Student Evaluation Questionnaires:
Support and Advice available in the University of Warwick
Natasha Nakariakova, e-Assessment and Data Analysis Manager,
IT Services E-lab
Yihua Huang, e-Assessment advisor,
IT Services E-lab
contact: extension 22337
email: natasha@warwick.ac.uk
contact: extension 74418
email: yihua.huang@warwick.ac.uk
Example 1
University of Warwick Mathematics Department
Final Module Evaluation Form
Module
Lecture
Please use a blue or black pen and cross one answer for each question
For each question please put a tick in the box that you think is most relevant. There is room for comments on
the reverse.
The quantity of material was
I found the example sheets
I found the pace of delivery
6
Just right
Too little
Too much
Just right
Too easy
Too hard
Just right
Too slow
Too fast
5
4
3
2
1
I attended most of the lectures
I attended none of the lectures
I found the lectures beneficial
The lectures were a waste of
time
The links with other modules
was clear
The PYDC entry was a fair
reflection of the module
The links with other modules
was unclear
The PYDC entry bore no
resemblance to the module
No unreasonable assumption of
background knowledge
By the end the direction and
purpose of the module was clear
Unreasonable assumptions made
I would like a module taking
this subject further
I had adequate access to the
recommended texts
I would not like a module
taking this subject further
I could not find a copy of the
texts anywhere
The lecturer was well
organised and prepared
The lecturer's timing was good
(i.e. not late, didn't overrun)
The lecturer was not at all
organised and prepared
The style of delivery was
stimulating
The lecturer was receptive to
questions
Style of delivery was dull
Explanations were clear
Explanations were unclear
I have a good set of notes to
revise from
I have a poor set of notes to
revise from
It was difficult to hear the
lecturer
The lecturers handwriting was
unreadable
Diagrams were difficult to
read
The lecturer was easy to hear
The lecturers handwriting was
legible
Diagrams were easy to read
By the end the direction and
purpose was unclear
The lecturer's timing was poor
The lecturer was unreceptive
to questions
If there were support classes provided:
I attended most of the support
classes
I attended none of the support
classes
I found support classes useful
Support classes were no help
The support class TA was
prepared
The support class TA was
disorganised
Please give further comments overleaf….
1441244998
University of Warwick
Mathematics Department
Module Questionnaire Results
Module:
Organiser:
Module Name
Number of forms: 175
Organiser Name
Where percentages do not summate to 100% a proportion of students did not mark an answer for that question
The quantity of material was
just right
too little
too much
94
1
3
just right
too easy
too hard
74
1
21
just right
too slow
too fast
91
2
3
I found the example sheets
I found the pace of delivery
6
5
4
3
2
1
I attended most of the lectures
79
14
6
0
1
0
I found the lectures beneficial
73
17
9
1
0
0
strongly agree
strongly disagree
Module
6
5
4
3
2
1
The links to the other modules was clear
78
16
5
1
0
0
The PYDC entry was fair reflection of the module
48
27
7
2
0
1
No unresonable assumption of background
57
31
7
2
1
1
62
30
6
1
0
0
I would like a module taking this subject further
57
27
9
3
2
1
I had adequate access to the recommended texts
50
25
17
2
2
1
strongly agree
knowledge
By the end the direction and purpose of the
module was clear
Page 1 of 2
strongly disagree
Lecturer
6
5
4
3
2
1
The lecturer was well organised and prepared
82
14
2
0
0
0
The lecturer's timing was good
89
10
0
0
0
0
The style of the delivery was stimulating
76
19
2
2
0
0
The lecturer was receptive to questions
79
19
1
0
1
0
Explanations were clear
64
27
5
3
0
0
I have a good set of notes
67
23
6
2
1
0
The lecturer was easy to hear
92
6
1
0
0
0
The lecturer’s handwriting was legible
77
15
3
1
1
1
Diagrams were easy to read
73
17
5
0
0
0
6
5
4
3
2
1
The lecturer was well organised and prepared
3
2
0
0
0
2
The lecturer's timing was good
1
3
1
0
0
1
The style of the delivery was stimulating
1
1
1
0
0
0
strongly agree
strongly disagree
Support in class
strongly agree
Page 2 of 2
strongly disagree
Example 2
7550380918
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
MODULE QUESTIONNAIRE
2007/2008
Module Title:
Module Code:
Module Organiser:
Term:
Course (e.g. CBS):
Year (1,2,3 or 4):
Lecturer 2
Lecturer 1
This questionnaire has been prepared as a means of helping to improve the quality of modules.
