Alternative Evaluation
In the following you will find a compilation of tips and hints if you would like to conduct the evaluation of your course on your own, or if the centrally administered evaluation using evasys is not planned due to a low number of participants.
Methods
Depending on the size of the group, the type of course and the cooperation in the course, two methods of independent questioning are particularly suitable for digital teaching:
1) Individual survey
An individual survey can be designed as a short, self-paced survey. It is implemented according to the criteria of efficiency and feasibility as well as the fit to the teaching format. For digital courses, for example, you can use digital collaboration or survey tools. It is recommended to limit the survey to 2-3 qualitative questions and, if necessary, to precede or supplement 1-2 quantitative questions.
The following tools are recommended for this purpose:
- joint editing of a document via collaboration tool (padlet or similar)
- Survey via moodle
- Survey tool, also for integration into presentations (e.g. mentimeter, kahoot, slido)
Students can provide anonymous written feedback at a time of their choosing or in the synchronous event. The results are visible and anonymous for everyone in the process (especially when using a collaboration tool).
The results are then evaluated or documented together in an event, analogous to the survey by means of a questionnaire. The documentation is eventually sent to at least the Dean of Studies.
Depending on the execution, you should plan approx. 15min (only evaluation of the results) or approx. 30min / 2 x 15min (feedback by the students plus evaluation) in your course.
2) Teaching Analysis Poll (TAP)
Depending on the group size, a question-based interview will be conducted. Questions can be announced in advance or discussed ad hoc in the session. The latter option has the disadvantage that students who cannot attend the in-person session are excluded from the feedback.
- if there are only a small number of participants, this discussion can be held directly.
- in case of a larger number of participants, it is advisable to divide into smaller groups, e.g. for one question each, and to appoint a speaker in the group.
This method requires a great willingness to communicate on both sides and is therefore ideally moderated by an external person (e.g. colleague, research assistant) or a student. In order to remedy the disadvantage of this method, i.e. the non-anonymity of the students, the teacher can be excluded at the beginning of the interview and then the students' comments (anonymized by the moderator) can be evaluated together.
The results are evaluated or documented together in an event, analogous to the survey by means of a questionnaire. The documentation is then sent to at least the Dean of Studies.
You should plan a total of 30 minutes for this procedure, which can also be implemented directly before or after a (synchronous) event.
On request (and if there is sufficient capacity) we can moderate the TAP in your course - please contact us by email at evaluation@ovgu.de.
Questions
Suggestion for quantitative questions, which are particularly suitable for the introduction to the evaluation or an overall evaluation
- What grade do you give this event? (1= very good to 6= not satisfactory)
- The instructor is sufficiently responsive to students.
- The instructor shows interest in the students' learning success.
- The amount of material was appropriate.
- The workload was too high / just right / too low.
- I would recommend the course to my fellow students.
Unless otherwise indicated, the scale fully applies / mostly applies / less applies / not at all applies.
Suggestion for qualitative questions
- What is your overall impression of the event?
- What do you take away from it?
- What did you find good/not so good?
- What could be changed?
- What should be maintained?
- How was the working atmosphere?
- What are you satisfied with?
- What did you miss out on?
- Was the workload (preparation and follow-up) appropriate? If not, what was the reason (lack of previous knowledge, too much material, etc.)?