A multilevel evaluation of the Department has been carried out as follows:
- An external evaluation of the Department was conducted by the Hellenic Quality Assurance and Accreditation Agency in September 2013,
- Accreditation of the Undergraduate Program of Studies was conducted by the Hellenic Authority for Higher Education in September 2021,
- Internal assessment based on student questionnaires filled out each semester for each taught course,
- Graduate absorption studies conducted by the Liaison Office, DUTH (Calendar years 2012 & 2013, Academic years 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21).
External Evaluation of the Department (September 2013)
An external evaluation of the Department was conducted by the Hellenic Quality Assurance and Accreditation Agency in September 2013. The Committee responsible for the External Evaluation of the Department of Education Sciences in Early Childhood of the Democritus University of Thrace consisted of the following three (3) expert evaluators drawn from the Registry constituted by the HQAAA in accordance with Law 3374/2005:
- Dr. Evangeline Newton, Professor of Literacy Education, The University of Akron in Akron, Ohio (USA) (Coordinator of the Committee),
- Dr. Christos Panayiotopoulos, Associate Professor of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Policy, University of Nicosia, Cyprus and
- Dr. Eleonora Papaleontiou – Louca, Associate Professor, Psychology, Vice-Chairperson, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, The School of Humanities and Social Sciences, European University Cyprus, Cyprus.
The report was received in September 2013 and was subsequently posted on the website of the Department and the Hellenic Quality Assurance and Accreditation Agency. The preparation of the evaluation process by the Department was mentioned in an extremely positive way in the report: “We commend the faculty for the meticulous preparation of this evaluation, particularly in the context of their limited time and resources”. Also regarding the undergraduate program of studies, the committee praised both its structure and structure as well as its implementation: “In general, the department is achieving its goals very well and we believe is to be commended for delivering high-quality instruction under challenging circumstances (e.g., lack of funding and resources). Faculty have demonstrated the ability to develop and implement innovative, research-based programs that represent “Best Practice” (Zemelman, Daniels, & Hyde, 2012) and contribute significantly to student learning”. It should be noted that the external evaluation report mentions a high level of satisfaction among the graduates (p. 10, 18): “In a 2008 alumni response, 8 of 10 graduates said that they would choose the same program if they were about to become students again ”, “During our meeting with students, it was clear that the department has produced a number of enthusiastic alumni who are also effective communicators”. Approximately 90% of the recommendations of the committee of external evaluators were implemented and their implementation was within the capabilities of the Department.
External Evaluation Report for the Department (September 2013) [pdf]
Accreditation of the Undergraduate Program of Studies (2021)
The Department submitted an application to the Hellenic Authority for Higher Education (HAHE) for the accreditation of the Undergraduate Program of Studies in April 2020 (the specific deadline was set by the HAHE for all Greek University Departments). Several documents were submitted along with the application. At least two years were required from the Department in order to prepare the documents for the application.
During September 2021, the accreditation process was carried out. Due to travel restrictions and lockdowns (i.e., coronovirus pandemic), the accreditation of the Undergraduate Study Programme on Education Sciences in Early Childhood (ESECH) of the Democritus University of Thrace (DUTH)was conducted fully in a remote mode, using the Zoom teleconferencing tool. The Panel responsible for the Accreditation Review of the Department’s Undergraduate Study Programme in comprised the following four (4) members, drawn from the HAHE Register, in accordance with Laws 4009/2011 & 4653/2020:
(i) Prof. Leonidas Kyriakides, University of Cyprus, Cyprus (Chair), (ii) Prof. Emeritus Athanasios Gagatsis, University of Cyprus, Cyprus, (iii) Prof. Mary Ioannidou-Koutselini, University of Cyprus, Cyprus and (iv) Prof. Panayota Youli Mantzicopoulos-James, Purdue University, USA.
The HAHE provided the External Evaluation & Accreditation Panel (EEAP) members with a packet of materials ahead of the review process that included: The Department’s Accreditation Proposal, a Quality Assurance Policy Document, Quality Assurance Goals, and Quality Data, as well as a wealth of supportive material and appendices. The Department further provided the EEAP with the accreditation file and appendices for easy access, as well as additional supportive material including videos, sample of student work, course assignments, practicum assignments, student theses, and faculty scholarship samples. The Panel was also provided with HAHE’s accreditation guidelines.