This is your opportunity to express your views. The information you give will be passed to the
lecturer and to the Chair of Department.
Please use a blue or black pen and mark one answer for each question by placing a cross in the
relevant box. If not applicable do not mark.
1 = strongly agree
2 = Agree
3 = No firm opinion
4 = Disagree
5 = Strong disagree
Lecturer 1
Content
Lecturer 2
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
The aims of the module were clear
The module achieved its learning
outcomes
Compared to my other modules the
quantity of material was greater
Compared to my other modules, the
module was more difficult
The prerequisite knowledge I had
for this module was sufficient
Delivery
The lectures were well organised
The lectures were well presented
Supplementary sessions (labs/
seminars etc) were well organised
Supplementary sessions were helpful
Module material (handouts / web
resources) was useful
Overall this was a very good module
I attended all lectures
PTO
University of Warwick
Department of Computer Science
Module Questionnaire Results
Module:
CS
Number of forms: 31
Organiser:
Where percentages do not summate to 100% a proportion of students did not mark an answer for that question
Content
1
2
3
4
5
29
42
13
13
3
The module acheived its learning
outcomes
23
48
23
6
0
Compared to my other modules the
quantity of material was greater
19
32
39
3
6
Compared to my other modules, the module was
more difficult
3
35
45
10
3
The prerequisite knowledge I had for
this module was sufficient
10
52
26
10
3
1
2
3
4
5
13
32
32
16
6
13
29
32
16
10
19
58
16
6
0
23
65
6
3
0
16
48
19
13
3
1
2
3
4
5
16
52
23
10
0
48
26
19
6
0
strongly agree
The aims of the module were clear
Delivery
The lectures were well organised
The lectures were well presented
Supplemenatry sessions
(labs/seminars etc) were organised
Supplementary sessions were helpfull
Module material (handouts / web
resources) was useful
Overall this was a very good module
I attended
Page 1 of 2
strongly disagree
'0' signifies no answer marked
Page 2 of 2
Example 3
9949331121
Politics and International Studies
Graduate Teaching Evaluation Survey
INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS: PLEASE READ FIRST
Your responses will be scanned. Your answers to the questions may be filled out using a blue or black
pen. Please blacken completely the number corresponding to your answer for each question. Try not to
make any stray marks of any kind. Mark the ONE most appropriate response to each item.
The survey results will be used by the teacher(s) of the module for feedback on their teaching. The
surveys are not divulged to the teacher(s) until after the examination boards.
Name of Module
Module Tutor
.aa
· The Module
For statements 1 to 20 (except 6 and 7) please use the following scale:
1 - very poor 2 - poor 3 - adequate 4 - good 5 - very good
1. The extent to which essays or other assignments improved
your understanding of the subject matter
1
2
3
4
5
The extent to which information about your progress in the
2. module was provided (returning assignments/essays within 4
weeks with comments)
1
2
3
4
5
3. How would you rate the module document?
1
2
3
4
5
How would you rate the availability of module
4. materials in the Library?
a) books and journals
b) electronic sources
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Taking in to account all aspects of the module (lectures,
5. seminars, reading, essays), how would you rate the module
overall?
· Your Participation (or Learning)
On average what proportion of the required reading for
weekly seminars did you complete before coming to class?
How many hours each week did you spend in independent
7.
study for this module?
6.
8. How would you rate your own performance
on the module?
9. How would you rate your contribution to seminar
discussions?
100%
80-99%
50-79%
10 or more
Below 50%
5-9
Less than 5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
11. Relates work on course to its stated aims and objectives
1
2
3
4
5
12. Ability to present material in an interesting way
1
2
3
4
5
13. Effectiveness in stimulating you intellectually
1
2
3
4
5
· Module Leader
10.
Communicates goals and requirements of the module
clearly and explicitly
2047331123
14. Enthusiasm for the subject matter
1
2
3
4
5
15. Encouragement of critical thinking and analysis
1
2
3
4
5
16. Ability to organise the session effectively
1
2
3
4
5
Ability to deal effectively with questions and comments
from the class
1
2
3
4
5
18. Accessibility for consultation (appointments, office hours)
1
2
3
4
5
19. Ability to facilitate class discussion
1
2
3
4
5
20. How would you rate this lecturer overall?
1
2
3
4
5
17.
