Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Standard 2: Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards (SEUA)
In the second standard one of the most important think is learning outcomes and evaluation methods of support of achievement learning outcomes by students. Presented questionnaire is more or less focused on students and graduates opinion about learning processes. In the case of student and graduates opinion is very important to observe coincidence between her/his opinion and her/his achievements in the aspect of intended learning outcomes and individual achievements (even in the aspect of grades). In my opinion there is necessity to avoid or minimize influence of personal results of given student on her/his opinion. To minimize this factor is at least necessary to know her/his results (grades). Above remark is valid in the case of anonymity of survey. In my opinion anonymity in this process is one of the fundamental requirements. Also there is a need to involve in questionnaire more detailed information about lecturers and courses. For example ability of teacher to explain difficult aspects of subject, language efficiency (e.g. teacher voice is loud enough, is teacher voice clear enough), tempo of lecture or classes, general attitude of lecturers to students and so on. There are no comments and remarks for questionnaire for employers.
a whole, but need from them their opinion about realisation of the system, evaluation of application of given tools is more required than evaluation of the system.
Standard 6. Institutions should ensure that they collect, analyse and use relevant information for the effective management of their programmes of study and other activities. (VbSEUA)
Questionnaire for employees is a tool to prepare preliminary evaluation of current situation in the higher education institution in the field of development IT resources in all aspects of university activity. This survey is not able to monitoring procedures of IT university system development, results are appropriate to show eventual progress or changes in the system once per relatively long period. There is no information about students or their involvement in the IT systems assessment process.
Standard 7. Institutions should regularly publish up to date, impartial and objective information, both quantitative and qualitative, about the programmes and awards they are offering. (YSAFA)
Evaluation by parents as a process, which occurs once a year (or for each admission) is enough to permanent evaluation of content, utility level and quality of information about HE institution and its awards in the aspect of research and education. Presented questionnaire reflects ordinal scale in the aspect of evaluation of progress and development (number of candidates, parents satisfaction level and so on) and as a tool is enough to monitoring conditions related to standard 7. Involvement of employers in the process of evaluation information policy of university in presented questionnaire is only useful in the phase of preliminary evaluation of information policy. There is a lack of data about information policy which is made by university in day by day work. Students opinion pool could be concerned as a tool to make continous monitoring of quality in the field of information policy. In students questionnaire there is part related to satisfaction level among questioned students. This level of satisfaction seems to be available to use as a indicator appropriate to monitoring process of evaluation information policy of HE institution. The model prepared by YSAFA staff is a dynamic model of quality assurance system for university information policy. Presented questionnaires are the significant part of the system and also there exists enough capacity in the aspect of results to use it in the way described by the model. To complete the picture of the model of quality assurance in the field of information policy there is a need to deliver information about the others component and procedures used in the process.