The virtual accreditation visit extended over three days, starting on September 20th, 2021. Virtual meetings and discussions were held out with the Vice Rector of Academic Affairs and Student Welfare, teaching and administrative staff members of the Department, OMEA and MODIP representatives, undergraduate students, graduate students, employers and social partners collaborating with Department. The committee members were also given an on-line tour of the classrooms, lecture halls, libraries laboratories, and other facilities and then discussed the facilities presented in the video produced for this purpose.
The accreditation report was received by the Department during 2021. The assessment results were very positive. Assessment involved compliance with ten principles. In nine out of ten principles the Department’s compliance was assessed as “Fully Compliant”. In one parameter, the Department’s compliance was assessed as “Substantially compliant”. Relevant information are summrized in the following table.
The duration of the accreditation is 4 years: 10/12/2021 – 9/12/2025.
Compliance with Principles
| Academic Unit Policy for Quality Assurance | Fully compliant |
| Design and Approval of Programmes | Fully compliant |
| Student-centered Learning, Teaching and Assessment | Fully compliant |
| Student Admission, Progression, Recognition and Certification | Fully compliant |
| Teaching Staff | Substantially compliant |
| Learning Resources and Student Support | Fully compliant |
| Information Management | Fully compliant |
| Public Information | Fully compliant |
| On-going Monitoring and Periodic Internal Review of Programmes | Fully compliant |
| Regular External Evaluation of Undergraduate Programmes | Fully compliant |
Among the positive highlights of the accreditation report are the following::
- The academic profile and orientation of the P.P.S., objectives, subjects, structure, organization, expected learning outcomes and intended professional qualifications are compatible with the National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education and the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area.
- Program revisions are compliant with the basic requirements outlined in the Standards.
- There is continuous and close collaboration between the Department and the MO.DI.P.
- Students’ satisfaction with the undergraduate Program of Studies and their readiness to serve in education and the community. These results are compatible with the experiences of collaborating institutions and graduates.
- Gaining experience through practice in various formal and non-formal learning environments (libraries, museums, hospitals) benefits both students and the community.
- Both students and collaborating institutions expressed their appreciation for the Department’s initiatives in alternative environments.
- Collaborating institutions had a very positive attitude towards the students’ work in the community.
- Educational and community goals are successfully promoted.
- There is a smooth transition at all stages of the program.
- There is a close connection between the program content, the community and the multicultural context of education.
- There is close cooperation between students and staff members.
- The students pointed out that they are given opportunities for active participation in teaching and learning.
The committee members also made various recommendations as part of the accreditation report. These recommendations will be taken into account by the members of the Department.
Internal Assessment: Results from Student Questionnaires
Students fill out evaluation questionnaires for each undergraduate course. From the academic year 2017-18, the relevant questionnaires are filled out electronically through the MODIP system of the DUTH. In previous years, forms were filled out. The following are results for the last 3 academic years. The results for the academic year 2019-20 are for the winter semester only.
General results
| Total assessments | Total mean value | |
| 2024-25 (fall semester) | 1116 | 3.98 |
| 2024-25 (spring semester) | 1040 | 4.26 |
| 2023-24 (fall semester) | 1077 | 3.96 |