· Key skills
For statement 21 below, please use the following 4-point scale:
1 - not at all, 2 - to some extent, 3 - a great deal , N/A - not applicable to the objective of this module
21. How effectively has this module (through lectures, seminars and independent study) aided your acquisition
of key skills listed below?
a) Oral presentation skills:formal class presentations
1
2
3
N/A
and informal discussions in seminars
1
2
3
N/A
b) Writing skills: the preparation of essays
c) Group work skills: group work either for preparation
1
2
3
N/A
for the seminar or in the seminar itself
d) Problem-solving/critical skills:analysis and assessment
1
2
3
N/A
of existing literature
1
2
3
N/A
e) Investigative research skills
· General
For statements 22 and 23 below, please use the following 5-point scale:
1 - low
2 - below average
3 - average
4 - above average
5 - high
22. Compared to other modules at the same level the workload is:
1
2
3
4
5
23. Compared to other modules at the same level, the level of difficulty is:
1
2
3
4
5
Please complete this section only after completing the above sections:
Please use the space below to provide supplementary comments on the module leader for this module. Your
thoughtful response will be important in assisting teachers in future module preparation. The information you
provide here is confidential and will be forwarded to your lecturers and seminar tutor only after final grades have
been agreed.
Politics and International Studies
Teaching Evaluation Survey
Module Code:
Module Code
Module Name:
Module Name
Tutor:
Tutor
Number of module:
Name of the Tutor
The Module
No/% of No/% of
students student s
very poor
poor
No/% of No/% of No/% of
% of
% of
% of
No of
students student s student s students students students students
adequate
good very good
<
>
good and
adequate adequate very good
1. Essays improved
understanding
0 0
2 5
4 10
20 48
16
38
5
95
86
42
2. Your progress in the
module
0 0
1 2
4 10
15 37
20
50
2
97
87
40
3. Rate module
document?
0 0
0 0
0 0
22 52
20
48
0
100
100
42
4 a) Availability in
Library: books
2 5
6 14
10 24
11 26
13
31
19
81
57
42
4 b) electronic sources
0 0
0 0
2 5
18 43
22
52
0
100
95
42
5. Rate module overall
0 0
0 0
0 0
26 62
16
38
0
100
100
42
Your Participation (or Learning)
% of
100%
6. Proportion
required reading
% of 8099%
2 5
15 36
10 or
more
7. Hours
independent study
6
% of
students
very poor
% of 50-79%
25
5-9
15
26
% of
students
poor
% Below
50%
60
0
0
42
Less
than 5
63
% of students
adequate
41
9 22
% of
students
good
% of
students
very good
8. Rate performance
module
0
0
1 2
20 49
19
46
1 2
41
9. Contribution to
seminar discussions
1
2
3 7
17 40
19
45
2 5
42
Page 1 of 2
Module Leader
% of
% of
% of
% of
% of
% of
% of
% of
students student s students student student s students students students
very poor
poor adequates good
very good
<
>
good and
adequate adequate very good
10. Communicates
goals clearly
0
0
0
0
2
4
17 35
29 60
0
100
96
48
11. Relates work to
objectives
0
0
0
0
5
10
16 33
27 56
0
100
90
48
12. Present material
interesting
0
0
1
2
6
13
18 38
23 48
2
98
85
48
13. Stimulating
intellectually
0
0
2
4
8
17
13 27
25 52
4
96
79
48
14. Enthusiasm
0
0
0
0
6
13
14 29
28 58
0
100
88
48
15. Encouragement of
critical thinking
0
0
0
0
5
10
14 29
29 60
0
100
90
48
16. Organise session
effectively
0
0
1
2
2
4
17 35
28 58
2
98
94
48
17. Deal effectively with
questions
0
0
0
0
6
13
15 32
26 55
0
100
87
47
18. Accessibility
0
0
0
0
6
13
14 30
27 57
0
100
87
47
19. Facilitate class
discussion
0
0
0
0
0
0
12 25
29 60
0
85
90
48
20. Rate lecturer overall
0
0
0
0
3
6
19 40
26 54
0
100
94
48
Key Skills
1
2
3
N/A
Q21
a) Oral present.skills
1
2
28
67
13
31
0
0
42
b) Writing skills
1
4
1
4
24
92
0
0
26
c) Group work skills
4
10
22
54
9
22
6
15
41
d) Problem solving
0
0
16
39
25
61
0
15
41
e) Investig. research
1
2
22
52
19
45
0
0
42
General
Low
Below
average
Average
Above
average
High
22. Level of the workload
0
0
3 7
21 50
15
36
3 7
42
23. Level of difficulty
0
0
1 2
19 45
19
45
3 7
42
Page 2 of 2
Example 4
Warwick Business School
2895020646
Postgraduate module feedback
/
Academic Year
Term
Module code
Module title
Please use a blue or black pen and mark one answer for each question, by placing a cross in
the relevant box:
Your details
1
2
3
Your degree course:
MSC
Economics
and Finance
