Course Evaluation

1. Purpose

This policy aims to establish the requirements regarding student feedback related to for-credit courses taught at VinUniversity. Student feedback is an essential component of the learning experience, quality assurance, reporting, and accreditation. It must be solicited, recorded, and utilized in a manner that maintains confidentiality and trust, and supports the enhancement of the student learning experience.

2. Scope

The policy applies to all full-time, part-time, adjunct, affiliated, and visiting faculty and teaching assistants who teach courses that are part of the degree requirements at VinUniversity.

3. Definition

4. Policy statements

4.1.  Required end-of- course evaluations

End-of-course evaluations can provide helpful information for improving courses and an opportunity for students to reflect and provide feedback on their learning.

1. At VinUniversity, an end-of-course evaluation will be conducted for each course that is part of the degree requirements. The evaluation will include feedback on, at a minimum, the quality of the course, teaching effectiveness of course instructor and teaching assistant.
2. These evaluations will have the required questions as listed in Appendix 1. For certain courses with alternative forms (e.g., internships, project-based courses, clinical courses), colleges are encouraged to develop a specifically tailored survey form and use alternative, convenient platforms to conduct end-of-course evaluation survey. This form must be proposed by the Program Director, consulted with Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance Department, and approved by the Dean.
3. The evaluation will seek feedback on each instructor and teaching assistant (TA) involved in student-facing course instruction or teaching support. For courses with multiple course instructors, the selection of instructors or teaching assistants to be evaluated will be decided by the college leaders or program directors.
4. Unless an exception is approved by the Dean/Vice Dean of the College/Program Director, end-of- course evaluations will be administered online, using a central system managed by the Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance.

4.2.  Required mid-semester formative student feedback for all for-credit courses

1. In addition to the required summative assessment (end of the semester), faculty and programs must seek formative student feedback at some point during the semester. The purpose of the mid-semester assessment is to provide real-time feedback regarding the student learning, engagement and perceptions about the quality of the course and instruction, so that the instructors can make any necessary changes to address the issues/concerns raised.
2. While this mid-semester or ongoing feedback is required for every course, the course instructor can determine the method, structure, and content of such feedback in consultation with the program director/Vice Dean/Dean.
3. This mid-term feedback is intended only for the course instructors and should be shared with others only with the consent of the instructors.
4. Mid-term feedback must be anonymous. Students should not be required to provide any identifying information in providing feedback. Any demographic information should be optional.
5. Course instructors may administer the mid-term assessments for their courses but may not supervise, instruct or coach students to complete the course evaluations.
6. The mid-term assessments can be administered using any medium that the instructor finds appropriate, such as Microsoft Forms, some online collaboration platform, or on paper.
7. The instructor/program will determine the timing for administering the assessment, which may be conducted once or multiple times throughout the semester. However, to avoid overburdening students with multiple surveys, it is recommended to conduct it once, preferably in the middle of the semester.

4.3.  Institutional support for administering end-of-course evaluation

1. The feedback process should be such as to encourage all students to participate.
2. The Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance will coordinate with program directors or their assignees to administer the end-of- course evaluations via a central system. For tailored surveys as mentioned at 4.1.ii, the Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance Department will provide technical consultation to ensure an appropriate and student-friendly evaluation system/platform is used.

4.4.  Avoidance of conflict of interest, coercion, identification, or adverse consequences for students

1. Course evaluations must be confidential. Students must not be required to provide any identifying information when responding to the survey. Any demographic information will be optional.
2. Independent studies, research, field experience courses or courses with total enrollments of fewer than five (5) students are exempted from course evaluation survey.
3. For courses/ sections with five (05) or more enrolled students but fewer than five (05) student responses, evaluation results are not reported.
4. Instructors are expected to reserve 15-20 minutes in a scheduled class time for the administration of the course evaluation survey. However, Course Instructors may not administer the evaluation for their courses. They may not be present in the classroom while the evaluations are being administered nor supervise or coach students to complete the course evaluations.
5. The Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance Department or their designee who is unrelated to the course will announce, distribute, collect, and submit the end-of-course feedback forms.
6. Evaluation results will be available to the instructor after final grades for the semester or term have been submitted. This is to prevent any bias or perception of bias in the course grading process.

4.5.  Appropriate timing of feedback assessments and access to results

1. Course evaluations will be administered and must close prior to the start of final exams.
2. Course instructors will have access to the complete end-of-course evaluation report after the final semester grades have been assigned.
3. For other types of reports, they will be available one week after the section report.

4.6.  Confidentiality and restricted access for course evaluation results

1. The Department of Accreditation, Testing, and Quality Assurance Department is responsible for administering the end-of-course evaluation, compiling the results, and distributing the reports.
2. The course evaluation report is produced at four levels: course/section level, program level, college level and university-wide level.
3. End-of-course evaluation reports and all related information are classified as confidential and shall be disseminated only to individuals with authorized responsibility. Each type of report will be distributed to relevant stakeholders in compliance with the Access Matrix (see Appendix 2). Any other individual requests access to the course evaluation results, s/he must request the Accreditation, Testing, and Quality Assurance Department, providing a reason for the request, and the instructor must provide explicit consent for sharing the results.
4. Mid-semester formative feedback may not be used for faculty performance assessment.
5. End-of-course evaluation reports will be used for faculty performance as determined in the HR policy.
6. Each type of course evaluation report provides a specific scope of information tailored to its intended purpose and authorized audience, as outlined below:

• • Report to MOET and the capital investor: University-level overall course satisfaction rate and overall teaching quality satisfaction rate.
  • Section report for instructor: Includes quantitative course evaluation results and open-ended comments for the instructor and teaching assistant.
  • Section report for teaching assistant: Includes quantitative course evaluation results and open-ended comments specifically for the teaching assistant.
  • Program report: Includes quantitative course evaluation results and open-ended comments of all courses in the program, excluding any information that identifies instructors or teaching assistants.
  • College report: Includes quantitative evaluation results and open-ended comments of all courses under the programs managed by the College, excluding any information that identifies instructors or teaching assistants.
  • University report: Includes quantitative evaluation results for all courses across academic programs and does not include open-ended comments.
  • If a formal complaint involves a specific instructor or teaching assistant, the relevant section report may be shared with the appropriate third party for verification and resolution. In such cases, the instructor/TA will be informed that their report has been shared.
  • In all other cases, sharing course evaluation reports with any third party requires approval from the report owners.

4.7.  Follow-up action

1. Course instructors and relevant academic staff must review course evaluation results within four weeks of release. Based on the student feedback, they will identify key areas for improvement, develop appropriate action plans, and report to the Program Director upon request.
2. Program Directors are responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of program-level follow-up action plan based on course evaluation results within their respective programs. The follow-up action plans will be sent to Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance Department.
3. Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance Department will consolidate program-level action plans into university action plan and monitor its implementation at the university level.
4. Follow-up action plans at both program and university level must be documented using the template provided by Accreditation, Testing and Quality Assurance Department, and where applicable, communicated to students at the start of the next course offering. This helps demonstrate that student input is valued and used to improve teaching and learning.
5. Colleges are expected to communicate these follow-up actions and improvements to students through appropriate channels (e.g., college town halls, course announcements, the learning management system, or in-class discussions). Where applicable, a summary of improvements based on previous evaluations must be shared with students at the start of the next offering.

5. Responsibilities

Appendix 1: End of Course Evaluation Form

Appendix 2: Access matrix for end-of-semester course evaluation report