As most Universities around the world the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences conduct surveys (student evaluation monitor: STEM) among their students to evaluate the different courses and their teachers. At the Department of Media, Information and Communication the response by students tend to decline in the course of the year. In 2011-2012 with a limited enrolment of 900 first year students, 70% responded to the first survey conducted after the first exams in October and dropped to 26% in the last survey at the end of the first year (July 2012). In 2012-2013 (with the same amount of students) the response was respectively 75% and 30%. This might be due to several factors, such as the length of the questionnaire, the way the survey is spread (via e-mail to the students University account), the time of spreading the surveys (after the courses and exams) or simple due to lack of interest. Another problem of the surveys is found in the quest to limit the length of the questionnaires. Hereby, some relevant aspects to apprehend the success of students (or the return of the department) and the quality of the courses and teachers aren’t measured, such as: coherence between the courses, the students opinion about the form of education and exams, the connection between the evaluation and the exam results or other influential factors of student’s success. Given these difficulties and the fact that insight in all of the above mentioned aspects are crucial for both students and teachers and not in the least for the management, a new approach for evaluating is needed. An evaluating system that can uncover crucial information, for example to pinpoint the characteristics of dropout or long-term students in order to limit these, and/or improve the education/course. This paper will describe a pilot study wherein a first step towards a new way of evaluating is taken by separating the course- and teacher evaluation from the rest of the surveys by using an app/QR or website. Furthermore, the literature about in- or outside class surveys and student success will serve as a theoretical base for the discussion this pilot and is part of a broader PhD research.
LINK
Living labs are complex multi-stakeholder collaborations that often employ a usercentred and design-driven methodology to foster innovation. Conventional management tools fall short in evaluating them. However, some methods and tools dedicated to living labs' special characteristics and goals have already been developed. Most of them are still in their testing phase. Those tools are not easily accessible and can only be found in extensive research reports, which are difficult to dissect. Therefore, this paper reviews seven evaluation methods and tools specially developed for living labs. Each section of this paper is structured in the following manner: tool’s introduction (1), who uses the tool (2), and how it should be used (3). While the first set of tools, namely “ENoLL 20 Indicators”, “SISCODE Self-assessment”, and “SCIROCCO Exchange Tool” assess a living lab as an organisation and are diving deeper into the organisational activities and the complex context, the second set of methods and tools, “FormIT” and “Living Lab Markers”, evaluate living labs’ methodologies: the process they use to come to innovations. The paper's final section presents “CheRRIes Monitoring and Evaluation Tool” and “TALIA Indicator for Benchmarking Service for Regions”, which assess the regional impact made by living labs. As every living lab is different regarding its maturity (as an organisation and in its methodology) and the scope of impact it wants to make, the most crucial decision when evaluating is to determine the focus of the assessment. This overview allows for a first orientation on worked-out methods and on possible indicators to use. It also concludes that the existing tools are quite managerial in their method and aesthetics and calls for designers and social scientists to develop more playful, engaging and (possibly) learning-oriented tools to evaluate living labs in the future. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/overdiek12345/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/mari-genova-17a727196/?originalSubdomain=nl
Introduction: Depression can be a serious problem in young adult students. There is a need to implement and monitor prevention interventions for these students. Emotion-regulating improvisational music therapy (EIMT) was developed to prevent depression. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of EIMT for use in practice for young adult students with depressive symptoms in a university context. Method: A process evaluation was conducted embedded in a larger research project. Eleven students, three music therapists and five referrers were interviewed. The music therapists also completed evaluation forms. Data were collected concerning client attendance, treatment integrity, musical components used to synchronise, and experiences with EIMT and referral. Results: Client attendance (90%) and treatment integrity were evaluated to be sufficient (therapist adherence 83%; competence 84%). The music therapists used mostly rhythm to synchronise (38 of 99 times). The students and music therapists reported that EIMT and its elements evoked changes in all emotion regulation components. The students reported that synchronisation elicited meaningful experiences of expressing joy, feeling heard, feeling joy and bodily responses of relaxation. The music therapists found the manual useful for applying EIMT. The student counsellors experienced EIMT as an appropriate way to support students due to its preventive character. Discussion: EIMT appears to be a feasible means of evoking changes in emotion regulation components in young adult students with depressive symptoms in a university context. More studies are needed to create a more nuanced and evidence-based understanding of the feasibility of EIMT, processes of change and treatment integrity.