| 2023-24 (spring semester) | 880 | 4.1 |
| 2022-23 (fall semester) | 946 | 4.1 |
| 2022-23 (dpring semester) | 834 | 4.22 |
| 2019-20 | 333 | 4.15 |
| 2018-19 | 971 | 4.08 |
| 2017-18 | 541 | 4.02 |
General results
| 2019-20 | 2018-19 | 2017-18 | |
| Evaluation rating |
% |
% |
% |
| 5 (Very much) | 52.54999924 | 46.18999863 | 46.09999847 |
| 4 (A lot) | 24.79999924 | 27.94000053 | 25.90999985 |
| 3 (Moderate) | 12.71000004 | 14.85000038 | 14.34000015 |
| 2 (A little bit) | 4.860000134 | 5.320000172 | 6.28000021 |
| 1 (Not at all) | 5.070000172 | 4.230000019 | 5.579999924 |
| 2022-23 (FS) | 2022-23 (SS) | 2023-24 (FS) | 2023-24 (SS) | 2024-25 (FS) | 2024-25 (SS) | |
| Evaluation rating | % | % | % | % | % | % |
| 5 (Very much) | 50.4 | 54.1 | 42.0 | 47.6 | 41.2 | 53.4 |
| 4 (A lot) | 23.4 | 22.9 | 28.7 | 27.3 | 28.6 | 26.3 |
| 3 (Moderate) | 14.3 | 12.8 | 15.0 | 13.2 | 17.5 | 12.2 |
| 2 (A little bit) | 5.8 | 3.9 | 6.1 | 3.8 | 6.0 | 3.9 |
| 1 (Not at all) | 5.0 | 3.8 | 6.1 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 2.7 |
| No reply | 1.1 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 2.6 | 2.1 | 1.5 |
Results for the questions concerning the instructor
| 2019-20 | 2018-19 | 2017-18 | ||||
| The Instructor | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Did he/she appear to know and master the subject matter well? | 4.64 | 0.67 | 4.5 | 0.74 | 4.46 | 0.87 |
| Did he/she come to class well prepared? | 4.55 | 0.78 | 4.44 | 0.78 | 4.33 | 0.97 |
| Was he/she highly contagious and communicated well with the students in the course? | 4.27 | 1.12 | 4.06 | 1.16 | 4.06 | 1.19 |
| Did he/she provide clear and informative answers to your questions? | 4.25 | 1.03 | 4.14 | 1.03 | 4.05 | 1.11 |
| Do you think he/she is a very good teacher? | 4.31 | 1.01 | 4.16 | 1.04 | 4.21 | 1.03 |
| 2022-23 (FS, SS) | 2023-24 (FS, SS) | 2024-25 (FS, SS) | ||||
| Instructor | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Did he/she appear to know and master the subject matter well? | 4.58, 4.63 | 0.76, 0.68 | 4.39, 4.48 | 0.89, 0.9 | 4.45, 4.6 | 0.8, 0.69 |
| Did he/she come to class well prepared? | 4.46, 4.54 | 0.88, 0.77 | 4.34, 4.42 | 0.92, 0.95 | 4.36, 4.5 | 0.9, 0.8 |
| Was he/she highly contagious and communicated well with the students in the course? | 4.05, 4.22 | 1.19, 1.08 | 3.9, 4.06 | 1.21, 1.16 | 3.9, 4.22 | 1.16, 1.02 |
| Did he/she provide clear and informative answers to your questions? | 4.13, 4.25 | 1.12, 1.01 | 4.0, 4.15 | 1.15, 1.09 | 3.96, 4.27 | 1.08, 0.96 |
| Do you think he/she is a very good teacher? | 4.18, 4.31 | 1.07. 0.99 | 4.05, 4.22 | 1.12, 1.07 | 4.03, 4.28 | 1.08, 0.95 |
Results for questions concerning teaching
| 2019-20 | 2018-19 | 2017-18 | ||||
| Teaching | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Was it done in a way that helped the understanding of the lesson? | 4.2 | 1.05 | 4.09 | 1.04 | 4.09 | 1.08 |
| Was it done with the use of ICT? | 3.4 | 1.55 | 3.87 | 1.18 | 3.54 | 1.4 |
| Did it lead to the completion of the curriculum? | 4.21 | 0.9 | 4.25 | 0.94 | 4.18 | 1.04 |
| Did it include good examples and practical applications? | 4.24 | 1.06 | 4.13 | 1.06 | 4.13 | 1.09 |
| Was it very good in your opinion? | 4.22 | 1.07 | 4.04 | 1.08 | 4.09 | 1.11 |
| 2022-23 (FS, SS) | 2023-24 (FS, SS) | 2024-25 (FS, SS) | ||||
| Teaching | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Was it done in a way that helped the understanding of the lesson? | 4.08, 4.21 | 1.13, 1.06 | 3.91, 4.09 | 1.19, 1.08 | 3.96, 4.19 | 1.08, 1.01 |
| Was it done with the use of ICT? | 3.91, 3.99 | 1.38, 1.28 | 3.89, 3.93 | 1.27, 1.24 | 3.93, 4.16 | 1.2, 1.08 |
| Did it lead to the completion of the curriculum? | 4.26, 4.34 | 1.01, 0.93 | 4.12, 4.18 | 1.05, 1.05 | 4.09, 4.41 | 1.02, 0.86 |
| Did it include good examples and practical applications? | 4.14, 4.27 | 1.11, 1.01 | 3.97, 4.13 | 1.16, 1.09 | 4.01, 4.3 | 1.09, 0.96 |
| Was it very good in your opinion? | 4.04, 4.23 | 1.16, 1.04 | 3.92, 4.08 | 1.19, 1.1 | 3.94, 4.2 | 1.09, 1.02 |
Results for the questions involving the course
| 2019-20 | 2018-19 | 2017-18 | ||||
| The course |
