Feedback Survey Procedure

On this page

Purpose | Scope | Principles | Procedure statements | Roles and responsibilities | Definitions | Approval information | Version history | References

1. Purpose

1.1 The Feedback Survey Procedure (the procedure) supports the implementation of the Feedback Survey Policy (the policy).

2. Scope

2.1 The scope of the policy applies for this procedure.

3. Principles

3.1 The principles outlined in the policy apply for this procedure.

4. Procedure statements

Distribution and promotion of the Student Feedback Survey for coursework subjects

4.1 Performance Evaluation in the Data Analytics and Insights Unit (Performance Evaluation), in consultation with faculties, coordinates the distribution and collection of the coursework Student Feedback Survey (SFS). Faculties are responsible for ensuring that spreadsheets are correct, up-to-date and submitted on time. Further information is available at Student Feedback Survey and Student feedback and surveys (Staff Connect).

4.2 Academic staff must provide the faculty SFS administrator with the correct class, subject information, learning modes and details of their subject activities (such as workshops, lectures, seminars, laboratories and tutorials) for submission to the SFS in line with the SFS Learning Mode Selection and Creation Protocol (available at Student feedback and surveys (Staff Connect)).

4.3 Teaching staff must be correctly assigned to their respective SFS before each survey period begins. Performance Evaluation should be notified of any changes to teaching allocations before the survey is released. Teaching staff assigned to an SFS cannot be changed once the survey opens.

4.4 Faculty SFS administrators must:

  1. check that each subject is surveyed at least once an academic year
  2. ensure that any instances where student subject activity allocations on central systems are inconsistent with actual class allocations are brought to the attention of Performance Evaluation, the relevant academic staff and the associate dean (teaching and learning)
  3. validate and record the details of each survey, and submit a completed SFS orders spreadsheet to Performance Evaluation as requested by Performance Evaluation.

4.5 Performance Evaluation coordinates general promotion of the SFS to students via emails, social and digital media, UTS’s learning management system and other promotional materials.

Distribution and promotion of the Short Forms of Learning Feedback Survey

4.6 All short forms of learning (short courses and microcredentials) must be surveyed via the Short Forms of Learning Feedback Survey (SFL-FS), appropriate to the duration and delivery of the short form of learning in line with the policy.

4.7 The SFL-FS is offered at the end of the course and is coordinated by the New Business Unit in consultation with Performance Evaluation and the faculties.

4.8 Performance Evaluation will assist the New Business Unit in the development of the standardised SFL-FS questionnaires, maintaining a library of survey items.

4.9 UTS (usually through the New Business Unit and the Enterprise Learning Unit) may agree survey timing, outcomes expectations and potential use of survey reports with an enterprise partner. The survey results and teaching data are not shared with the enterprise partner in line with the policy.

4.10 Faculties that offer any short forms of learning will work with the New Business Unit to generate and administer the surveys. This is normally undertaken by the relevant short form of learning coordinator or contact (email utsopen@uts.edu.au).

4.11 The following steps are followed by the New Business Unit in managing the SFL-FS.

  1. Establish the core survey questions for short forms of learning, with any changes to these core questions approved by the appropriate member of the University Leadership Team (ULT) in line with the policy.
  2. Set up surveys for each short form of learning course on the system in consultation with the faculty, including approved additional questions suitable for the short form of learning as required.
  3. Send a preview link to the survey on the system for approval by faculty staff responsible for managing the short form of learning.
  4. After the survey closes, prepare and distribute aggregated reports to the short form of learning coordinator who will, in turn, distribute this to teaching and professional staff in line with the policy.
  5. Store survey data in line with the Records Management Policy, the Privacy Policy and the Data Governance Policy.

4.12 The following steps are followed by faculties in managing the SFL-FS.

  1. Work with the New Business Unit to ensure feedback surveys are created for all short forms of learning.
  2. Notify and work with the New Business Unit if additional questions are required.
  3. Where appropriate, consider survey questions specific to the requirements of the enterprise partner and/or required by the enterprise contract.
  4. Set the start and end dates for the survey period.
  5. Administer and promote the survey to participants by providing the survey link (either by email, through an announcement with a link to the survey or in the participant’s learning management system account). Promotion may incorporate the use of both university-wide and faculty-specific incentives to encourage participation.
  6. Before and during the survey period, encourage and remind participants to complete the survey.
  7. Distribute survey results to teaching and professional staff as appropriate and in line with the policy.

