Page 147 - Proceedings-edit-2021_09_20-final

© Proceedings of the Ruhuna Quality Assurance Sessions 2021 (RUQAS 2021)
st
21 September 2021

Figure 1: Operational structure of the monitoring system

The Mechanism of Encouraging Teachers to Respond to the Feedback

When the filters and the graphs are in place, respective sheets will be shared with respective teachers
and the head of the particular department. Access to the data cells in the Google sheet will be restricted

so that the data cannot be modified by any of the users. Filters will be available to the users to select

the necessary data.

The course of action after receiving the feedback depends on the type of feedback received. If the
teacher or a particular course has poor feedback the HOD may contact the teacher and discuss the

issues and find appropriate solutions. For example, if there is no improvement in the teaching strategy

even after several feedback-response cycles the HOD may talk to the teacher. This approach allows the
teacher to adjust and minimize the chances for conflicts.

The same process applies to peer evaluation. The peer evaluation could be relatively simple technically

since the number of participants is less. A form that supports mobile phones would enable the peer to
fill the form without any hassle. The Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ruhuna has already adopted

a strategy to identify the peers who evaluate individual teachers at the beginning of a given semester.
This paper only proposes a technical solution to gather feedback and a follow-up strategy. Each faculty

may decide its own follow-up strategy and other factors such as time and frequency of feedback

collection.

130