Zentrum für Wissenschaftliche Weiterbildung an der CAU e.V. (ZwW)

Evaluation Criteria

Quality Standards

 
For the master thesis, examination of modules, send-in assignments and practical trainings, there are binding central questions and assessment criteria in terms of quality standards for teaching und learning. These central questions and criteria will be explained in the orientation seminars; they can be found on the learning platform and are the subject matter in the training of all examiners. 

Master Thesis

Intention
The master thesis serves to examine the ability to design a scientific paper about a topic of the program, especially with regard to excellence in teaching, research and management in dentistry. In the process, a discussion on selected contents of modules shall take place.

Assessment

 For the assessment of the master thesis, the following aspects are in essence authoritative. They represent the binding frame for the assessment.

Content Criteria
•    Are central questions and objectives clearly stated and plausibly justified against the background of the module topics?
•    Is the relevance of selected aspects with regard to the professional experience convincingly presented?
•    Is the presented concept suitable for answering central questions and for achieving the objectives?
•    Is the transfer of the concept to the professional experience presented intelligibly and focussed on the essential aspects necessary for answering the central questions?
•    Are the contents correct?
•    Are gathered outcomes checked with regard to central questions? Is the validity of the applied evaluation processes adequately reflected?
•    Are the results comprehensibly evaluated with regard to the objectives stated? Are conclusions drawn for the continuing professional experience?

Formal Criteria
•    Is the presentation precise in language, coherent, and stringent in thought process?
•    Do correctness of language, volume, and outer appearance fulfil requirements?
•    Are forms of quotation adhered to and employed sources properly specified?

Module Examination

Intention

 Module examinations serve to test all that was learned in the modules. An examination may take the form of one or more of the following formats: exam, paper, oral examination, presentation.

Assessment
For the assessment of the module examinations, the following factors are in essence authoritative. They represent the binding frame for the assessment.
•    Were the contents correct?
•    Were essential relationships recognized in the analysis?
•    Were relationships established with adequate models, approaches, or theories?
•    If need be, were references made to personal experience?
•    Were differentiated and plausibly justified judgements made?
•    Were meaningful and practical consequences identified?
•    Was the presentation precise, coherent and correct in language?


Send-in Assignments

Intention

 In the context of the send-in assignments, students demonstrate that they are able to
•    Reproduce contents of the modules technically correct
•    Conduct a transfer to other contexts
•    Justify possible consequences and alternatives for their profession.

Assessment

 For the assessment of the send-in assignments, the following aspects are in essence authoritative. They represent the binding frame for the assessment.
•    Were the contents correct?
•    Were essential relationships recognized in the analysis?
•    Were relationships established with adequate models, approaches, or theories?
•    If need be, were references made to personal experience?
•    Were differentiated and plausibly justified judgements made?
•    Were meaningful and practical consequences identified?
•    Was the presentation precise, coherent and correct in language?

Practical Training(Intership)

Intention
Practical trainings serve to gain knowledge by making several areas of research and teachings the subject of experience and reflection.

Assessment
For the assessment of the reports, the following aspects are in essence authoritative. They represent the binding frame for the assessment.
•    In practical trainings in other institutions: were typical features and characteristics of the organisations presented with special regard to own occupation?
•    In practical trainings at conventions: were essential contents, new insights, discourses, and controversies presented with regard to own occupation?
•    If need be, were references made to personal experience?
•    Were differentiated and plausibly justified judgements implemented?
•    Were conclusions drawn and justified for the personal professional behaviour?