1. Evaluations are intended to ascertain that the expected objectives and learning outcomes of the study unit or program in question have been achieved by the students, measuring the degree to which these results are attested. They aim to improve the learning experience of the students by providing them with feedback, establishing clear and consistent criteria for progression decisions by the SAPC and indicating the effectiveness of the teaching and the administration of the modu
2. This evaluation policy concerns both the setup of the evaluation method and the compilation of exam documents, the assignments and student evaluation It is intended to ensure that the evaluations are conducted in a fair, transparent, consistent, rigorous and reproducible manner – that is, they produce the same result in case of a re-evaluation.
3. The teachers consult each other so that the evaluations are clearly defined and explained to the students, in terms of procedures and criteria, at the beginning of the semester. Appropriate methods must be developed to evaluate the students and the details of the evaluation must be published on the VHEI website and/or portal, together with relevant information for each study unit, before the beginning of the academic External examiners must be informed of the instructions given to the students.
4. In selecting the evaluation method to apply to their study unit, the teachers should consider different options and exercises that take into account the different abilities of disadvantaged students, such as those with specific learning difficulties (e. dyslexia). A teacher can therefore also integrate a written test with other methods of evaluation to avoid penalizing a student who may have difficulty with a specific examination methodology. This adds flexibility and helps to deal with the different learning needs and skills of the students. It will also improve the teacher-student relationship and make the leadership role of teachers and tutors more efficient. Through the different evaluation methods adopted, students can be evaluated not only on the theoretical knowledge acquired, but also on the practical work produced during the course.
5. Generally the evaluation of each study unit must include one or more of the following methods, depending on the content and learning outcome to be evaluated:
- Continuous evaluation – of the work presented during the course of the module, possibly including tests carried out at indicated intervals;
- Oral exam – in the form of an interview to evaluate the student’s knowledge, held in an indicated location, on a predetermined date;
- Assignment – an essay of a specific length or other exercises (e.g. programming) to be submitted by a set date.
- Portfolio — a systematic and representative collection of the student’s work, documenting his progress in the indicated period;
- Practical — work of a practical nature carried out under supervision in an established location (laboratory, workshop, etc.);
- Presentation — addressed to the class and made by an individual or group of students; generally followed by a discussion to improve students’ communication skills;
- Project — a collaborative or individual work that may involve different productions of tasks or activities;
- Written test or exam — consisting of essays, multiple-choice questions or other exercises; it is done under supervision at the indicated location, on a set date.
6. Teachers must follow the guidelines developed by the Institute to select the most appropriate evaluation method (s) for their study unit.
7. The institute engages experts to assist the academic staff in the selection or adaption of evaluation methodologies for students with learning disabilities, when needed. In addition, private professionals – usually doctors, psychologists or others, depending on the nature of the students in difficulty – can recommend (in writing) the application of supportive methods, such as extra time during written exams, for individuals with a history of learning difficulti The expert hired by the Institute, who will indicate the approach that must be taken by the examiner, will consider these cases.
8. At the beginning of the study unit, teachers must advise students of their criteria of evaluation and grading, which will generally take into account the work done in class, the improvement shown between the beginning and the end of the course, the projects developed at home and other factors considered by the teacher at his discretion, depending on the subject.
9. The level of difficulty of the exam and the evaluation criteria vary, depending on whether the subject is a central unit or one chosen by the student. The teacher will give due weight to the student’s interest in the subject – whether he will specialize or not, and could also take into account any mitigating circumstances in compiling the exam documents or the evaluation.
10. Teaches must ensure that their evaluation is consistent and fair, in accordance with the aim of comparing actual learning outcomes with those that the teaching was intended to achie To this end, they must follow the evaluation system indicated by the Institute. In this way, students can receive feedback that helps them to improve their learning process.
11. In the case of oral tests, two examiners will be present to evaluate the students’ knowledge, while for written tests a co-teacher, tutor or another faculty member will review the evaluation of practical work, the grades assigned. Generally the teacher and co-teacher will conduct an oral exam. Alternatively, another faculty member will replace one of the tw
12. All the academic staff members can be additional examiners alongside the teacher and co- teacher or tutor of a particular study unit. In addition, as part of the internal quality audit, the Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) can involve external examiners – selected from the academic and professional networks of the Institute – to participate in evaluation practices carried out for a certain number of study units. This will provide students, on one hand, with a further independent evaluation of their work, and teachers, on the other hand, with an external and qualified opinion on the effectiveness of their teaching and evaluation methods. It will also allow the Academic Council (AC) to compare the Institute’s Educational Standards with those of other universities and/or academies that offer degree programs in related disciplines. All the recommendations made by the external examiners will be taken into consideration by the AC, which will then report to the Management Board (MB) on the actions taken to deal with any possible problems.
13. The evaluation grades must be published online on a reserved section of the VHEI website and/or Portal to which students will have access, within one month from the date of the exam.
14. Regarding evaluation results, the students may request a review of the paper in the case of written exams or tests, or a review of their projects, portfolios or assignments submitted for evaluation, within one week of the publication of the grad In this case, another faculty member (not involved in the original evaluation) will be appointed to review the work and issue a report, taking into account the VHEI’s policies on the correction and evaluation of students.
15. The AC determines the rules for student progression for each individual study program offered by the Institut These rules must be published on the VHEI website and/or Portal, together with any updates that may be introduced before the beginning of each academic year.
16. The SAPC must be assisted by the Academic Advisor (AA) appointed for each program to monitor student performance and facilitate their regular progression through the course of stud
17. Exam marks must be listed on the final diploma supplement, in order to highlight the level of the student’s learning achievement.