At the end of the course, the following four criteria were considered for an overall course evaluation:

1. Efficiency of learning/teaching
2. Adequacy of course content/topics
3. Assessment fairness
4. Accessibility/Sufficiency of materials

The results of the evaluation were as following:

1. Excellent (4), Average (5)
2. Excellent (6), Average (3)
3. Excellent (5), Average (3), Insufficient (1)
4. Excellent (6), Average (3)

As can be seen from this evaluation, students were positive about the course.

A detailed questionnaire was also distributed to each student, at the end of the course. Each question was given a quantitative measure: 5, 4, 3, 2 that corresponded to the qualitative value: Excellent, good, average and Insufficient. The total score was calculated for each question. According to the final results, the highest score number was for:

• Assessment method via portfolio (most of the cases considered it excellent and few cases good)
• The course was well planned and designed (most students have chosen excellent)
• The course stimulated interest toward biodiversity issue

A high score number was obtained for:

• A relevant linkage between issues covered by the course and everyday situations was observed
• Teacher encouraged student participation during the course and respected their ideas
• There was a fair knowledge assessment
• The use of active learning methods allowed an active involvement in the course
• There was a high quality of questions and cases described by the teacher

Therefore, according to the evaluation results, students had appreciated the course with excellent and good and in few cases average.

In addition to the questionnaire organized with MSc students from the Faculty of Biology and Soil Sciences, there was a supplementary questionnaire with undergraduate (I, III, IV and V year) and graduate (MSc) students from different faculties (Mathematics and Information Technologies, Linguistics, Biology and Soil Sciences, Economical Sciences, International Relations, Political and Administrative Sciences). The purpose of this survey was to assess what students think on an efficient learning, assessment methods (summative versus formative assessment), the role of course syllabi and student participation in the evaluation of the course.

Students had different opinions in regard to efficient learning, however most of the respondents were focused on:

What do you consider an efficient learning method?
• Learning through cooperation with peers
• Active participation in the course (debates, discussions, seminars etc.)
• Attending course sessions and taking an exam

This question demonstrated that lecture and seminars are the most often methods of learning and very rarely discussions. When asking respondents where the change should start with, most of them suggested teaching methods, course materials, student-teacher relationship. Some mentioned that it is necessary that teachers need to do something in order to provoke student interest toward subject, using active methods and also modern equipment. There were also two respondents that have mentioned that changes are not necessary, since most of the students have part-time jobs as well and there is no time for them to work additionally in the library.

Among most frequents answers were active classroom participation (discussions, debates, seminars), individual and group work. Concerning the use of course syllabi, students answered that it allows an understanding of the course concept and it serves as a learning guide.

Which of the evaluation methods do you consider most efficient in terms of assessing your performance and also learning efficiency?

Both formative and summative assessments were mentioned and only two respondents have chosen separately summative or formative assessment.

Two questions were referring to what should be done with cheating during the exam and low lecture attendance. Most respondents gave answers that in order to avoid such cases, it is important to get students involved in the course activities and also those who cheat should be punished, but also there were suggestions to change assessment methods from summative to formative. In regard to low attendance, the main causes were that many work part-time, some are irresponsive and teachers or university requirements are not enough demanding.

When asking if students have a chance to evaluate the course, most answered very rarely or never and only few of them often. Also why evaluation is necessary, the answers were to improve course quality and identify student academic needs, and only lastly for showing teacher his/her performance.

The extended questionnaire with students from other faculties of the university demonstrated that students are aware of the problems faced by universities in regard to learning efficiency, teaching methods, lecture attendance and cheating and suggest that changes have to be introduced in regard to teacher-student interaction and communication and teaching approach.