[edgt_separator type='full-width' position='center' border_style='solid' color='#ebebeb' width='' thickness='1' top_margin='10' bottom_margin='21' ]
Image Alt

Statistics / Quick Facts

School of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences

Program Evaluation


Ten programs have been evaluated by the students in fall semester, 2017-2018. The presented survey covered the following programs at BA level: English Philology and American Studies; at MA level: US Foreign Affairs, English Philology, Methods of English Language Teaching, General Education Administration, Higher Education Administration, Caucasian Studies; PhD level: Education Sciences and Teacher Training program. The participants were the students with minimum 81 GPA. Totally 42 subjects participated in the survey.

The main purpose of the study was to identify the students’ general satisfaction level and get their opinions regarding the content, feasibility, assessment, flexibility, counselling, lecturers, communication, information, resources and quality assurance of the program. The students were also granted with the opportunity to write their comments and recommendations freely. Below presented figure shows students’ general evaluation of the programs.


The majority of the subjects (86%) evaluated the programs with the highest points. Some recommendations were given to the program coordinators in terms of program flexibility and communication of exam results.

Course Evaluation


The courses were evaluated by all students involved in the programs. 96 courses were evaluated by the students. 1304 responses were collected for analysis. The obtained data revealed the average 4.68 (out of 5), which stresses out quite a high level of students’ satisfaction regarding the courses offered at the faculty. The program coordinators were provided with concrete recommendations, which will be taken into account from next academic year.

Lecturer Evaluation


21 lecturers (14 academic and 7 invited) were evaluated through the following criteria: variety of testing items, updating testing items, submitting exam questions, inserting grades on time, using SMART and SIS platforms. These components are monitored by the quality assurance manager. The overall evaluation also contains the survey results obtained through students’ questionnaires.

Students use 5-point scale to evaluate the lecturers. Average rating for the academic staff is 4.7 (out of 5) and 4.73 (out of 5) for the invited staff. Average rating of general evaluation for the academic staff is 32.89 (out of 35) and 44.80 (out of 50) for the invited staff.

Individual Plans


The programs reveal an individual approach towards the students in case of mobility and status restoration. The individual plans are also worked out for the students with special needs and low academic achievements.

Within the internal and external mobility processes 51 course mappings have been created on individual basis since 2013 at the faculty. Within the status restoration processes 81 course mappings have been created on individual basis since 2013 at the faculty.

We have one student with special needs, who is granted with the opportunity to have more time at the exams.

Students with low academic achievements are granted with the opportunity to have extra English classes. The project started in 2016 and 72 students have been trained so far.