4.13 The short forms of learning coordinator (or similar) must report to the faculty, the New Business Unit and the Enterprise Learning Unit (where appropriate) on any actions taken based on survey feedback.

Collection and analysis of survey results

4.14 Performance Evaluation is responsible for the collection, analysis and reporting of survey results for award course subjects via the SFS. Once results have been released, academic staff and students may login to their SFS account and access survey reports for their relevant subjects. The New Business Unit undertake this function for the SFL-FS.

4.15 The online SFS system automatically screens offensive language that may appear in student comments (to the extent that this is feasible) and oversees a process whereby teaching staff can request suppression of individual comments they consider to be malicious in accordance with the SFS Student Comment Screening and Suppression Protocol (available at Student feedback and surveys (Staff Connect)). Performance Evaluation will reissue screened reports to relevant teaching staff and academic supervisors.

4.16 Negative respondent feedback that is not malicious is not eligible for removal after publication.

4.17 The LX.lab provides support and resources to assist academic staff in:

  1. interpreting SFS reports
  2. applying SFS results to improve teaching practice and enhance the learning experience of students through improvements including technology-enhanced learning, and
  3. determining when and how to implement exemptions in line with the policy and SFS Exemption Protocol (available at Student feedback and surveys (Staff Connect)).

Survey results and reports

4.18 Access to individual SFS results (current and historical) is available to academic staff and students via their SFS account. Results are available for classes taught, coordinated or, for students, classes in which they were enrolled.

4.19 Survey results are released to teaching staff after the student marks have been ratified to provide an opportunity to identify any reporting errors and for requests for comment suppression (not captured in the automatic screening) in line with the policy and this procedure.

4.20 Faculty reports are provided by Performance Evaluation to faculty deans, deputy deans (where applicable) and associate deans (teaching and learning) at the end of each session in line with the policy in the following forms:

  1. subject reports, faculty and university, incorporating analysis of subjects performing both strongly and poorly
  2. teaching data
  3. subject open-ended comments.

4.21 The associate deans (teaching and learning) as data stewards can grant access to teaching data to staff responsible for:

  1. the development and supervision of the academic staff member concerned
  2. the improvement of the quality of teaching and learning
  3. the annual staff performance management process
  4. teaching allocations
  5. staff probation, progression and promotion
  6. student accessibility
  7. necessary administration, faculty management and recordkeeping, and/or
  8. the investigation and management of complaints in line with UTS policy.

4.22 Survey results are released to academic supervisors after teaching staff have received the results. Academic supervisors are responsible for:

  1. discussing results with individual teaching staff members and, where necessary, assisting staff to improve the quality of their teaching, including referring them to IML or LX.lab for assistance
  2. ensuring that probationary staff participate in the evaluation process for all of their major teaching duties in each session, and
  3. discussing survey results with casual academic staff and providing appropriate assistance where necessary.

4.23 Faculty deans, associate deans (teaching and learning) and other authorised staff will use survey results to:

  1. improve, as appropriate, the quality of teaching and learning in all subjects and courses in their faculty
  2. acknowledge teaching excellence and reward academic staff as part of the probation process, the academic progression and promotions process, normal performance and development processes and as evidence for learning and teaching awards
  3. develop and improve the performance of individual staff in their faculty in relation to the quality of teaching and learning
  4. update or improve induction and training material for new and existing staff.

4.24 Performance Evaluation provides summaries and trend analysis of university-level data to members of the ULT. SFS data are used by Performance Evaluation to support UTS’s quality management and reporting processes in line with the policy.

4.25 To protect the confidentiality of individual teaching staff, teaching staff have the option to withhold reporting of survey results from students if they are the sole teacher of that subject. This must be requested at the start of the survey period.

Faculty level access

4.26 Faculty deans and associate deans (teaching and learning) as data stewards must approve local-level access protocols for SFS and SFL-FS to ensure compliance with the policy. Access protocols must ensure that:

  1. teaching data is restricted to relevant academic supervisors and the relevant staff member
  2. Performance Evaluation is notified of each SFS administrator and all other staff who are given faculty level access to survey results to ensure that faculty portal access is current
  3. late-session survey results and comments relating to the quality of teaching and learning is made available to those concerned with the design, management, delivery and review of those subjects or courses
  4. late-session survey results only be made available after assessment results have been finalised in line with the policy
  5. early-session survey results are made available (whenever the early-session survey is administered) to teaching and faculty staff with responsibility for design, management and delivery of new subjects or courses in order to make immediate adjustments in subject delivery to improve the learning experience
  6. comments of a potentially malicious nature relating to individual staff members that have not been screened and removed are not circulated to other faculty staff.

