Aspect Description
1. Presentation of the course syllabus/contract at the beginning of the term (applicable only to lecturers during the first session)
2. Use of relevant and up-to-date reference books/literature
3. Alignment of the actual course delivery with the assigned credit (SKS) load
4. Consistency of the material presented with the course syllabus/contract
5. Course content that motivates students to further develop their knowledge
6. Provision of opportunities for students to ask questions and engage in discussion
7. The lecturer’s attitude, behavior, and appearance during the course sessions
8. Allocation of a realistic timeframe for the completion of assignments
9. Appropriate weighting of assignments, tests, and examinations in the final grade calculation
10. Provision of constructive feedback on student learning outcomes (assignments, exams, quizzes, etc.)
ANALYSIS AND FOLLOW-UP
Analysis:
The lecturer’s role in the learning process is rated very highly, with 51.52% of responses falling into the “very good” category, followed by 43.67% “good,” 3.77% “fair,” and 1.05% “poor.” However, the three aspects with the lowest “very good” ratings are:
1. Providing a realistic timeframe for the completion of assignments (48.82%)
2. Appropriateness of the weighting (proportions) of assignments, tests, and examinations in the final grade (48.86%)
3. Providing constructive feedback on student learning outcomes (assignments, examinations, quizzes, etc.) (47.12%)
Conversely, the three aspects with the highest “very good” ratings are:
1. Communicating the course syllabus/contract at the beginning of the term (applicable to lecturers during the first session) (56.93%)
2. Alignment of the material presented with the course syllabus/contract (53.04%)
3. Providing opportunities for students to ask questions and engage in discussion (54.66%)
Follow-up actions:
To address the results of the analysis above, the following steps will be taken:
1. Communicating the course evaluation results to all lecturers in the Biomedical Engineering undergraduate program, either through department meetings or individual discussions.
2. The Head of the Study Program (KPS) will encourage and motivate all faculty members to continuously improve their personal performance in teaching and learning activities, specifically by providing constructive feedback on student learning outcomes.
3. The Head of the Study Program (KPS) will encourage all faculty members to provide a realistic timeframe for the completion of assignments.
4. The Head of the Study Program (KPS) will encourage all faculty members to provide constructive feedback on student learning outcomes (assignments, examinations, quizzes, etc.).