City St George’s module evaluation guidance sets out campus routes and feedback responsibilities

Updated Sep 07, 2026

City St George’s public module evaluation guidance describes a shared set of expectations alongside campus-specific access routes. It is useful operational guidance, but the accessible page does not establish that the system was launched or substantively changed on 30 March 2026. Module evaluation guidance.

What the guidance says

Taught modules are normally evaluated once, usually during teaching week 9. Students can use email, MyMoodle or Canvas and survey portals; Clerkenwell/Moorgate and Tooting have distinct contact and portal routes. The university says module teams prepare a cohort response covering common comments, their reflection and development points. Results also inform relevant committees.

The confidentiality statement is conditional. Programme teams should not know who answered unless comments identify the respondent. Central systems track participation and can link background information for non-identifying reporting. The university also reserves the right to identify respondents in specified circumstances, including suspected legal or policy breaches or threats to student welfare. Process and FAQ.

Questions for a multi-campus review

Our recommendation is to test the student journey separately for each campus. Can a student find the right survey, understand who sees the answer, and find the resulting response? Similar page wording is not proof that underlying platforms, access permissions or analytical practices are fully integrated.

Use the same distinction when describing anonymity. Explain the normal access arrangement, risks of identification through comments, and any stated exceptions. Avoid replacing a qualified institutional statement with an absolute promise.

For analysis across schools, record questionnaire differences, collection periods and participation alongside themes. Shared labels do not make differently collected datasets equivalent. Assign responsibility for interpreting the comments and communicating decisions, including cases where a requested change cannot be made.

The student comment analysis governance checklist can support that discussion. The public guidance does not supply an evaluation showing improved response quality, faster decisions or consistent delivery of every stated process.

Review note, 7 September 2026: removed the unverified March launch/update claim, corrected the implication of a single campus portal, and restored the confidentiality exceptions. The review uses the accessible indexed institutional guidance; implementation and backend controls were not independently audited.