News

Students’ feedback of educational work - academic year 2024/25

January 14, 2026

The academic year 2024/25 brought changes from certain aspects in relation to the students’ evaluation of the Faculty's teaching work. Hereby, the most important information is summarized according to each feedback procedures.

End-of-semester feedback regarding compulsory subjects

In the fall semester of the academic year 2024-25 altogether around 137,000 student feedback were received and around 127,000 responses were collected in the spring semester through the Neptun system. This demonstrates a completion rate of around 80%, which rate is similar to previous years. The results are sent in personalised files via email to the instructors, while summary reports are published to the heads of departments.

At the end this report, the list of the best rated departments and instructors are published based on the compulsory subjects of the fall and spring semester, as well and separated by language programmes.

In addition to the quantified data, many students also expressed their opinion in text remarks. The affirmative feedback and constructive comments are summarized below.

The following positive feedback repeatedly occurred in relation to the various forms of education:

Many evaluations of lectures emphasized that lecturers present the theoretical curriculum in an interesting and enjoyable way. Feedback also indicated that the explanations of the more difficult content were understandable, and lectures helped to identify the important points, especially while preparing for the exam. Students studying in foreign language programmes acknowledged the high linguistic standard and the clear, easy-to-follow presentation method. It was highlighted positively when lecturers made theoretical knowledge more illustrative with clinical examples or practical references.

Regarding seminars and practices, many students remarked that instructors are student-friendly, helpful and have encouraging attitude. They also often reported a safe learning atmosphere, in which they had the opportunity to ask questions, express opinions and actively participate in the class. Feedback also highlighted interactive teaching methods and practical approach. Many students appreciated when the instructors gave specific study or exam advice.

Positive feedback on assessments was not primarily about the ease of the exams, but about the examiners' attitude and predictability. Students highly appreciated the fair, respectful and humane examination, as well as the fact that the examiners were helpful and supportive, even in the event of poor performance. Several feedback emphasized that it was a positive experience if the exam was clearly based on the curriculum and did not contain unexpected, "surprise" elements. It was also often appreciated when the expectations were clear and the students received meaningful feedback on their performance during the exam, not just a grade.

The students also expressed some criticism and pointed out areas in need of improvement.

Regarding lectures some students indicated that consciously highlighting the important points would help them prepare for exams, professional practices and work. Feedback regarding study materials drew attention to the fact that they were not always suitable for studying, and sometimes they were not available on time. Some students also made comments regarding the late ending of classes.

Regarding seminars and practices, feedback showed that sometimes they were rather lectures than seminars, fewer opportunities were provided for practicing and giving feedback to students to be able to improve. Many students also pointed out that there were differences between practise leaders in the areas of quality, expectations, and attitude.

Some comments about assessments highlighted that the expectations coming from lecturers were not clear and not all exams were closely aligned with the curriculum. Students sometimes perceived examiners differently, which reduced the predictability of the assessment. Stress-inducing factors included the less supportive atmosphere during exams and the long waiting period.

End-of-semester feedback regarding elective and facultative subjects

Starting this academic year, students were also able to give feedback on elective and facultative courses at the end of the semester in the Neptun system. In the fall semester 36,000 responses and in the spring semester 28,000 responses were received, which means a completion rate of approximately 75%. The results are included in the institutional reports to inform the instructors and the heads of departments. In addition, detailed evaluations of the subjects by programmes are published in the Committee's Documents section.

Quick feedback through POTEcho

In addition to the end-of-semester feedback through the Neptun system, the automated POTEcho system provides the possibility to give short feedback immediately after classes. The results of the previous academic year are available in the POTEcho system. (More information on POTEcho can be found at the website.)

Students’ evaluation of professional practices (General Medicine programme)

Similar to the last couple of years, students could evaluate their summer practices and their rotational year practices. In relation to the summer practices in Hospital Care, Internal Medicine and Surgery, 684 evaluations were received from the three language programmes, of which 200 related to the Clinical Centre's practices. A total of 130 completions were received for the rotational year practices, while a total of 85 completions were received for the rotational year exams. The heads of departments will receive the result before the upcoming period, the summaries for students are available in the Committee's Documents section.

For the sake of improvement of the feedback culture, the Committee's document library contains a recommendation for students regarding writing free text responses, as well as a recommendation for instructors regarding the interpretation of the feedback results. We trust that responsible student evaluations and suggestions, as well as their thoughtful interpretation by instructors, can contribute to the strengthening of instructor-student partnerships, trust, the development of education and, in accordance with our traditions, the training of high-quality doctors.

Prof. Dr. Zsuzsanna Füzesi, chair
Dr. Gergely Csaba, secretary

UP MS Feedback Committee

Alumni : University of Pécs Medical School