Student evaluation of teaching in 2020/21 (report)

Report of the Evaluation Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Pilsen for the year 2020/21

In the academic year 2020/21, a traditional survey on the quality of teaching was conducted among students. In the survey, students evaluated individual courses (practicum and lectures) and teachers. The evaluation was in the form of a response to a single prompt "Rate the course" using a rating scale: excellent, above average, average, below average, poor for each taught course (lectures and practicals separately). The question was accompanied by the following instructional text: 'Focus especially on the clear definition of teaching objectives and their fulfilment, the organisation of teaching, the stimulation of independent thinking, the opening of space for discussion, the continuity with other subjects, the quality and availability of study materials'. In total, approximately 16% of students participated in the survey (352 voters from 2011, percentage calculated from the total number of Master's students as of 16 May 2021; last year 28%). Students added 1239 verbal comments on individual courses, teachers and the study department and non-teaching departments of the Faculty (canteen, dean's office ...), of which 166 were from international students.

The evaluation committee went through the individual comments and classified them according to their content into positive, negative, neutral, irrelevant and unclear. Similar to the previous year, positive comments dominated - 74% (compared to 69%, 68%, 64%, 59% and 58% in 2019/202018/19, 2017/18, 2016/17 and 2015/16 respectively), while negative comments were written by students in 15% (compared to 15%, 17%, 17% and 24% in 202019/20, 2018/19, 2017/18, 2016/17 and 2015/16 respectively). Neutral and irrelevant comments therefore accounted for 9% and 2% of all comments respectively.

Information on the availability of the Teaching Quality Assessment results is provided in the section at the end of the report. 

Evaluation of departments

This type of evaluation provides an indicative global view of the pedagogical activities of the department. It is a summary parameter that can be generated from several differently evaluated courses (compulsory and optional ...). The evaluation of each department includes a number of comments, based on which we have developed the SWOT analysis used in previous years, simplifying it and giving emphasis to specific suggestions for solving problems and discussing them with the heads of departments.

Figure 1: Percentages of irrelevant, negative, neutral and positive comments in the student survey; departments are ranked in ascending order of number of comments (numbers of comments are shown after the department name) in the 2020/21 academic year.

The individual results (numerical ratings, comments) are always available in SIS in the following range (by role):

• Heads of department or school representatives: all ratings and comments for the respective department.

• individual teachers: numerical ratings and comments for their own person only.

• The following is a list of comments sent to the heads of department and their responses 

SURGERY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 47

Analysis of this clinic was beyond the capacity of the student teaching evaluation committee this year.

DERMATOVENEROLOGY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 9

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational assessment and derive recommendations. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

PAEDIATRIC DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 2

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive a recommendation. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

GYNAECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 5

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive a recommendation. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

1. INTERNAL MEDICINE DEPARTMENT 1

Number of comments = 33

• Positive aspects: Students generally praise the lectures and mastery of online learning. They also appreciate the storage of lectures on Moodle for possible re-watching.
• Aspects for improvement: Add lectures from Internal Propedeutics and Internal Medicine I to Moodle as well to make the materials complete. Teach students how to fill out decurse forms, basic skills with the information system (Medicalc). Pay more attention to adherence to the syllabus, students complain about the lack of organisation and systematicity of the teaching practice. Some departments/topics have students more than once and some not at all.
• Suggestions for solutions: Basic skills with IS can be included in the course Fundamentals of Clinical Medicine or one hour of teaching can be devoted to them. Introduce a fixed system of rotating teaching/students in each department by semester so that each student has the opportunity to spend at least one semester in each department to cover all topics for the entire course.
• Departmental Response and Changes Implemented: The Chair agreed with the suggestions and will try to implement a fixed rotation system for teaching. The remaining lectures are being filmed and added to as time goes on.