MSC
MSC
Financial
Mathematics
Finance
1
Your class tutor:
2
Tick the box corresponding to your tutor's initials
Your input this term
not all but more
less than 80%
than 80%
all
1.I attended
1
2.On average I spent
2
more than 10
of the lectures
3
hours per week on this
module, other than in
lectures and classes
between 5 and 10 less than 5
The module this term
Agree
Strongly
agree
1
3.The module outline was clearly set out
No firm
opinion
2
Disagree
3
Strongly
disagree
4
5
4.The reading materials were available
5.The text book(s) were useful
6 The module succeeded in its objectives
7.I believe I will do well in this module
8.Overall this was a very good module
The lecturer(s) this term
1=Strongly agree
2=Agree
3=No firm opinion
4=Disagree 5=Strongly disagree
Lecturer 1 [
1
9.The
2
]
3
4
5
Lecturer 2 [
1
2
]
3
4
5
lectures were interesting
10.The lecturer was well prepared
11.The lecturer paced the
material well (Please explain
overleaf if you disagree)
12.The lecturer was responsive to
questions
The class tutor (where applicable) this term
Strongly
agree
13.The tutor encouraged critical thinking
1
14.The tutor encouraged participation
15.The tutor made the subject interesting
16.The class helped me understand the subject
Please turn over
Agree
2
No firm
opinion
3
Disagree
4
Strongly
disagree
5
Warwick Business School: Course Evaluation
Year:
Term:
Module code:
No. of students on course:
No. of forms returned:
36
Input
Question
All
(1)
> 80%
(2)
< 80%
(3)
Mean
1. I attended (% of lectures)
27
7
2
1.30
>10
(1)
5 - 10
(2)
<5
(3)
Mean
7
6
19
2.37
2. On average I spent (hours per week)
Module
Strongly agree > Strongly disagree
Question
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
3. The module outline was clearly laid out
19
14
2
0
1
1.61
4. The reading materials were available
13
14
7
1
1
1.97
5. The text book(s) were useful
6
13
14
0
2
2.40
6. The module succeeded in its objectives
14
16
3
1
1
1.82
7. I beleive I will do well in this module
15
12
9
0
0
1.83
8. Overall this was a very good module
14
17
2
1
2
1.88
Lecturer 1
Strongly agree > Strongly disagree
Question
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
9. The lectures were interesting
17
14
2
2
1
1.77
10. The lecturer was well prepared
18
15
2
1
0
1.61
11.The lecturer paced the material well
17
15
2
1
1
1.72
12. The lecturer was responsive to questions
13
18
3
1
1
1.86
Page 1
Lecturer 2
Strongly agree > Strongly disagree
Question
1
2
3
4
5
9. The lectures were interesting
0
0
0
0
0
10. The lecturer was well prepared
0
0
0
0
0
11. The lecturer paced the material well
0
0
0
0
0
12. The lecturer was responsive to questions
0
0
0
0
0
Mean
Class Tutor
Strongly agree > Strongly disagree
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
13. The tutor encouraged critical thinking
9
11
2
0
0
1.68
14. The tutor encouraged participation
10
9
2
1
0
1.72
15. The tutor made the subject interesting
9
11
1
1
0
1.72
16. The class helped me understand the subject 12
8
2
0
0
1.54
Lecturer's comments:
Page 2
Example 5
1012266390
University of Warwick
School of Law
MODULE EVALUATION QUESTIONAIRE 200 7 8
Module Code
/
DATE
Module Name
/
This questionnaire is in three sections. Part A relates to the module as a whole: Part B relates to the
lecturer(s) and Part C relates to your seminar teacher(s). If you had more than one lecturer and/or
seminar teacher, the questionnaire should contain separate sections for each.
All answers will be anonymous. The questionnaires are designed to be analysed electronically. The
information you provide may be used for a number of purposes including providing information for the
annual review of each module and assisting individual teachers to develop and improve their teaching.
As well as collecting statistical data it is important that the Law School should receive your personal
views. PLEASE MAKE USE OF THE COMMENTS SECTION at the top of each section.
Please use a blue or black pen and mark one answer for each question, by placing a cross in the relevant
box:
PART A = The Module as a Whole
Your Comments:
0-30%
31-50% 51-70%
70-90%
None
Most
90+%
What proportion of lectures did you attend?
N/A
Some
All
In how many seminars did you contribute?
Too low Low Reasonable High
Very High
How would you rate the workload?
How would you rate the difficulty?