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Did it have interesting material and provide important information? | 4.24 | 1.01 | 4.14 | 1.04 | 4.14 | 1.03 |
| Did it have a similar workload with similar courses? | 3.62 | 1.27 | 3.07 | 1.4 | 2.93 | 1.45 |
| Was it supported by good literature and related aids? | 4.04 | 1.12 | 3.97 | 1.06 | 3.83 | 1.15 |
| Does it seem to be useful for your further professional employment? | 3.98 | 1.2 | 4.21 | 1.04 | 4.22 | 1.02 |
| Would you recommend other students to attend it? | 4.05 | 1.24 | 4.11 | 1.12 | 4.07 | 1.14 |
| 2022-23 (FS, SS) | 2023-24 (FS, SS) | 2024-25 (FS, SS) | ||||
| The course |
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| Did it have interesting material and provide important information? | 4.1, 4.26 | 1.13, 1.05 | 3.93, 4.16 | 1.16, 1.08 | 3.96, 4.3 | 1.13, 0.99 |
| Did it have a similar workload with similar courses? | 3.53, 3.63 | 1.27, 1.27 | 3.34, 3.5 | 1.3, 1.29 | 3.44, 3.69 | 1.23, 1.17 |
| Was it supported by good literature and related aids? | 3.95, 4.08 | 1.2, 1.1 | 3.88, 3.86 | 1.15, 1.16 | 3.77, 4.08 | 1.13, 1.07 |
| Does it seem to be useful for your further professional employment? | 4.08, 4.23 | 1.19, 1.12 | 3.97, 4.18 | 1.21, 1.1 | 4.04, 4.38 | 1.16, 0.96 |
| Would you recommend other students to attend it? | 3.98, 4.18 | 1.21, 1.17 | 3.82, 4.09 | 1.3, 1.2 | 3.88, 4.25 | 1.25, 1.1 |
Graduate Absorption Studies (Calendar years 2012 & 2013, Academic years 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21) (Liason Office, DUTH)
The Liaison Office of the Democritus University of Thrace is part of the Employment and Career Structure (D.A.STA.) of the University and functions as a connecting link between the University and Professional Community, being an information center for the students and graduates of DUTH with a view to their subsequent personal and professional development for integration into the labor market.
In its effort to continuously improve the services it offers to the students and graduates of Democritus University of Thrace, the Liaison Office conducted studies on the labor market absorption of the graduates of DUTH (graduates for the calendar years 2012 and 2013, the academic years 2016-17, 2018-19 and 2020-21). The primary purpose of the research is to assess the degree and quality of employment of graduates for the 20 Departments of the University.
The research is carried out six to seven years after the completion of the undergraduate studies of the graduates, overcoming factors that delay the direct integration of young people into the labor market, such as for example postgraduate studies, military obligations, etc. Capturing the opinion of the graduates after they enter the labor market is considered critical for the quality of the academic services offered by DUTH.
The graduates who participated in the sample of the study answered questions about:
- General information
- Their education
- Absorption from the labor market
- Unemployment rate
- Information about the Liaison Office
DUTH’s graduate absorption study (calendar years 2012, 2013) in pdf (Greek)
DUTH’s graduate absorption study (Academic year 2016-17) in pdf (Greek)
DUTH’s graduate absorption study (Academic year 2018-19) in pdf (Greek)
DUTH’s graduate absorption study (Academic year 2020-21) in pdf (Greek)
Participants
- Calendar years 2012, 2013: 82 of the 276 Department graduates participated in this research (telephone interview).
- Academic year 2016-17: 55 of the 98 Department graduates participated in this research (telephone interview),
- Academic year 2018-19: 41 of the 126 Department graduates participated in this research (telephone interview),
- Academic year 2020-21: 68 of the 97 Department graduates participated in this research (telephone interview).
Following are relevant results ([1]: Years 2012 & 2013, [2]: Academic Year 2016-17, [3]: Academic Year 2018-19, [4]: Academic Year 2020-21). In each row, the 1st sub-row is data for the calendar years 2012 & 2013, the 2nd sub-row is data for the academic year 2016-17, the third sub-row is data for the academic year 2018-19 and the fourth sub-row is data for the academic year 2020-21.
