Students’ feedback of teaching work - academic year 2023/24

Dear Instructors! Dear Students!

The academic year 2023/24 has brought changes from certain aspects in relation to the students’ evaluation of the Faculty's teaching work (OMHV). Hereby, we present the most important information according to each feedback procedures.

End-of-semester feedback through Neptun

In the fall semester of the academic year 2023-24 altogether around 117,000 student feedbacks were received and around 107,000 responses were received in the spring semester. This demonstrates a completion rate of around 80%, similar to previous years. The results that can be considered valid in this way also served as criteria during the distribution of the "Celebration of Teachers 2024" awards.

Unlike before, the individual results of the instructors are not available within the Neptun system, however, personalized tables were sent by email, which included the evaluations of the previous three academic years. The summary reports for the academic year were sent to the heads of departments via email. In the Appendix you can find the list of our highest-rated departments and instructors by the language of instruction based on the results of both the fall and spring semesters. In addition to the quantified data, many students also expressed their opinions in text remarks. We have summarized their affirmative feedback and constructive comments below.

The following positive feedbacks repeatedly occurred in relation to the various forms of education:

• In regard of the lectures several positive opinions were received about the enthusiastic, well-prepared and in the case of foreign students, the linguistically high-quality lecturers. Sharing personal stories and experiences, including humour also appeared repeatedly as important tools of maintaining attention, as well as the online tasks, the opportunity to ask questions during class, or highlighting more clinically relevant aspects of theoretical topics.
• In the comments received on seminars and practices, students often expressed their gratitude for the encouragement and psychological support from their instructors. They also considered it useful if their practice leaders used or recommended digital educational platforms and reliable learning resources (e.g. Slido, Biochemcity). The students repeatedly emphasized the usefulness of the mid-semester "progress indicators", i.e. the short, no-stakes knowledge-measuring tests.
• In case of assessments the students particularly appreciated the humane, constructive attitude of the examiner, regardless of their performance, which could ease repeated preparation even in the event of failure. According to their feedback, learning was supported by the detailed subject headings or topic outlines, as well as by knowing the minimum requirements that could case failure.

The students most often emphasized the following topics as criticisms and areas to be improved:

• During lectures it happened that certain topics were not weighted based on importance or prevalence, which made the identification of the focal points in terms of exams and the subsequent clinical work difficult. In addition, it also occurred that no slides or not the current slides were uploaded to POTEPedia, even though they can serve as a reliable guide and great help during preparation.
• During practices students in some cases apprehended significant difference between the practice leaders, which could have led to different preparation opportunities. Furthermore, students’ demand emerged also for more practical teaching methods in the case of clinical subjects. The students would be happy if they had the possibility to be exempted from some of the classes in exchange to spending time in the emergency room, specialist clinic or operating room.
• Regarding the exams students would appreciate the most if the requirements were unified and transparent and the assessments were as objective as possible. The occasionally insufficient technical conduct of the exams, the uncertain starting and waiting times put extra burden on the students.

Quick feedback through POTEcho

In the spring semester of the academic year 2022-23, in addition to the end-of-semester feedback through the Neptun system, the automated POTEcho system was also launched, which provides the possibility to give short feedback during the semester, immediately after the classes. In the fall semester of the academic year 2023-24, 1121 students took advantage of this possibility, supporting the work of the instructors with a total of 18570 evaluations, while in the spring semester 875 students gave 15259 feedback. Similarly to the current reports, the results of the previous academic year are available in the POTEcho system. (More information on POTEcho can be found at the website.)

Students’ evaluation of professional practices (General Medicine major)

Following the introductory survey of the academic year 2022-23, the students could evaluate their summer practices and their rotational year practices according to predetermined criteria in this academic year as well. In relation to the summer practices in Hospital Care, Internal Medicine and Surgery, 190 evaluations were received from the three language programs, of which 77 related to the Clinical Centre's practices. A total of 256 completions were received for the rotational year practices, while a total of 223 completions were received for the rotational year exams. In the current academic year, the rotational year data collection is continuous until the final closing examination, students can access it on the website of the Registrar’s Office.

For the sake of improvement of the feedback culture, the Committee's document library contains a recommendation for students regarding the writing of free text responses, as well as a recommendation for instructors regarding the interpretation of the feedback results. We trust that responsible student evaluations and suggestions, as well as their thoughtful interpretation by instructors, can contribute to the strengthening of instructor-student partnerships, trust, the development of education and, in accordance with our traditions, the training of high-quality doctors.

 

Wishing you a continued successful year, with respect,

Prof. Dr. Zsuzsanna Füzesi, chair

Dr. Gergely Csaba, secretary

UP MS Feedback Committee

 

Documents