Standard Quantitative Course Evaluation Form for the Master’s Degree Programmes
(written/ICLON-format)
This course evaluation is anonymous; you are not required to give your name or university ID
card number. The Department and the Faculty thank you filling out this evaluation form.
1 I am registered as a
1 = (general) Master’s student, 2 = research Master’s student
2 In my degree programme, this course or course component is a(n)
1 = elective subject, 2 = compulsory subject
Should you wish to specify or qualify your answer to one or more of the following questions with a written
comment, you may do so in the last and second-to-last question. We would appreciate this very much.
3 I found this course or course component interesting.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
4 The information I was given at the beginning of the course provided a clear idea of the
competences I should have acquired at the end of the course or course component.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
5 When answering this question, please remember that the study programme is based on fulltime availability (i.e. 40 hours per week) The course work that was expected of me was
proportional to the number of ECTS credits that the course or course component carried. (1 ECTS
credit = 28 hours or 3,5 working days)
1 = much too light … 3 = in proportion … 5 = much too heavy
6 In terms of difficulty, the course material was:
1 = much too easy … 3 = appropriate … 5 = much to difficult
7 I estimate the percentage of lectures/tutorials/meetings that I prepared for seriously to be
1 = <25%, 2 = 26-50%, 3 = 51-75%, 4 = >75%, 5 = all
8 This course or course component stimulated my critical thinking.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
9 This course or course component stimulated my independent and active input in processing the
course contents (e.g. in the assignments, lecture and tutorial preparation, and exams)?
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
10 The quality of the course materials was good (e.g. legibility, clear structure etc. of books, readers,
reference books etc.)
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
11. The teaching methods used (lecture, tutorial, or a combination of both, etc.) were suitable for the
course objectives.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
12 The internal cohesion of the course or course component was good, e.g. between the self-study
components and the teaching, or if there were two or more tutors, between the subjects treated by
each tutor.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
13 Answer only if Blackboard or CAL applications such as Hologram were used:
The Blackboard and/or CAL programme(s) used supported this course effectively.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
14 This course fit in well in the overall degree programme thus far (e.g. course level, no needless
repetition, logical continuation of earlier subjects or course components, course offered at an
appropriate moment in the curriculum)?
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
15 The levels of participating students differed greatly in terms of relevant knowledge or language
proficiency.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
16 Answer only if differences in level between students existed: In my opinion, the differences in
level between students affected the quality of teaching negatively.
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
17 Answer only if the course was taught in English:
My proficiency in English was sufficient to fully participate in this course without problems (e.g. in
preparation for class, active participation in the meetings themselves, communication with fellow
students and with the lecturer, written and oral presentations and examinations)?
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
[To be repeated for each participating lecturer]
18 Lecturer [x]taught this course well (e.g. as a lecturer: interesting, clear, well-structured, easy to
understand, etc.; as a supervisor: stimulating, a good listener, approachable etc.)?
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
[To be repeated for each participating lecturer]
19 Answer only if the course was taught in English
Lecturer [x]’s proficiency in English was sufficient (explanation in class, communication with
students, written course material)?
1 = I completely agree ... 5 = I completely disagree
[programme specific questions to be inserted here]
20 What are the strengths of this course?
...........................................................
21 What are the weaknesses of this course?
...........................................................
22 Is there anything you would like to add?
...........................................................