Level of satisfaction of the Department’s graduates (2012 & 2013, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21)
|
Question (5: Very satisfied, 4: Satisfied, 3: Neutral, 2: Unsatisfied, 1: Very unsatisfied) |
5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Level of satisfaction with the curriculum | 45.1% | 47.6% | 6.1% | 0% | 1.2% |
| 32.73% | 45.45% | 21.82% | 0% | 0% | |
| 14.6% | 56.1% | 26.8% | 2.4% | 0% | |
| 35.29% | 47.06% | 17.65% | 0% | 0% | |
| Level of satisfaction with the teaching staff | 30.5% | 54.9% | 13.4% | 0% | 1.2% |
| 38.18% | 41.82% | 18.18% | 1.82% | 0% | |
| 12.2% | 58.5% | 29.3% | 0% | 0% | |
| 26.47% | 47.06% | 26.47% | 0% | 0% | |
| Level of satisfaction with operational infrastructure (building facilities, classrooms, etc.) | 4.9% | 31.7% | 45.1% | 13.4% | 4.9% |
| 14.55% | 25.45% | 54.55% | 5.45% | 0% | |
| 7.3% | 29.3% | 41.5% | 19.5% | 2.4% | |
| 10.29% | 29.41% | 38.24% | 17.65% | 4.41% | |
| Level of satisfaction with administrative support (administrative staff) | 33.3% | 53.1% | 9.9% | 1.2% | 2.5% |
| 54.55% | 30.91% | 12.73% | 0% | 1.82% | |
| 17.1% | 39.0% | 36.6% | 7.3% | 0% | |
| 36.76% | 36.76% | 17.65% | 7.35% | 1.47% |
Level of satisfaction of the Department’s graduates in relation to the mean values and standard deviations of the Departments of DUTH (2012 & 2013, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21)
| Question | Mean (PSED) | SD (PSED) | Mean (DUTH) | SD (DUTH) |
| Level of satisfaction with the curriculum | 4.35 | 0.709 | 4.03 | 0.739 |
| 4.11 | 0.74 | 3.89 | 0.86 | |
| 3.83 | 0.70 | 3.67 | 0.91 | |
| 4.18 | 0.71 | 3.76 | 0.87 | |
| Level of satisfaction with the teaching staff | 4.13 | 0.733 | 3.93 | 0.797 |
| 4.16 | 0.79 | 4.04 | 0.81 | |
| 3.83 | 0.63 | 3.77 | 0.83 | |
| 4.00 | 0.73 | 3.90 | 0.84 | |
| Level of satisfaction with operational infrastructure (building facilities, classrooms, etc.) | 3.18 | 0.904 | 3.02 | 1.056 |
| 3.49 | 0.81 | 3.18 | 1.14 | |
| 3.20 | 0.93 | 3.02 | 1.10 | |
| 3.24 | 1,01 | 3.20 | 1.13 | |
| Level of satisfaction with administrative support (administrative staff) | 4.14 | 0.833 | 3.62 | 1.025 |
| 4.36 | 0.85 | 3.75 | 1.05 | |
| 3.66 | 0.85 | 3.24 | 1.04 | |
| 4.00 | 0.99 | 3.57 | 1.10 |
Further questions (2012 & 2013, Academic years 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020-21)
| Question | |||
| Level of studies completed or in progress | Undergraduate (54.9%) | Master’s Degree (45.1%) | |
| Undergraduate (38.18%) | Master’s Degree (61.82%) | ||
| Undergraduate (41.5%) | Master’s Degree (58.50%) | ||
| Undergraduate (60.29%) | Master’s Degree (39.71%) | ||
| Current professional status |
Employed (65.9%) | Self employed (11%) | Unemployed (13.4%) |
| Employed (74.55%) | Self employed (1.82%) | Unemployed (18.18%) | |
| Employed (80.5%) | Self employed (4.9%) | Unemployed (12.2%), inactive (2.4%) | |
| Employed (72.06%) | Self employed (5.88%) | Unemployed (20.59%), inactive (1.47%) | |
| Correlation of current professional status with studies | Very much (50.8%) | Much (12.7%) | Not at all (31.7%) |
| Very much (45.24%) | Much (11.9%) | Not at all (33.33%) | |
| Very much (46.3%) | Much (4.9%) | Not at all (24.4%) | |
| Very much (28.30%) | Much (18.87%) | Not at all (30.19%) | |
| Time lapsed from graduation to finding first job | 1-6 months (46.3%) | 7-12 months (20.7%) | 13-24 months (15.9%) |
| 1-6 months (45.45%) | 7-12 months (14.55%) | 13-24 months (12.73%) | |
| 1-6 months (36.6%), during the studies (36.6%) | 7-12 months (7.3%) | more than 12 months after graduation (9.8%), I have not worked since graduation (4.9%) | |
| 1-6 months (17.65%), during the studies (63.24%) | 7-12 months (4.41%) | more than 12 months after graduation (8.82%), I have not worked since graduation (5.82%) |