Page 148 - Proceedings-edit-2021_09_20-final

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

Discussion and Conclusions

Anticipated Problems in Implementing the Centralized Strategy

The centralization will create files with huge volumes of data. Poor handling of the files may lead to a

data loss or data may be inaccessible to the end-users. Therefore, appropriate backing up is necessary.
Annual cleanup of the databases could prevent data buildup. However, this will remove access to the

past data. The use of pivot tables provided by Google sheets becomes intricate if the number of
questions in the feedback form is high, the number of answers is high and answers are complicated.

The actions taken by the HOD on the feedback could embarrass the teachers if both parties handled

those actions unprofessionally. Teachers’ perceptions and professionalism are key factors in the whole
feedback-response process (Arthur, 2009). However, the system cannot provide solutions to such

issues. Seemingly, there is no way to ensure that the appropriate action has been taken for the feedback
without exposing the information to a superior or supervisor. Individual faculties may decide their own

follow up activities.

Prospects of Improving the System

If a bespoke software solution can be developed by the institution instead of using common platforms

such as Google, the process of data access would be simple with tailormade interfaces. Further, student
participation can be made compulsory for feedback surveys without exposing the identity of the

students to the teachers.

While acting as an interim solution the centralized feedback management system proposed in this
paper provides an insight into the shape of the software platform that needs to be incorporated into

MIS or LMS to manage student feedback and peer evaluation. The follow up activities may differ from

faculty to faculty of the university. Accordingly, various modifications to the system may be
necessary.

References

Arthur, L. (2009) From performativity to professionalism: lecturers’ responses to student feedback,

Teach. High. Educ, 14, p441–454.

Jha, M., Jha, S., Cowling, M., Clark, D. and Picton, J. (2019) A Proposal for Enhancing Students’

Evaluations through an Adaptive and Progressive Digital Feedback System, in: Wei, S.C.Y., Mun,
C.K., Alphonso, A. (eds.), 36th International Conference of Innovation, Practice and Research in the

Use of Educational Technologies in Tertiary Education. Singapore, p458–463.

131