SFS feedback

4.27 Teaching staff are expected to review any feedback they receive on their coursework subjects and their teaching. Feedback is an opportunity to identify current good practices and new practices to improve the learning experience.

4.28 Faculties and academic staff are encouraged to inform students of how their feedback will be used to improve the quality of subjects or courses. Faculties will identify planned improvements and communicate these to students.

4.29 Faculties may provide authorised representatives of the UTS Students’ Association with survey results and teaching data and planned improvements to give them the opportunity to provide feedback to student groups.

5. Roles and responsibilities

5.1 Procedure owner: This procedure is jointly owned by the Chief Data Officer (CDO) and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Students) in line with the policy.

5.2 Procedure contact: The Head of Performance Evaluation in the Data Analytics and Insights Unit and associate deans (teaching and learning) are responsible for implementing the SFS for coursework subjects in line with the policy and this procedure.

The Director, New Business and the associate deans (teaching and learning) are responsible for implementing the SFL-FS in line with the policy and this procedure.

5.3 Implementation and governance roles:

The New Business Unit, under the Director, New Business is responsible for coordinating the distribution and promotion of the SFL-FS in line with the policy and this procedure.

The Enterprise Learning Unit, under the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (External Engagement and Partnerships), is responsible for the distribution and promotion of the enterprise learning feedback survey in line with this policy.

Further responsibilities are outlined in the policy.

6. Definitions

The following definitions apply for this procedure. These are in addition to those outlined in the policy and Schedule 1, Student Rules. Definitions in the singular include the plural meaning of the word.

Learning mode is the delivery approach for subjects based on pedagogical requirements. Different learning modes represent different ways for students to interact with their subject, class or educators. Learning modes are represented in the late-session SFS by a set of two items (that is questions) developed for that mode (refer SFS Learning Mode Selection and Creation Protocol (available at Student feedback and surveys (Staff Connect)).

SFS orders spreadsheet means a system-generated spreadsheet created for each faculty and academic unit to validate and record survey details for each instance of the SFS in that faculty or unit. This is completed by the faculty SFS administrators. The SFS orders spreadsheet incorporates:

  1. subject coordinator and academic staff details
  2. learning modes assigned to each subject
  3. confirmation of the faculty’s non-core survey items
  4. confirmation of subject survey not to be administered in the session.

Survey means SFS and SFL-FS collectively (refer also the policy).

Approval information

Procedure contactHead of Performance Evaluation, Data Analytics and Insights Unit
Approval authorityDeputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Students)
Chief Data Officer
Review date2024
File numberUR21/1061
Superseded documentsStudent Feedback Survey Vice-Chancellor’s Directive 2009 (UR 06/479)

Version history

VersionApproved byApproval dateEffective dateSections modified
1.0Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Students)19/08/202114/10/2021New procedures.
1.1Deputy Director, Corporate Governance (Delegation 3.14.2)22/02/202222/02/2022Minor change to reflect portfolio realignment under Fit for 2027 project.
1.2Director, Governance Support Unit (Delegation 3.14.1)25/07/202225/07/2022Office and role title changes to reflect the Office of Quality Assurance move and new title of Performance Evaluation in the Data Analytics Unit.
1.3Director, Governance Support Unit (Delegation 3.14.1)02/12/202215/12/2022Minor change to reflect the new Accessibility and Inclusion Policy.
1.4Deputy Director, Corporate Governance (Delegation 3.14.2)19/09/202423/09/2024Update to reflect new title of Deputy Vice-Chancellor (External Engagement and Partnerships).

References

Feedback Survey Policy

Student Feedback Survey

Student feedback and surveys (Staff Connect)

Acknowledgement of Country

UTS acknowledges the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, the Boorooberongal people of the Dharug Nation, the Bidiagal people and the Gamaygal people, upon whose ancestral lands our university stands. We would also like to pay respect to the Elders both past and present, acknowledging them as the traditional custodians of knowledge for these lands.