QMU Module Evaluation Questionnaire Databank
Section 1: Purpose of the Questionnaire and Instructions for Students
We value your views on the modules you take, for monitoring, development and quality assurance purposes. All questions are should be answered on a 1-5 scale whereby 1 = “Strongly Agree” and 5 = “Strongly Disagree”. Please select the response that is closest to your views. There is space at the end of this questionnaire for your comments on the module as well. All responses will remain anonymous.
Section 2: Module Information
Module Name:
Module Code:
Module Coordinator:
Section 3: Student Information
Programme (e.g. BSc (Hons) Psychology and Sociology; BA (Hons) Film and Media:
Level of Programme:
Section 4: up to a maximum of 25 questions to be selected by the module coordinator/team.
(Questions are to be selected from the University’s list of suggested questions below or developed by each academic lecturer)
The University’s list of module evaluation questions is arranged in four (4) sections: the Environment, Module Structure, the Lecturer, and the Module. Within each section are several sub-sections with differing emphases: however, some questions could be placed equally easily in several sub-sections.
It is suggested that each lecturer selects up to 25 questions from the list to construct their own questionnaire for each module for which they are module coordinator.
It is intended that the list of up to 25 questions address the four sections and that a minimum number of questions from each section below are selected as follows: two questions from Section 1; three questions from Section 2; five questions from Section 3; and five questions from Section 4.
All questions should be answered on a 1-5 scale whereby 1 = "Strongly Disagree" and 5 = "Strongly Agree".
- Pool of Questions for Module Evaluations
1: The Environment (Please chose a minimum of 2 questions from this section)
1.1 Physical Environment and Resources
(a) The technical facilities necessary for this module were available (e.g. computers, other equipment and technical resources etc).
(b) The physical facilities provided for this module were appropriate (e.g. classroom/lab space, structure, furnishings etc).
(c) The classroom was properly equipped for using information technology in teaching.
(d) The classroom space was conducive to learning.
(e) The number of students in the module was acceptable.
(f) Use of the libraries was essential for this module.
(g) All the required module materials were available.
(h) All the required module materials were available in the libraries.
(i) The laboratory space was conducive to learning.
1.2 Learning Environment
(a) The lecturer(s) demonstrated respect for individual differences (e.g. gender, race, religion etc.)
(b) I was treated with respect in this class.
(c) The lecturer(s) related to students in ways that promoted mutual respect.
(d) The competitive atmosphere in this module helped me learn.
(e) The emphasis on teamwork in this module helped me learn.
(f) There was a competitive atmosphere in this module.
(g) The general climate in this module was good for learning.
(h) The lecturer(s) behaved equitably towards men and women students.
Please add any comments on the above:
2: Module Structure (A minimum of 3 questions from this section)
2.1 Feedback
(a) The lecturer(s) effectively used test results to see where students needed extra help.
(b) The answers to exam questions were adequately explained after the exam was given.
(c) Module assessments contributed to my learning.
(d) The lecturer(s) provided useful feedback on my progress in the module.
(e) The lecturer(s) was/were responsive to my learning needs.
(f) In this module, many methods were used to help me learn.
(g) In this module, teaching in small groups helped me learn.
(h) The lecturer(s) used a variety of learning and teaching methods.
(i) Module assessments helped me prepare for exams.
2.2 Clarity
(a) The module outcomes were clearly explained.
(b) The lecturer(s) emphasized important points.
(c) The lecturer(s) summarized material in a way that helped me remember.
(d) As the module progressed the lecturer(s) showed how each topic fit into the module as a whole.
(e) The module material was presented in an organised manner.
(f) The requirements of the module (projects, papers, exams) were adequately explained.
2.3 Cohesion
(a) The laboratory workshops were well integrated into the module.
(b) The module outline was consistently followed.
(c) There was a close agreement between the stated module outcomes and what was actually taught.
(d) The module content matched the module outcomes.
(e) The module topics were dealt with in sufficient depth.
(f) This module was clearly relevant to my program of study.
(g) The tutorials were well integrated into the module.
(h) The module appeared to have been carefully planned.
Please add any comments on the above:
3: The Lecturer(s) (A minimum of 5 questions from this section with at least 1 question from 3.5)
3.1 Overall Assessment
(a) Overall, the lecturer(s) is/are (a) good teacher(s).
(b) I would recommend this module to other students.
(c) I would like to take another module from this/these lecturer(s).
(d) I would recommend this/these lecturer(s) to other students.
3.2 Interaction with the Lecturer(s)
(a) The lecturer(s) encouraged students to actively participate.
(b) The lecturer(s) provided adequate opportunities for questions and discussion during class time.
(c) The lecturer(s) was/were generally available to students seeking advice.
(d) The lecturer(s) related to students in ways that promoted mutual respect.