Too easy Quite Easy Reasonable
N/A
Poor
Adequate Average
Hard
Good
How would you rate the set textbook(s)?
How useful were the printed materials?
How useful was the module website?
How useful did you find IOLIS?
Overall assessment of the module.
NOTE: Please supplement your answers by commenting in the box above.
Very Hard
V Good
School of Law
Part A
Module Evaluation
Module code: Module Code
Module name: Module Name
No. of students on course:
No. of forms
116
1. What proportion of lectures
did you attend?
0-30%
31-50%
51-70%
71-90%
90+%
1
1
10 9%
24 21%
78 67%
Some
Most
1%
N/A
2. In how many seminars did
you contribute?
1
None
1%
3
Too low
3. How would you rate the
work load?
1
1
1%
0
22 19%
Reasonable
0%
47 41%
Quite easy Reasonable
1%
N/A
3%
Low
Too easy
4. How would you rate the
difficulty?
1%
1
Poor
1%
47 41%
All
42 36%
High
46 40%
Very High
60 52%
Hard
6 5%
Very Hard
56 48%
7 6%
Adequate
Average
Good
V.Good
5. How would you rate the set
textbook(s)?
1
1%
2 2%
9 8%
22 19%
52 45%
28 24%
6. How useful were the printed
materials?
3
3%
2
2%
2 2%
15 13%
57 49%
32 28%
7. How useful was the module
website?
2
2%
6
5%
17 15%
35
44 38%
8 7%
8. How useful did you find
IOLIS?
70
60%
5 4%
2 2%
12 10%
12 10%
1 1%
9. Overall assessment of the
module?
0
0%
1
2 2%
12 10%
70 60%
26 22%
1%
30%
Example 6
9098029478
UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
PX
Lecturer
Title
Year
Please use a blue or black pen and mark one answer for each question thus
1.
I attended (..?..) of the lectures
<50%
50-80%
>80%
2.
By the end of the module, its purpose and
direction of the course were
Clear
Hazy
Unclear
3.
The quantity of material was
4.
About right
Too great
Too little
I understood the following main topics:
(a).
In lectures
After more work
poorly
(b).
In lectures
After more work
poorly
(c).
In lectures
After more work
poorly
(d).
In lectures
After more work
poorly
(e).
In lectures
After more work
poorly
(f).
In lectures
After more work
poorly
5.
Explanation of new terms and concepts was
good
Adequate
poor
6.
I have a (..?..) set of notes
good
Adequate
poor
7.
I attempted (..?..) of examples sheet questions
40-80%
>80%
8.
The example sheet question were
9.
PROMPTNESS of feedback on submitted coursework was
<40%
too easy
10. Would you like a course taking this subject further?
about right
good
Yes
too hard
Adequate
neutral
poor
no
Recommended textbook:
11.
12.
I found it to be
13.
Please give further comments overleaf ...
purchased
consulted
very helpful
helpful
did not use
unhelpful
UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK
DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
Physics Course Questionnaire Results
Module:
Module Code
Lecturer:
Lecturer Name
1.
2.
3.
4.
I attended (..?..) of the
lectures.
By the end of the module, its
purpose and direction were
The quantity of the material
was
<50%
50-80%
>80%
0
14
70
Clear
Hazy
Unclear
36
33
14
About right
Too great
Too little
67
13
3
I understood the following main topics:
In lectures
4a.
4b.
4c.
Topic 1
Topic 2
Topic 3
18
52
4e.
Topic 4
Topic 5
Poorly
14
In lectures
After more work
Poorly
18
56
10
In lectures
After more work
Poorly
49
22
After more work
Poorly
49
15
In lectures
After more work
Poorly
17
54
13
In lectures
After more work
Poorly
43
10
13
In lectures
4d.
After more work
20
4f.
Topic 6
31
5.
Explanation of new terms and
Good
Adequate
Poor
7
40
36
Good
Adequate
Poor
18
41
24
concepts was
6.
I have a (..?..) set of notes.
Page 1 of 2
7.
8.
9.
I attempted (..?..) of example
sheet questions.
The example sheet questions
were
PROMPTNESS of feedback on
submitted coursework was
10.
Would you like this course
taking this subject further?
11.
Recommended text book:
12.
<40%
40%-80%
>80%
45
20
11
Too easy
About right
Too hard
2
38
14
Good
Adequate
Poor
0
0
0
Yes
Neutral
No
17
33
32
purchased
consulted
did not use
22
18
Very helpful
Helpful
Unhelpful
20
20
5
36
I found it to be
Page 2 of 2