2.  INTERNAL MEDICINE DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 18

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive recommendations. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

CARDIOLOGY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 3

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational assessment and derive recommendations. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

DEPARTMENT OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, RESUSCITATION AND INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE

Number of comments = 6

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive recommendations. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

DEPARTMENT OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND TRAVEL MEDICINE

Number of comments = 4

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational assessment and derive recommendations. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

DEPARTMENT OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL TRAUMATOLOGY

Number of comments = 5

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to conduct a rational evaluation and derive recommendations. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

DEPARTMENT OF PNEUMOLOGY AND PHTHISIOLOGY

Number of comments = 1

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive a recommendation. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

CLINICAL IMAGING DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 47

• Positive aspects: students generally praised the teaching style, the excellent explanation and the availability of materials. In particular, they appreciate Professor Jan Baxa, also Associate Professor Hynek Mírka. Students found the connection with anatomy and its repetition excellent. They also appreciated the opportunity to participate in the questionnaires during the classes of Associate Professor Hynek Mírka.
• Aspects to improve: We were not able to make constructive suggestions from the survey comments. The comments were mostly complimentary.

NEUROLOGY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 15

• Positive aspects: students overwhelmingly praised the elaborate online teaching, the very interesting interactive lectures, and they also appreciated the smooth communication with the secretariat.
• Aspects for improvement: Unfortunately, there was negative feedback on Dr. Sucha's teaching. Students are not comfortable with the teaching style and approach to students.
• Suggestions for solutions: As these comments have been repeated in the past, we have asked the Chair if you could sensitively discuss this with Dr Sucha. Of course, we do not want this fact to give the impression that students do not value the time given to them by the lecturers.
• Departmental response and changes implemented: the Head of Department commented on the problem that he found Dr Suchá's teaching to be of high quality and that he personally took great care to ensure that the students enjoyed the seminars and lectures and were satisfied with the delivery. 

OPHTHALMOLOGY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 5

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational assessment and derive recommendations. So the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

ONCOLOGY AND RADIOTHERAPY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 4

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive a recommendation. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY CLINIC

Number of comments = 2

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive a recommendation. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

PSYCHIATRY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 32

CLINICAL DENTISTRY

Number of comments = 45

• Positive aspects: students generally praise the lectures and mastery of online learning. They also appreciate the storage of lectures on Moodle for possible re-watching. 
• Aspects for improvement: 4th year students do not get extractions in the Stomatology department, especially the afternoon groups when mainly checks are booked. Simple extractions are not booked. Almost no or a small number of patients are being booked for the afternoons on all wards. The 2nd year students feel that they spend little time in the chair, they also complain of problems with the dates of the Periodontology test, which is a requirement for the Preclinical Dentistry exam.
• Suggestions for solutions: students suggest booking patients into the Stomatology Department for simple extractions, then booking more patients in the afternoon or switching with the morning groups mid-semester. Second year students suggest that the periodontal test could be taken earlier or not be a requirement for the exam
• Department response and changes implemented: Recorded lectures will remain available on Moodle, although they were originally intended to be available for a limited time. Due to the dissatisfaction of some lecturers with the currently recorded lectures, some recordings will be removed at their request. However, the Chair is confident that replacement study materials will be provided by lecturers upon request from students. There is an effort to order simple extractions based on student suggestions, but it must be taken into account that this is a specialised department. Simple extractions can be performed in the outpatient clinics. Procedures are also ordered for afternoon classes, but only in smaller numbers due to the limited time to resolve potential complications. According to the clinic's statement, the time spent in the chair in the 2nd year is sufficient for basic familiarisation. A prerequisite for passing the periodontology test is the presentation of all periodontology lectures, therefore the block of these lectures will be moved and the test will be taken earlier.

UROLOGY DEPARTMENT

Number of comments = 9

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational assessment and derive a recommendation. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

ŠIKL INSTITUTE OF PATHOLOGY

Number of comments = 64

• Positive aspects: students generally praise the interesting lectures, which are excellently led by, for example, Professor Ondřej Daum, MD, PhD.. The Institute has well prepared teaching materials for the exam, including slides. Students rated the Department of Pathology as the one that best handled distance lectures and exercises. They also appreciated the recording of lectures and the human approach of the lecturers.
• Aspects for improvement: We were not able to make constructive suggestions from the survey comments.