(e) The lecturer(s) encouraged me to express my own views in class.
(f) The lecturer(s) had a good rapport with this class.
(g) The lecturer(s) was/were actively helpful.
(h) The lecturer(s) adjusted the level of teaching to meet students' needs.
3.3 Presentation
(a) Overall, the lecturer's presentations were clear and understandable.
(b) The lecturer(s) explained module material clearly.
(c) The lecturer's pronunciation was intelligible.
(d) My questions were answered clearly and thoroughly.
(e) The lecturer(s) used concrete examples to explain concepts.
(f) The lecturer(s) made good use of examples and illustrations.
(g) The lecturer(s) was able to simplify difficult material.
(h) The module outcomes were clearly explained.
(i) The lecturer(s) told us what we could expect to learn as a result of taking this module.
(j) The lecturer's presentation style was lively.
(k) The lecturer(s) was/were well-prepared.
(l) The lecturer(s) generally started the classes on time.
3.4 Enthusiasm
(a) The lecturer(s) encouraged students to actively participate.
(b) The lecturer(s) stimulated my interest in the subject.
(c) The lecturer(s) was enthusiastic about the subject.
(d) The lecturer(s) introduced stimulating ideas.
(e) The lecturer(s) aroused my interest when introducing an instructional activity.
(f) I felt involved in this module.
(g) In this module, I always felt motivated to learn.
(h) The lecturer(s) motivated students.
(i) The lecturer(s) stimulated students to reason and problem solve.
(j) The lecturer(s) encouraged independent thinking.
3.5 Learning and Teaching Strategies
(a) The use of information technology teaching resources helped the delivery of module material.
(b) The use of information technology resources was necessary for presenting module material.
(c) The lecturer's use of new Web-based teaching tools (e.g. posting module notes, assignments, module outlines, using email for communicating with students on WebCT) was effective.
(d) The lecturer(s) used effective teaching aids/methods.
(e) The module helped develop critical thinking.
(f) The lecturer(s) presented alternate examples when necessary.
(g). The lecturer(s) integrated lectures, texts and other assigned reading.
(h) Field trips were appropriate and effective for this module.
(i) The lecturer(s) adequately managed daily administrative details.
(j) The lecturer(s) used a variety of appropriate teaching techniques.
(k) The lecturer(s) clarified material requiring explanation.
(l) The lecturer(s) effectively dealt with thought-provoking questions.
(m) The lecturer(s) maintained an atmosphere which actively encouraged thinking and learning.
(n) The lecturer(s) appropriately demonstrated specific lab procedures.
(o) The lecturer(s) encouraged development of different problem-solving strategies.
(p) The lecturer(s) adapted instruction to varying student skill levels.
(q) The lecturer(s) was/were flexible and changed approaches to meet new situations.
(r) The lecturer(s) designed the module to meet diverse student needs.
(s) The lecturer(s) selected relevant examples.
(t) The lecturer(s) presented views other than his or her own when appropriate.
(u) The lecturer(s) demonstrated ways of learning difficult and complicated ideas.
(v) The lecturer(s) indicated topic transitions.
(w) The lecturer(s) provided a preliminary overview of lecture at the beginning of class.
(x) The lecturer(s) demonstrated how lab illustrates conceptual material.
(y) The lecturer(s) utilized knowledge of cognitive strategies and information processing to make decisions about teaching.
(z) The lecturer(s) summarized key points at the conclusion of the lecture.
(aa) The lecturer(s) responded appropriately to problem situations.
(bb) The lecturer(s) used instructional technology appropriately.
(cc) The lecturer(s) utilized alternative participation formats.
(dd) The lecturer(s) utilized a variety of activities at different levels of complexity.
(ee) The lecturer(s) encouraged active learning.
(ff) The lecturer(s) achieved closure at the end of the session.
(gg) The lecturer(s) signalled transition to a new point.
(hh) The lecturer(s) encouraged student participation by asking questions.
(ii) The lecturer(s) demonstrated enthusiasm and interest in the subject.
(jj) The lecturer(s) utilized case studies effectively.
(kk) The lecturer(s) engaged in problem-based learning (PBL).
(ll) The lecturer(s) was/were organized and displayed evidence of skilful preparation.
(mm) The lecturer(s) stimulated interest in the subject.
(nn) The lecturer(s) used appropriate learning and teaching methods.
(oo) The lecturer(s) provided clear and concise answers to student questions.
(pp) The lecturer(s) selected thought-provoking materials and activities.
(qq) The lecturer(s) skilfully facilitated class discussion.
(rr) The lecturer(s) had a realistic appraisal of students' background and experience.
(ss) The lecturer(s) effectively held class attention.
(tt) The lecturer(s) helped students develop analytical problem-solving ability.
