Good practice classified under: General Education Student Assessment
Applying multiple methods for evaluating GE courses
An institution employs multiple methods to evaluate teaching and learning outcomes of GE courses.
The purpose of this practice is to provide a comprehensive review and analysis of the GE programme so as to help improve its design and students’ learning outcomes. The evaluation methods include conducting (1) internal course reviews to assess if the implementation of the approved courses have aligned with the stipulated GE objectives and expectations; (2) entry-exit surveys to evaluate the students experience of the teaching and learning components of the GE courses they studied, and their self-perceived performance over time; (3) focus group interviews to gain a better understanding of how the students reflect on their learning experience in the GE courses; and (4) narrative qualitative assessment of the students’ term papers to assess their critical thinking after taking the GE courses.
By applying the prescribed quantitative and qualitative methods to analyse the GE courses, a fuller picture of student learning performance can be obtained which helps identify the areas for improvement of the delivery of GE courses.
Good practice classified under: Programme Development Student Assessment
Use a multi-method approach for evaluating the programme outcomes
A multiple-method evaluation mechanism is built-in to the service learning programme to assess student learning outcomes and the effectiveness and satisfactory operation of the programme.
The purpose of this practice is to help the service-learning programme team to assess student learning outcomes in a comprehensive way as a means for ensuring the quality of the programme. An institution adopts a multi-method approach for collecting information and feedback from different stakeholders in order to evaluate student performance and learning outcomes.
The methods include asking students to complete pre and post-programme questionnaires, which measure their perceptions of changes in their knowledge, skills and attitudes across various domains. Students can also be invited to join focus group discussions, and reflective and consultation meetings, to provide deeper insights into their learning experiences. Through summative questionnaires and evaluation meetings, feedback can be collected from course instructors, agency supervisors and programme coordinators, to identify the problems that they have encountered during the programme implementation, and their suggestions for programme improvement.
The outcome of employing this practice is a more comprehensive and reliable body of evidence about student learning processes and outcomes. This approach makes better-informed decisions about refinements to the programme curriculum, design, and implementation. Drawing on inputs from all key stakeholders, a comprehensive set of outcome measures and process indicators is obtained. This approach can also be applied as an evaluation tool for other learning programmes.
Good practice classified under: Student Support Services Student Assessment
Blended academic and non-academic services to support specific learning needs of students
Blending of academic and non-academic services is a powerful means to provide specialist support required by students with learning disabilities.
To support students with learning disabilities, many teaching and assessment practices in higher education can be adapted. Collaboration between specialist student support services (e.g. disability services, student wellbeing) and teaching staff will provide opportunities to adapt practice in simple ways. For example, providing lecture notes in advance or recording seminars for students to study and review can make a major difference to students with learning disabilities.
Collaboration between teaching staff and specialist support services can inform improved teaching and assessment practice and create a more inclusive learning environment for students.
Disclaimer: All contents and any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations available in this electronic knowledgebase are for reference only and DO NOT represent HKCAAVQ’s endorsement of these practices in meeting HKCAAVQ’s accreditation criteria and standards.