Evaluation strategy

A mid-term evaluation is made, which the teacher is responsible for conducting. The mid-term evaluation is conducted in free form and does not need to be reported.

There is an ongoing dialogue between lecturers and students regarding any reasonable adjustments to the teaching.

Towards the end of each semester, evaluation forms are sent out to all students in all subjects. A final evaluation in writing is conducted for all courses and based on five established categories (purpose, context, understanding, activity, collaboration and dialogue) as well as five fixed questions. The Study Board is responsible for the implementation of the evaluation.

All offered subjects are evaluated at the end of the course. See the next item for an overview of the questions.

No.	Statement
1	Purpose: The purpose of the subject and what I am expected to learn were made clear to me at an early stage of the teaching.
2	Link: There is a clear connection between the purpose of the subject, the content of the teaching and the exam.
3	Understanding: I have gained a greater understanding of the subject’s themes and topics through the teaching (incl. independent preparation, work in study groups etc.).
4	Activity: The teaching has supported me in actively learning (e.g. through discussions, exercises, group work and independent preparation).
5	Cooperation and dialogue: The cooperation and dialogue between students and lecturers was good.

Scoring scale: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree, 6 = undecided/irrelevant

At the end of each semester, evaluation forms are sent out to all students in all subjects. All courses are final evaluated in writing based on 5 established categories (purpose, context, understanding, activity, collaboration and dialogue) as well as 5 five fixed questions. In addition, free text fields are supplemented for all 5 questions. For the master's program, 2 questions are added about the balance between physical and online teaching, as well as the connection between theory and practice in education and in business. The study board is responsible for the implementation of the evaluation.

The Study Board processes the results of the evaluations twice a year, cf. the annual cycle, and in connection with the status meetings for the Educational Report.

The results of the evaluations are published via the reporting form for the evaluation of education programmes.

The Study Board’s evaluation strategy is discussed at least once a year, cf. the annual cycle.

The Study Board has chosen to reintroduce the mid-term evaluations so that it is again possible to discuss on an ongoing basis and possibly adjust the previous teaching in dialogue with the students. The Study Board also has good experiences with the response rates being high for mid-term evaluations. It is therefore the study board's expectation that it will further be reflected in the final evaluations when the students experience an ongoing dialogue about the teaching during the semester. Furthermore, the Study Board also expects that the attendance requirement throughout the entire course of study will help to improve the response rates. The Study Board wishes to continue to support the evaluation process by allocating time in the teaching process for the students to carry out their evaluation.

In general, and not least in the current extraordinary situation, the Study Board continues to prioritise an ongoing dialogue between the lecturer and the students. This allows for discussions during the semester whether there is a need for adjustments in the teaching and makes it possible to implement any measures immediately rather than having to await the evaluation results at the end of the semester.