(uu) The module helped develop skills/techniques/views needed in field.
(vv) The module fostered respect for diverse points of view.
(ww) The module helped develop decision-making abilities.
(xx) The module encouraged the development of appropriate writing strategies.
(yy) The module helped develop skills in communication and self-expression.
(zz) The module developed awareness of strategies used to gain new knowledge.
(aaa) Handouts were valuable supplements to the module.
(bbb) Group projects were well organized.
(ccc) Group projects were stimulating.
(ddd) The demonstrations and examples were helpful for learning.
(eee) The lecturer(s) drew attention to racist or sexist bias in assigned materials.
(fff) Experiments/exercises were well chosen and well organised.
(ggg) Procedures/techniques were clearly explained/demonstrated.
(hhh) Team teaching was appropriate for this the module.
3.6 Expertise
(a) The lecturer(s) was/were knowledgeable about the subject matter.
(b) The lecturer(s) helped students to develop specific practical skills needed by professionals in the field related to this module.
(c) The relevance of the subject matter to real world issues was made apparent.
(d) The lecturer(s) presented topics and materials that showed the relationship between concepts.
(e) The lecturer(s) was/were familiar with the lab equipment that students were required to use in the module.
(f) The lecturer(s) was/were up-to-date with the subject matter.
(g) The lecturer(s) was/were familiar with the software that students were required to use in the module.
4: The Module (A minimum of 5 questions from this section)
4.1 Overall Assessment
(a) Overall, this is a good module.
(b) I would recommend this module to other students.
(c) Overall, I learned a great deal from this module.
4.2 Expectations
(a) The prerequisites for this module were appropriate.
(b) The credit weighting assigned to this module were appropriate to the workload.
(c) The module outline was an accurate description of the module.
(d) This module fulfilled my expectations.
(e) In general, the level of difficulty in this module was appropriate.
4.3 Learning Outcomes
(a) The module outcomes were clearly explained.
(b) The stated goals of this module were consistently pursued.
(c) As a result of taking this module, I have more appreciation for this field of study.
(d) In this module, I have learned to value new viewpoints.
(e) This module has broadened my views greatly.
(f) This module helped me develop my creative capacities.
(g) The module content helped me explore my personal values.
(h) This module contributed significantly to my professional training.
(i) The relevance of the subject matter to real world issues was made apparent.
4.4 Module Content
(a) An appropriate amount of content was presented in this module.
(b) There was a close agreement between the stated module outcomes and what was actually taught.
(c) Module topics were dealt with in sufficient depth.
(d) The amount of work required in this module was appropriate.
(e) The module material was challenging, but not overwhelming.
(f) The overall time required for this module (class time, studying, assignments, projects, laboratory) was reasonable.
(g) The module content matched the module outcomes.
4.5 Resource Materials
(a) The module materials helped me understand the subject matter.
(b) The module materials were adequate for learning the subject matter.
(c) The assessments were appropriate.
(d) There was interesting variety in the module materials.
(e) The length of assigned readings was reasonable.
(f) The assessments helped me learn.
(g) The difficulty level of the assigned readings was appropriate.
4.6 Assessments/Evaluation
(a) The assessment methods were fair.
(b) The marking criteria was clearly explained.
(c) The assessments were clearly explained.
(d) The assessment methods reflected the important aspects of the module.
(e) I believe my final mark will accurately reflect my overall performance.
(f) The assessment(s) reflected the important aspects of the module.
4.7 Learning Activities
(a) The assessments contributed to my learning.
(b) The work required was appropriate for credit weighting given to the module.
(c) The assessments helped achieve module outcomes.
(d) The required textbook was suitable for this module.
(e) Assigned readings facilitated my understanding of module material.
(f) Assigned readings complemented the lecturer's lecture material.
(g) The amount of required reading was reasonable.
(h) The number of problems was reasonable.
(i) The level of difficulty of problems was reasonable.
(k) The assigned problems were important for understanding material.
(l) The assessments involved application of concepts discussed in class.
(m) The number and length of assessments were reasonable.
(n) The assessments reinforced the module concepts.
(o) Group projects were appropriate for this module.
(p) Experiments/exercises and activities were important supplements to the module.
(q) Experiments/activities helped me to develop important skills.
(r) Experiments/activities were of an appropriate level of difficulty.
(s) The equipment available for experiments and exercises was adequate.
(t) The equipment was in good operating condition.
(u) Access to lab/equipment/tools was adequate.
(v) Assessments required reasonable time and effort.
(w) Assessments were promptly and fairly graded and returned.
(x) Assessments required original thought.
(y) The background knowledge expected of students was realistic.
Please add any comments on the above:
Section 5: Comments
Please feel free to add your own comments on the module.
(Developed with the significant assistance of McGill University and the University of California, San Diego)