DEPARTMENT OF ANATOMY

Number of comments = 248

• Positive Aspects: Students praised the handling of online learning, the great educational videos and the materials created for distance learning. Prof. Ferda's great Radiology seminar.
• Aspects for improvement: Students were not satisfied with the teaching concept in terms of lack of continuity of the material discussed in the practicals and lectures. The disproportion between the difficulty of each subject and the time allocated to it (extensive and more difficult subjects have the same or less time than simpler subjects at the beginning of the winter semester). Lack of awareness of the organisation of the course and late communication of information about the conditions and content of the final assessment.
• Dissatisfaction with a particular lecturer - punctuality, behaviour and systematics of teaching.
• Suggestions for solutions:  Comprehensiveness and consistency of information about the organisation of teaching and final evaluation of students. Improvement of continuity and time allocation for individual topics. Communication of the issue of student complaints against specific teachers. Addition of Czech subtitles to the tutorial videos.
• Department response and changes implemented: according to the department management, the issue of some negative comments was due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the death of Associate Professor Fiala.

INSTITUTE OF BIOPHYSICS

Number of comments = 74

• Positive aspects: students highly praised the mastery of distance learning and the possibility to upload lectures on Moodle. They also praised the lecturers and the management of the class.
• Aspects for improvement: Students would appreciate a single source of exam materials.
• Suggestions for solutions: For example, create some form of script on Moodle/Mefanet where the material would be coherent.
• Departmental response and changes implemented: The department thanks the students for their positive evaluation. The Institute is working on the teaching materials and is continuously adding to them.

DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY

Number of comments = 61

• Positive aspects: students generally praised the mastery of distance learning.  They really liked the attitude of the instructors towards teaching and also towards the students.
• Aspects for improvement: We were not able to make constructive suggestions from the survey comments.
• No suggestions for solutions.
• Departmental response and changes implemented: The department thanked for the good news.

INSTITUTE OF PHARMACOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY

Number of comments = 58

The analysis of this department was beyond the capacity of the student teaching evaluation committee this year.

INSTITUTE OF PHYSIOLOGY

Number of comments = 30

• Positive aspects : Students praised the beautiful lectures which prepared them well for the exam.
• Aspects to address: in some comments, students complained about the inferior quality of the recordings, but this was a problem that only stemmed from the inconvenience of online teaching.
• Suggestions for improving the teaching: Students expressed a request that more time could be given to the Blood and Immunity chapter in the practical and lectures to better prepare them for the exam.
• Department response and changes implemented:

The preceptor commented on the issue, stating that he felt the hourly allotment for the curriculum was sufficient and they are still continuing to record the lectures and are working on modifying their processing

INSTITUTE OF HISTOLOGY AND EMBRYOLOGY

Number of comments = 75

The analysis of this department was beyond the capacity of the student teaching evaluation committee this year.

INSTITUTE OF HYGIENE AND PREVENTIVE MEDICINE

Number of comments = 2

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational assessment and derive recommendations. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

INSTITUTE OF IMMUNOLOGY AND ALLERGY

Number of comments = 13

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive a recommendation. Thus, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGES

Number of comments = 79

German language:  

• Positive aspects: students highly praised the prepared online lessons and the involvement of the teachers. The students appreciate that the teaching is very interactive and not just learning phrases from textbooks. The students appreciate the time that the teachers give them beyond the lessons.
• Aspects for improvement: Some students mentioned in their comments that unfortunately they did not have the high level of language required to enrol in the course, but they did not know this beforehand because it was not mentioned anywhere.
• Suggestions for solutions: students suggested whether it would be possible to better describe in the SIS information what a student needs to know in order not to have problems in the future if he/she decides to enrol in the course.

English language:

• Positive aspects: Students were very appreciative of the elaborate online learning and the involvement of the teachers. They very much appreciated the personal approach and enthusiasm for teaching, as well as the time that the tutors are willing to give to the students beyond the practicum hours. 
•  Aspects for improvement: Unfortunately, some comments mentioned that students are not satisfied with the distribution of students with different language levels in the classes. Unfortunately, some students did not have the language level to keep up with their colleagues, while other students were able to handle more difficult issues but had to keep up with their colleagues who needed more time. Furthermore, students negatively evaluated the amount of homework in relation to the amount of responsibilities from other subjects. They would rather be able to cover the main chapters in class and just repeat the class issues at home as a refresher. Furthermore, some students did not like the crowding of students in the corridors of the institute during exam periods. We drew only from relevant comments.
• Suggestions for solutions: Inquire about the possibility of grouping students together on practicals so that those with the same language level attend practicals together. Furthermore, we would like to ask on behalf of the students whether the timing of the students' examinations could be better staggered given the current epidemiological situation. 

