Our university executed Mid Lecture Evaluation for the first time.
The midterm lecture evaluation was executed by students to improve lectures last month. The evaluation targeted all of this semester’s lectures except (△Bedside Trainning △Recital lectures of College of Arts △SDU lectures △Placement △Military Science). The midterm lecture evaluation consisted of 5 multiple choice questions and 2 short-answer questions. Ryu Ji-hee, a staff of Academic Affairs Office, said “The questions were so brief that students might not spend their time so much.” And she said “The 2 short-answer questions would let students comment their opinions about their classes.” Because previous midterm lecture evaluation was conducted once a semester, the result has usually been reflected next semester. Because the result of the evaluation is only used in data for lecture improvement, it wouldn’t be reflected in professor performance assessment and the students who didn’t participate in the evaluation will not have any disadvantages.
The students who participated in the evaluation felt satisfied. Kim Ji-yoon (Communication 3) said “I was satisfied that as soon as the midterm exam ended, the result of the evaluation was reflected in the class.” And she said “It seems that we have communication between professors and students. Professor mentioned the results and suggested improvement directions to the students.” Lee Ju-yeong (Electronics Engineering 3) said “I felt satisfied during the short-answer questions where I could mention trivial complaints. For example, programs treated in the class weren’t installed in computers.”
However, the problem with the evaluation was a low participation rate. According to the Academic Affairs Office, the entire participation rate was 27.43%, which had low value as the sample. It was not significant enough to reflect in feedback. Oh Mi-yeong (Business Administration 3) said “I didn’t know that there was the midterm lecture evaluation.” And she said “I would’ve participated in the evaluation if I knew this in advance.”
Ryu Ji-hee, a staff of Academic Affairs Office, said “We will increase the participation rate through various information activities without any compulsion.” And she said “I wish you knew that student’s participation could make lectures better.”
Meanwhile, some students were concerned about the increase in perfunctory systems. Noh Eun-jin (Medicinal Biotechnology 3) said “I’m not sure how it could improve the lectures because the questions were rather commonplace and short.”
Academic Affairs Office responded that “We prepared evaluations to have best effect with short questions.” And they said “We want students to participate in the evaluation especially in the short-answer questions to make their opinions reflected in lecture improvement.”
