Evaluation of teaching, be it on a course or a modular level, is often a two-faceted exercise – addressing accountability needs and pursuing a more open, reflective agenda such as enhancement of teaching and learning practice. The majority of HE institutions in the UK use standardised questionnaires for module evaluation. Whilst necessary for quality assurance and governance, a standardised data set is often seen by academics as ‘piecemeal’, not necessarily meeting needs of their subject and their own needs as reflective practitioners. Anecdotal evidence at Liverpool John Moores University, UK, suggested that single module evaluation design was perceived by teaching staff as a top-down, management-driven approach, reducing their engagement with the survey. One of the attractive functionalities available in Blue is the ability to add module/course specific self-written questions – offering the opportunity to better explore different evaluation perspectives and giving academics more ownership in the process of module evaluation. The presentation will explore module leaders’ engagement with the QP (Questions Personalisation). Taking a longitudinal perspective (analysing three years’ worth of data) we will look at the extent to which QP was utilised by the module leaders, what type of questions were written in different subject areas and across the institution. Module leaders’ perspective on this functionality gathered via focus groups and future institutional developments will also be presented.

Presenters: Elena Zaitseva, Liverpool John Moores University; Natalie Holland, Liverpool John Moores University

Watch the video presentation