Latin

• Positive aspects: students appreciate the organised learning, the materials on the Moodle platform, which are very beneficial for them. Above all, they like the individual approach of the teachers to the students when they need to clarify the material.
• Aspects for improvement: Students do not like the pressure from the lecturers to acquire new scripts, which are issued every year, but they are hardly different from the scripts from previous years, which students acquire from older classmates. Further, students are concerned that they will not be able to handle the instruction conducted as online-only instruction in the second part of the course.
• Suggestions for streamlining teaching: The department was asked if it would be possible to discuss the return of purely face-to-face teaching in the future if further surveys showed that students' concerns were realised and most would not be able to learn the subject from the materials alone. 
• Departmental Response and Changes Implemented: The requested changes will be discussed and debated with those in charge. Only the division of groups in language teaching according to difficulty was already rejected this year by the Vice-Dean Prof. MUDr. Jiří Ferda, Ph.D.

INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL BIOCHEMISTRY AND HAEMATOLOGY

Number of comments = 16

INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL CHEMISTRY AND BIOCHEMISTRY

Number of comments = 109

• Positive aspects. Students also appreciate the availability of quality study materials.
• Aspects for improvement: If it were necessary to repeat the exercises in an online format, students would appreciate an expansion of resources for the lab exercises, e.g., in the form of video of the lab and adaptation of the required protocols.
• Suggestions for solutions: No suggestions.

INSTITUTE OF MICROBIOLOGY

Number of comments = 18

• Positive aspects: students were very appreciative of the mastery of distance learning. They also appreciated the accessible materials and exam handouts.
• Aspects for improvement: We were not able to make constructive suggestions from the survey comments.
• No suggestions for solutions.
• Departmental Response and Changes Implemented: The department creates its own questionnaires each year and dynamically adjusts the teaching and evaluates the changes implemented based on the results.

INSTITUTE OF PATHOLOGICAL PHYSIOLOGY

Number of comments = 39

• Positive aspects: students overwhelmingly praise the teaching, especially the practicum, as preparation for the exam as well as the integration of knowledge from other subjects.
• Aspects for improvement: Overall very well rated study materials would be appreciated by students in an integrated and printable format.
• Suggestions for solutions.

INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL AND POST-ACUTE MEDICINE

Number of comments = 2

Due to the very low number of comments, it was not possible to make a rational evaluation and derive recommendations. Therefore, the main recommendation for next year is to motivate students to provide feedback.

INSTITUTE OF FORENSIC MEDICINE

Number of comments = 4

• Positive aspects: students praised the organised online learning which was a very good preparation for the exam.
• Aspects to address: As there were not enough comments and all the comments sent were positive, we did not prepare any suggestions for a solution. The students would like to see more interesting cases in the future if the lessons were conducted in a face-to-face manner. However, we understand that this was just an inconvenience that resulted from epidemiological measures and in the future there will be no need to address these complaints.

INSTITUTE OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND ACTIVE HEALTH

Number of comments = 3

• Positive Aspects: The students praised you highly for your elaborate online teaching. The lectures were very interesting, enjoyable and clear. The lecturers were very inspiring to the students. Students also appreciated the smooth communication with the institute management.
• Aspects to address: Since there were not enough comments and all the comments sent were positive, we did not prepare any suggestions for a solution.

Institute of Physical Education

Number of comments = 29

• Positive Aspects: Students generally praise the teaching approach of all the teachers of your department. This is even in an era of online teaching that has moved to the Strava app.
• Aspects for improvement: Students only had the choice of running and walking, and would appreciate more sports to record activity (rowing, weight training, self-defence). After completing the kinesio taping elective, students would like to receive a certificate of completion.
• Suggestions for solutions. Students would appreciate a new elective/course that would cover self-defence due to the increasing cases of assaults on health professionals.
• Department Response and Changes Implemented: The Physical Education Department responded with a thank you for the proposed changes. A self-defence course was held. After the kinesio taping course, the institute prepared a certificate for the participants.

