the course.
  4. Comments that identify, or could identify, staff can be shared only with the identifiable staff member and those detailed in Activity B, Step 4 above.
  5. 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 recipients of this report are 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 nonparticipating teachers should not be passed on to anyone.
  6. Where comments refer directly to another teacher engaged in the course delivery but who was not specifically identified within the co-teaching team and will not therefore receive the report, the comments will be forwarded to the Discipline Leader for sharing with the teacher as appropriate.
  7. Every effort will be made to remove student feedback which is considered offensive or defamatory (e.g. racist, sexist, personal or abusive, or allegations of criminal activity. This feedback should NOT be passed on to any staff member or any student.
  8. Under no circumstances will a comment be tracked to identify any student.
D Recognition and reward of exemplar performance

Senior Survey and Student Data Officer

Director (Learning and Teaching)
  1. Identify exemplary performance in Course and Teacher response and reward this outcome. Where Course and Teacher Overall responses meet the Outstanding Category (as defined above) and at least 25% response rate with courses with more than 15 students enrolled, letters of commendation are generated and achievements are recognised at the Institute level.
  2. Identify and send letters to individual staff and/or teaching teams and programs with copies to the Executive Deans and D(L&T). Staff associated with exemplary practice will be encouraged to nominate for Institute and/or institutional (ie Vice Chancellor Learning and Teaching Awards) and/or national learning and teaching awards.
E Quality assurance improvement strategies D(L&T)s
  1. Ensure that courses where Course Survey Action Plans are required are identified and that plans are developed in line with Step 4 below.

Step 4 Actioning Student Feedback

  ACTIVITY RESPONSIBILITY STEPS
A. Developing Course Survey Action Plans (CSAP).

Course Coordinators

Program Coordinators

D(L&T)s
  1. A Course Survey Action Plan needs completing if a course meets the following criteria:
    1. 'Overall Course Quality' rating is aligned to the "Further Action Required category" (Red traffic light indicator) as described above
    2. A response rate is equal or greater than 25%
    3. A minimum 5 student responses

      • Note: If criteria ii-iii are not meet, however other challenges are present, the Director (L&T), may direct the completion of a CSAP. The CSAP provides an opportunity for course reflection enhancements for future delivery.

  2. The Course Coordinator creates a CSAP using these four key prompts:
    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.
  3. The Course Coordinator may choose to meet with their line manager, D(L&T) or another colleague to discuss student feedback and reflect on suggestions moving forward.
  4. The Course Coordinator submits the CSAP to the relevant Institute Board.
  5. Where courses have been identified that require further action however have not required a CSAP, a statement and acknowledgement of this must be noted at Institute Board. This statement must briefly describe any issues and proposed improvements
B. Developing Institute Course Action Summary (ICAS) D(L&T)s
  1. The D(L&T) is responsible for summarising the CSAP reports provided to Institute Board into an Institute Course Action Summary (ICAS).
  2. The D(L&T) submits the ICAS to the University Learning and Teaching Committee as evidence of continuous quality assurance
C Addressing student feedback by completing the “Closing the Loop” section of the Course Description. This is to be completed for each course after each delivery. Course Coordinators and teachers
  1. 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 SELT Survey Tool.
  2. All Course Coordinators/Teachers need to ensure future students have access to comments relevant to the ongoing improvement of a course. For all HE 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.
  3. 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.
  4. Course Coordinators should use the four key prompts listed above. Enhancements should be aligned with timely implementation and clearly communicated to key stakeholders.
D. Planning improvements to a course Course Coordinators, Program Coordinators, D(L&T)s
  1. Course Coordinators and Program Coordinators are expected to reflect on the findings and use the data to plan improvements to a program. D(L&T)s and other learning and teaching support staff can also guide improvements relative to feedback.
  2. Program Coordinators and the D(L&T)s 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 D(L&T) and their supervisor may need to be involved to identify what support best suits the situation (i.e. peer review, mentoring etc).
E. Documenting areas for course improvement via Performance Review and Development Program (PRDP) Supervisors/Coordinators
  1. Course Coordinators/lecturers and/or teachers must provide evidence of course and teacher feedback as part of annual PRDP discussions.
  2. Supervisors are expected to discuss SELT Survey Tool feedback with supervisees 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.
F. Addressing teacher feedback where necessary Teacher/Line Manager (ie Discipline Lead)
  1. If student feedback regarding a teacher's performance needs addressing, a teacher must meet with their line manager to discuss the feedback.
  2. The teacher develops improvement strategies within an acceptable time frame (within and no later than eight weeks after the feedback has been received) and actions any improvement deemed necessary by their line manager.
  3. 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).
  4. The strategies need to be approved by the line manager and may include peer review by the Institute D(L&T) or others as deemed appropriate.
G. Reviewing and continuously improving  
  1. The impact of the new strategies is reviewed in a timely manner as part of the continuous quality assurance cycle.

Supporting Documents

Forms

Responsibility

  • Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) is responsible for monitoring the implementation, outcomes and scheduled review of this procedure.
  • Dean, Learning and Teaching (Centre for Academic Development) is responsible for maintaining the content of this procedure as delegated by Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic).

Promulgation

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

  • Specific advice to Partner Providers and Institutes;
  • General advice on the University Website;
  • Inclusion on the university's Policy Central; and
  • Specialised marketing and information materials.

Implementation

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

  • Administration and reporting of the survey via the Survey Team, Data Analysis and Reporting.
  • Implementation of the communication plan to engage students.
  • Continuous improvement of courses and programs through the application of feedback and reflective practice.
  • Discussions at Institute and institutional level meetings and with key Institute stakeholders.

Records Management

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

Title Location Responsible Officer Minimum retention period
Survey data Central drive Coordinator, Student Engagement and Experience Surveys Destroy 7 years after action completed
Course Survey Action Plan

Institute Drive

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

 D(L&T) Destroy two years after organisational use has concluded
Institute Course Action Summary

Institute Drive

Submitted to FedUni Learning and Teaching Committee on a cyclic basis

 D(L&T) Destroy two years after organisational use has concluded
PrevPrev  UpUp  
Student Evaluation of Learning and Teaching Policy 
 


Approval Authority: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) Original Issue 14/12/2012
Policy Sponsor: Dean, Learning and Teaching (Centre for Academic Development) Current Version: 17/01/2023
CRICOS Provider Number 00103D Review Date: 12/12/2025
TEQSA Provider ID: PRV12151 Provider Category: Australian University
RTO Code 4909 Policy Code CG1703