Periodic evaluation on KFL2060 Gender Equalities in the Nordic Countries 2010-2012

 (the course is taught spring and autumn)

By Elisabet Rogg

This is a course mainly meant for international students and there are students from all over the world. Norwegian students are rare, approximately 1-2 per semester.

  1. Evaluation of:
  • Syllabus

The syllabus covers the main topics as described in the course description and is in accordance with the major gender equality themes in the Nordic region. The syllabus is mainly composed of independent articles, referee-based and chapters in books. As the different articles to some extent discuss the same themes from different angles the students are equipped with tools for discussing different approaches to enhance gender equality in the Nordic context as well as in their own background.

 

  • Teaching

The teaching consists of lectures and discussions based on the syllabus and the students’ own background. So far the course has consisted of 3 hours sessions with one third reserved for lectures and two thirds for student activities, in all 30 hours during the semester together with the students from KFL2060.

Participation is mandatory: 80% of the course.

To be allowed to take the exam students must give two oral presentations: one presenting an article and one opposition to an article. During the course students are also invited to participate in a small field excursion: observing gender in Oslo.

Feedback from students indicates that the composition of the teaching programme is good, some say excellent.

 

  • Resources and infrastructure

Until autumn 2012 the course was held in a locality that allowed us to spend 3 hours together and use seminar rooms for group discussions. This has contributed to a very social learning environment and that students from different parts of the world get to know each other.

  • Exam

The exam consists of a three days take-home exam evaluated according to a scale A-F where A is excellent and F is failed. This appears to be a good way of evaluating the learning outcome of this course.

 

  1. Correspondence course description – learning outcome.

The formulation of learning outcome in the course description has so far been in accordance with what the students are expected to know after the exam.

 

  1. Is the course description correct? Concerning:
  • Marks, withdrawals and complaints

 

 

 

A

B

C

D

E

F

Withdr.

No

S 2010

9%

32%

36%

9%

14%

0

1

(23)

A 2010

22%

11%

39%

17%

6%

6%

0

(18)

S 2011

10%

10%

40%

20%

10%

10%

1

(11)

A 2011

15%

25%

25%

25%

5%

5%

4

(24)

S 2012

17%

25%

33%

17%

8%

0

1

(13)

A 2012

17%

33%

28%

11%

6%

6%

1

(19)

 

In general the results reflect the level of students’ own learning activities: how well they are prepared through reading, reflecting and discussions. Most students are highly motivated and hard-working and meet well prepared in class, participating actively with relevant contributions in discussions both in small groups and in plenary sessions. Moreover most students master the English language very well. Weaker results reflect however also the students’ learning activities. Some students who also are hard-working and highly motivated meet a barrier concerning language. They strive to read and understand the syllabus in English. But there are also students who give less priority to this course than other activities.

 

  • Feedback to teachers and administration

The feedback from students has been very good.

 

  • Feedback concerning information about the course

The feedback from students has been good.

 

  • Is the course correctly defined concerning recommended requirements?

The only recommended requirement is to master the English language.  In principle all international students do as they have to document necessary competences in English before they are accepted as students at UiO. Unfortunately not all documentation is based on realistic mastery of the English language.

 

  1. Are there any changes since the last periodic evaluation?

There have been the following changes:

  • Participation has become mandatory (80%)
  • Required student activities have increased from only to present one article to also criticising one article.
  • Reading material has been updated.
  • Pedagogical methods have been developed to increase student learning activities within a friendly framework.

 

 

  1. Suggestions for improvement

There will be more mandatory student activities: Field excursion with written report as result of group work.

Published Feb. 26, 2013 1:50 PM - Last modified Feb. 26, 2013 1:54 PM