Educational frame of reference
Study programmes did not always make explicit their educational frame of reference, although this is essential because it determines the methods and didactic approach which will be used. It can also be invaluable to ensure coherence in the otherwise diverse approaches of the professors.
Section 1
36
General considerationsTransparency of examination systems
Some study programmes have a policy, based on the university regulations, of not communicating to students their grades immediately after the examination concerned, because deliberations only take place at the end of the academic year. Other programmes do make such information available earlier, depending, again, on university regulations. The assessment committee is of the opinion that even if giving proper feedback in the form of the marks is not yet allowed by the university regulations, students ought to have some insight into their performance in order to learn from what they are doing and to understand whether their performance is under the level required, at the required level, or at a higher level. Moreover, although it appears that anonymous marking for written examinations is not yet the norm in Flanders, urgent consideration should be given to making anonymous marking standard, in accordance with international best practice.
Study time measurement
Some study programmes do not have (institutional) study time measurements in place, or are in a transitional phase, or even in a vacuum on this point. The Advanced Master’s programmes are not currently the subject of systematic evaluation and much depends on the initiative of the individual lecturers. The absence of structural study time measurements frequently resulted in the assessment committee hearing statements such as ‘students do not complain’, or ‘currently, no one has mentioned that the programme is too heavy’. This is qualitative information but it does not allow the study load (burden), to be properly monitored and remedial action to be taken where necessary. Such evaluation is an essential part of the teaching process, and should be undertaken by all study programmes without delay. It can best be organised at faculty or at university level, and the assessment committee recommends that appropriate attention be paid to this point without delay. While the individual study programmes could, and in some cases have, set up their own initiatives in this field, study time measurement is of more general interest and value, and for this reason the assessment committee suggests that the necessary instruments be developed at the broader faculty or university level and put at the disposal of the different study programmes. At the same time, at broader faculty or university level, a policy concerning regular study time measurement should be developed.
Feedback
In some courses it is apparent that students should get more and better feedback, related to their work, not simply in terms of marks, but in terms of performance, shortcomings, and suggestions for improvement. This will enable students to raise their performance level during the period of the study programme. Sometimes this deficiency appears to be linked to guest lecturers, where the lecturer is only present at a short period of time at the university. However, even in these cases,
ways of improving feedback can be devised. This is especially important for written assignments. Students should have a right to receive feedback within a reasonable time on the papers they have produced otherwise it becomes very hard for students to raise their standards.
Deadline for the Master’s thesis
Some study programmes rely on the summer holidays to allow students to finish their Master’s thesis; and others do not take into account when that Master’s thesis has been handed in (June or September) in deciding on the marks to be awarded. The assessment committee is particularly in favour of clear and strict deadlines for the submission of the Master’s thesis, but it recognizes that the choice of June or September as such is a matter for the study programmes themselves. Nevertheless, the maintenance of a clear requirement and deadline helps to ensure equal treatment of all the students, to guarantee clear standards, and to obviate a temptation for students to postpone submitting their Master’s thesis in order to get a higher grade. Obviously there may be circumstances in which it is perfectly legitimate for a student to seek a postponement, but they should be evaluated on an individual basis, and there should be no culture of slippage of deadlines. Moreover, some study programmes which, as a general rule, permit Master’s theses to be submitted in September should carefully consider the risk of this resulting in a higher effective study load than the norm of 60 ECTS.
Students’ proficiency in English as a working language
The maintenance of a high standard of English for admission purposes is essential to ensure that students can cope adequately with the level required for a good understanding of their courses. It seems that the TOEFL / IELTS tests do not always guarantee that the student has sufficient proficiency in English. It may be possible to devise other ways of testing the student’s fluency in English, both in writing and in speech: they might be telephoned before the admission decision is taken, in order to check their spoken English, and they could be asked to submit examples of graded written work in English.