 Suggestions for improving the poll

The Teaching Evaluation Committee seeks to systematically improve both the evaluation of the data collected and the validity of the source data. For the fifth year now, we have followed a transparent methodology (see Appendix 1) for the evaluation and have optimised the survey questions, the processing of the results and the organisation of the survey based on feedback from students and teachers. The principles of the course of evaluation of teaching by students at our faculty are summarised in the measure of the Dean (No. 10/2017) Evaluation of teaching by students of the Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University.

In this edition, we developed the SWOT analysis used in previous editions, simplified it and put emphasis on specific proposals for solving problems and discussing them with the heads of departments.

The essential task for the next round of the survey is to improve the promotion and develop a general discussion about the meaning of the survey and its contribution to the further development of teaching at the faculty.

Suggestions for improving the work of the committee should be sent to the chair of the committee or any member of the committee (see this page for an updated list of members)

Conclusion 

The set rules for the evaluation of the quality of teaching at the Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen and the involvement of the committee evaluation of the results allows us to give valuable feedback to the teachers and the faculty management. It is very important both to work rationally and conscientiously with the information obtained and to be aware of the limits of the survey evaluation. The committee honours and further develops these principles.

The Teaching Evaluation Committee is open to all suggestions from the academic community. Some suggestions have led to desirable changes in the survey. However, the basic goal must remain the same: to improve the quality of teaching at our faculty.

The results of the poll will be available:

1. publicly (on the faculty website)

1. this report

2. in SIS freely accessible (instructions)

1. numerical ratings for individual courses and instructors

3. in SIS accessible after login (instructions)

1. free comments on courses and individual lecturers (only to the relevant lecturers and their supervisors)

The publicly accessible parts of the report can be included in the Faculty Annual Report (selected passages only) and the Information Report on the course of student evaluation of teaching in our Faculty (for the Rector's Office).

Objections, comments and questions about the content of the report can be sent within 30 days of its publication on the Faculty's website to rajdl@fnplzen.cz.

 Composition of the Student Teaching Evaluation Committee that produced the report

FILES FOR DOWNLOAD

Methodology for the evaluation of the results of the Consensus of the Commission for the Evaluation of Teaching at LFP, survey 2020/21 

The aim of this methodology is to establish transparent rules for the evaluation of the results obtained from the student survey. However, their final application depends on the actual data structure and it is common that the methodology needs to be adjusted during the actual evaluation (e.g. results clearly do not correspond to reality, criteria set discriminate or favour a certain evaluated group ...). The survey adds a qualitative dimension (how well someone teaches), not a quantitative one, to the view of the workplace and individual teachers.

Numerical evaluation

● includes both teacher ratings (aggregated across all subjects taught) and department ratings (individual subjects separately and aggregated across all subjects - including optional subjects for which the department provides teaching)

● the percentage of students who participated in the voting is calculated from the number of master's students studying as of 15 May of the summer semester of the academic year being evaluated

● non-valid data - non-teaching lecturers; comments that do not make sense in the context of the course, etc. should be excluded in advance. In particular, the evaluated department provides the survey administrator with an initiative to review the validity of the data (e.g. reports that a teacher who does not teach the subject has been evaluated).

● participation required in the survey - we proceed on a department-by-department basis; numerical ratings are a non-specific representation of what students describe in their open-ended comments. We place most emphasis on their analysis.

Comments

The primary importance of comments is to draw attention to a particular problem, praise a particular activity, etc., and then ev. to negotiate a remedy, to secure praise ...

We classify comments into positive, negative (and other categories - neutral, vague and irrelevant). We will review the unclear comments and try to "clarify" them.

The result will be:

● number of positive comments about the relevant department/teacher.

● the number of negative comments about the relevant workplace/teacher

The classification of comments helps us to understand the reasons for the results of the numerical evaluation and to find possible solutions. We have further developed the SWOT analysis used in previous years, simplifying it and putting emphasis on concrete suggestions for solving problems and discussing them with the heads of departments.

What will be published to whom

● The numerical evaluation of individual subjects and teachers will be visible to all in SIS

● comments will be visible to the teacher concerned and their supervisor in SIS

● the evaluation report will be publicly available