Co-Development in Action: Updating HAMK’s Module and Course Feedback Survey

At the Häme University of Applied Sciences (HAMK), staff are encouraged to work and develop their ways of working together. Co-development is seen as a way to engage and commit the university community to development work and the changes in processes. The Spark course feedback survey that is used at HAMK was updated during the 2024–2025 academic year, and the revised survey was launched on in the beginning of August 2025. The process of implementing this update aimed to follow the principles and methods of co-development. This article describes how the update was carried out and how different stakeholder groups were involved in the process.

Feedback survey as part of HAMK’s quality system

HAMK uses a shared module and course feedback survey across its study programmes, and this is part of its larger student feedback system. The survey collects student feedback on the practical implementation of a study unit (a module or an individual course), and the feedback is used to develop modules, courses and study programmes across HAMK (2025a). This student feedback system is also part of HAMK’s quality system so that the data it produces supports quality work at HAMK (2025b).

HAMK uses the Spark course feedback system that was developed by the Studyo company (Studyo, 2025). Spark is integrated into HAMK’s study administration system, and the data that it produces is also used in HAMK’s reporting and analytics service (Microsoft Power BI). As a result, using Spark also supports data-driven decision-making at HAMK (HAMK, intranet, 4.8.2025; Lavonius-Ylönen, 2025).

Scheduled maintenance and user feedback as starting points

Spark was adopted as a feedback tool at HAMK in 2020. At that point, its implementation project defined the technical aspects but also the survey questions and usage principles of the gathered information. HAMK staff participated widely in this process. After five years of use, a scheduled maintenance was in order, and this gave the opportunity to review and update the survey, its principles, instructions, and practices.

Using the survey had led to identifying overlap between Spark and other student surveys used at HAMK, as HAMK has also introduced the LearnWell learning experience survey since Spark’s launch (Alatalo et al., 2024; HAMK, 2025c). Because it became clear that there was overlap in some of the questions in Spark and LearnWell, one goal of the update was to eliminate these redundancies.

In addition to this, also feedback from degree programmes highlighted some further issues. The survey was considered too long, it did not provide sufficient information to support implementation planning and pedagogical development, and it was perceived as a monitoring tool for HAMK’s management and administration. Furthermore, there were reports of cases where feedback given via Spark had been used to discredit individual teachers.

Because of these issues, in addition to removing overlap, the update aimed to make the survey more useful for producing immediately actionable operational data to support development work. The update project also set a goal to involve in the process key stakeholders — lecturers, heads of degree programmes, and especially students

Applying co-development methods in the update process

The development work for updating Spark sought to apply the principles and methods of co-development. While co-development can be defined in various ways, common elements in the definitions include leadership of development work, stakeholder involvement, interaction, and community engagement (Salonen et al., 2017). Co-development is a common approach in higher education institutions which are complex expert organisations with various stakeholders and relatively autonomous units and staff (Manning, 2013). There is also often a perceived divide between “core activities,” such as education and RDI, and the “administration” which consists of management and support services (Manning, 2013; Bolden et al., 2009; Sewerin & Holmberg, 2017). Therefore, co-development is well suited to organising and implementing development work in higher education communities (Buller, 2013; Salonen et al., 2017).

HAMK’s strategy, as well as its operational and financial plan, guide and encourage the organisation and staff toward purposeful development, proactivity, community spirit, and collaboration (HAMK, 2025d; HAMK, intranet, 4.8.2025). Co-development is exactly the type of activity that supports this strategy. In addition to co-development, HAMK also promotes agile experimentation, which lowers the threshold for making changes, encourages staff to try new things, speeds up development work, and allows for quick adjustments when needed.

Work on the Spark update began in spring 2024 and it was completed in spring 2025. The project was led by the Educational Development Services unit, and it involved both HAMK students and staff through various co-development methods. The methods were chosen so that they would most effectively gather stakeholder views on how Spark is perceived and how it could be improved. Another criterion was agility: participation and data collection needed to be fast and efficient.

To ensure hearing the student perspective, approximately 200 students from bachelor’s, master’s, and teacher education programmes were involved in feedback workshops that were organised in connection with the students’ other lessons and lectures. The update process itself was discussed conversations and workshops organised at meetings of HAMK’s heads of degree programmes. These degree programme heads then nominated lecturers from their programmes to participate in a survey related to the update, and some were also interviewed based on this survey. In addition to these development measures, the update was communicated as widely as possible through HAMK’s internal channels.

Final outcome shaped by collaboration

Based on stakeholder involvement, the update resulted in two main changes: The survey itself was shortened, reducing the number of questions. At the same time, the number of numerical Likert-scale questions was decreased while the number of open-ended questions was increased.

During the update project, it also became clear that the role and principles of the course feedback survey needed to be reviewed and clarified. This resulted in the following list of main points:

• Spark is HAMK’s shared course feedback survey, designed to support the development of modules, course implementations, and teaching.
• Spark is part of HAMK’s student feedback system and thereby also part of HAMK’s quality system.
• Responding to the survey is voluntary and anonymous.
• If feedback is particularly offensive, the respondent can be identified with the help of the system provider, if necessary.
• It is useful to also employ the feedback survey to support the development of students’ feedback skills.

Two of these principles generated discussion during the update project. Some participating lecturers and heads of degree programmes felt that students should respond using their names. They argued that anonymous responses may increase the amount of inappropriate feedback and, in extreme cases, even lead to targeted harassment of teachers. However, the majority of degree programme heads and lecturers believed that inappropriate feedback is relatively rare, and they did not see anonymity as problematic. Also most stakeholders who were involved in the update agreed that students should have the right to provide anonymous feedback, especially to safeguard their legal rights. It is also worth noting that other Finnish higher education institutions that were reviewed during the project use anonymous course feedback surveys. Thus, there was strong justification for maintaining anonymity. On the other hand, it was clarified during the update that particularly offensive or targeted feedback can be traced if necessary.

A shared module and course feedback survey means that everyone uses the same survey. Some lecturers felt that a common survey may not meet their specific needs. The wording and content of the questions also generated some discussion. It is clear that a shared survey is a compromise, and not all wishes can be fulfilled. However, the updated questions are the result of broad-based and collaborative development work, and because of this they will likely satisfy most stakeholders. Additionally, lecturers and teaching teams can still insert up to three custom questions using the question bank of the system.

Moving forward together

Developing the survey does not stop here. This now-implemented update focused on the survey form itself. However, several potential areas for further development emerged during the process. These include integrating Spark into HAMK’s Learn (Moodle) learning platform, making response times more flexible, sharing effective feedback practices across HAMK, using Spark to support the development of students’ generic skills, and the need for a technical platform for collecting mid-course feedback. These areas for future development relate to technical system improvements, to the overall development of feedback culture, and to Spark’s role in supporting educational development at HAMK.

In conclusion, developing the survey continues – together, through experimentation, and in search of most effective solutions.

Authors