This paper analyses university graduate students' perspective on what makes a good lecturer in research university. Teaching is not just a profession but an art (Squires, 2002; Ababio, 2013) which requires deep subject knowledge, ability to transfer knowledge to students and help them develop certain skills, and more important it implies high social responsibility because lecturers prepare future specialists. It is worth taking into account that the entry requirements for teaching at university are less strict than for teaching in schools. Basic pedagogical education or any methodological training is not necessary to teach at university, the primary attention is focused on the research experience, subject knowledge and expertise of the specialist who becomes a teacher (Ferman, 2002). Issues related to the definition of quality of education and teaching have been studied, however there is still no universally accepted definition and understanding of the quality of education and teaching (Harvey, 2024). This research is an attempt to define what makes a good university lecturer in a research university where teachers combine two roles: the first one is a researcher and the second one is a teacher.

For the purposes of this research we analysed graduate student evaluation of teaching results in the Institute of Education department of the Higher School of Economics Research University for the last 5 years: 2019 through 2024. The comments for courses graded 4.2 and higher out of 5.0 grading system were considered. 

The theoretical framework for the study was the 3P (Presage-Process-Product) Model developed by John Biggs to analyze and evaluate the learning and teaching process. provides a useful context for understanding the importance and function of approaches to learning. The model proposes personal characteristics and environmental influences (presage factors) combine to create the approach a student uses in their learning (process factors), which in turn influences the learning outcomes (product factors) they are able to attain (Song, 2018).

The methodology of this research is based on qualitative methods, including thematic coding. Students' text responses from the SET results from 2019 through 2024 are categorized by the following themes: 1. Course design, 2. Evaluation system, 3. Feedback, 4. Attitude towards students, 5. How classes are organized, 6. Communication style, 7. Usefulness of a course. Additionally, the present study is based on content analysis of anonymous student responses to open-ended evaluation of teaching questions.

The primary finding of the current research is that teaching excellence at research university is not determined by one or two factors, but it is a complex of professional skills, pedagogical skills and communicative approach which are aimed to provide valuable learning experience. It is our view that these findings can be relevant for other research universities where teacher are firstly focused on their research work, and only after that - on their teaching. What students value most are: 1. Teachers' deep knowledge in their professional area ('... she is a unique teacher and an excellent researcher...', '100% knowledge of the material,...'), 2. Knowledge that is applicable and relevant to their future profession ('the course provides a full set of tools and techniques for your work'), 3. The ability to explain complex theories and ideas understandably ('he explains boring legal nuances with live examples and real cases'), 4. Clear course evaluation requirements ('...during the first class the teacher explained all the requirements to us. They fully corresponded to the content of the course and were understandable for everyone.'), 5. Timely and accurate feedback ('...we always received meaningful comments on our work about how we succeeded and what we could change.'), 6. Openness for communication and discussions ('interesting discussions, openness to academic extracurricular communication'), 7. Encouraging and supportive atmosphere in the classroom (Very reverent and patient in explaining any complexity and creating a comfortable and safe atmosphere for interaction).

1) Ferman, T. (2002). Academic professional development practice: What lecturers find valuable. The international journal for academic development, 7(2), 146-158. 2) Squires G. Teaching as a professional discipline: A multi-dimensional model. – Routledge, 2002 3) Ababio B. T. Nature of teaching: What teachers need to know and do //International Journal of Innovation Education and Research. – 2013. – Т. 1. – №. 3. – pp. 37-48 4) Harvey L. What have we learned from 30 years of Quality in Higher Education: academics’ views of quality assurance //Quality in Higher Education. 2024. – Vol. 30. no. 3. pp. 360-375. DOI: 10.1080/13538322.2024.2385793 5) Song J., Elements in MOOC-based College English Learning Environment--Based on Biggs’s 3P Model. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 89, 4th International Symposium on Social Science (ISSS 2018), 370-373. 6) Su F., Wood M. What makes a good university lecturer? Students' perceptions of teaching excellence //Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. – 2012. – Т. 1. – Vol. 4. – pp. 142-155