Example template – Course analysis (course evaluation) Course code
1BI040
Course title Tissue Biology
Credits 4 Semester
(spring/autumn) Autumn
Period
2020-09-17 to 2020-10-05
Course coordinator Sara Windahl
Examiner Sara Windahl Teacher in charge of component
Sara Windahl
Other participating teachers
Katja Möller-Hackbarth – responsible for the lab project
Number of registered students during the three week check 53
Number approved on the last course date (after first exam) 49
Response frequency course valuation survey
22 / 53 (41,5%)
Other methods for student influence (in addition to concluding course valuation) Course evaluation council with 4 student representatives (student’s course council).
Feedback reporting of the course valuation results to the students Uploaded in Drupal on October 28, 2020
Note that...
The analysis should (together with a summarising quantitative summary of the students’
course valuation) be communicated to the education committee at the department responsible for the course and for programme courses also the programme coordinating committee.
The analysis was communicated to the education committee on the following date:
2020-11-18
The analysis was communicated to the programme coordinating committee on the following date: 2020-11-18
1. Description of any conducted changes since the previous course occasion based on the views of former students
A script is provided for 3 of the online videos
The learning outcomes for the microscopy session were clarified further during the introductory lecture to the course
The requirements for the lab project were further clarified in the introduction to the lab project
The Q&A session for the lab project was held online in Zoom (instead of a chat site in Canvas) to improve communication
2. Brief summary of the students’ valuations of the course
(Based on the students’ quantitative responses to the course valuation and key views from free text responses. Quantitative summary and any graphs are attached.)
Summary from the KI-survey
We must keep in mind that only 41,5% of the students answered the KI survey.
The students found that there was a common theme running throughout the course – from learning outcomes to examinations.
Strengths:
The lectures and lecturers were much appreciated by the students.
The tissue demonstrations and seminar were appreciated by the students.
The microscopy sessions were appreciated by the students.
The lab exercise was good.
Suggestions for improvements:
The communication regarding the lab project could be improved.
The seminar could have gained by being on site to improve discussions within the groups.
Summary from “Course evaluation council”
In general, the students were pleased with the course and really appreciate it. Zoom worked well and the course was well organized. The course director communicated very well with the course participants and they appreciated her presence during the lectures. The students appreciated that the recordings from the online lectures were uploaded to the course site in Canvas.
Strengths:
The students found that the overall content of the lectures was good.
The students found that the lab project provided them with very essential knowledge, and some appreciated that calculations are good to learn.
The students found the microscopy sessions very helpful, well explained and very satisfactory.
The exam was considered as generally nice and fair.
Suggestions for improvements:
Allocate time in the schedule for the pre-recorded video lectures and consider allocating more time to some lectures.
The students suggested that programs like Mentimeter etc.could be used to check understanding during the lectures.
If lectures are given online, the teachers could use headsets or microphones to improve the sound.
The students requested improved feedback of different kinds for the lab project.
3. The course coordinator’s reflections on the implementation and results of the course
Strengths of the course:
The lectures/lecturers were good.
The demonstrations and microscopy sessions were appreciated.
The lab project providing essential knowledge.
It was appreciated that the recordings from the online lectures were uploaded to the course site in Canvas.
The exam was fair.
Weaknesses of the course:
The time allocated to different lectures could be adjusted.
The sound at some online lectures were not optimal.
Communication regarding the lab project could be improved.
3. Other views
4. Course coordinator’s conclusions and any suggestions for changes
(If changes are suggested, state who is responsible for implementing them and provide a schedule.)
The course seems well balanced and the students appreciated the communication with the course director. There are some adjustments that could be made to improve the experience of the course.
For the next occasion the course is given:
Consider adjusting the time for some lectures and visualise time in the schedule for viewing online video lectures (course director, before the next occasion the course is given).
Improve feedback to the students regarding the lab project (course coordinator and lab responsible person, during the next occasion the course is given).
If the course is given online, remind the lecturers to use headsets or similar during the lectures to improve the sound.
Appendices: KI Survey: “Report for Tissue Biology Autumn 2020”.
