Curriculum review · Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka37 graduates surveyed, 2022–2026
Animal Bio-Resource Technology & Management, through its graduates’ eyes
Every response here comes from a graduate of the Animal Bio-Resource specialization — Aquatic Bio-Resource responses have been set aside so the curriculum committee is reading feedback on the track it actually owns.
Graduating cohort
4.41/5
Overall graduate experience
89%
Would recommend the programme
4.32/5
Felt prepared for their career
37
Responses in this view
Who answered
Graduation year, degree class and where they landed
Graduation year
202519 · 51%
20269 · 24%
20244 · 11%
20224 · 11%
20231 · 3%
Final classification
Second Class Upper18 · 49%
Second Class Lower11 · 30%
General6 · 16%
First Class2 · 5%
Employment sector
Private26 · 70%
Government9 · 24%
Semi-Government2 · 5%
Field of expertise
16 Farming/Production13 Food Processing/Manufacturing11 Animal Feed9 Other5 Consultancy5 Marketing3 Value Addition2 International Trade
Did the curriculum do its job?
Self-rated 1 (not well) to 5 (extremely well)
Prepared me for my career4.32 / 5
Learning outcomes communicated clearly4.16 / 5
Assessment matched learning outcomes4.14 / 5
Exam schedules were flexible3.49 / 5
Course by course
Average rating, centred on the scale midpoint (3)
Rated lowest
Applications of Aquatic Bioresource Management
2.81
Introduction to Aquatic Biology and Aquaculture
3.05
Aquatic Bio-resource Production
3.05
Equine Management and Micro livestock Production
3.38
Swine Production
3.57
Risk assesment and Food Safety Management in Fishery Products
3.57
Agrostology
3.73
Cereal Science & Technology
3.73
Rated highest
Industrial Training
4.70
Research Project
4.65
Quality Management of Food Processing and Handling
4.65
Principles of Food Science & Technology
4.57
Laboratory Techniques in Livestock Production
4.49
Food Microbiology
4.49
Farm Practice-LP
4.49
Food and Nutrition
4.43
Average by course group
Core courses4.06 / 5
Compulsory specialization4.1 / 5
Elective specialization3.8 / 5
Industrial training & assessment
19 of 37 called the training period too short
200-hour industrial training
Too short19 · 51%
Adequate18 · 49%
Was the exam system effective?
Yes32 · 86%
Partly4 · 11%
No1 · 3%
Faced strict or challenging situations
No24 · 65%
Yes8 · 22%
Other3 · 8%
Somewhat2 · 5%
Course structure felt flexible
Yes27 · 73%
Other5 · 14%
No3 · 8%
Somewhat2 · 5%
Where it leads
Job relatedness and time to first employment
How closely their job matches the degree
Directly related24 · 65%
Somewhat related7 · 19%
Not related6 · 16%
Wait from graduation to first job
Less than 1 month23 · 62%
1 to 6 months10 · 27%
6 to 12 months4 · 11%
How the programme stacks up
Against similar degrees, in graduates’ own words
Compared to similar programmes
More comprehensive28 · 76%
Similar7 · 19%
Lacks key aspects2 · 5%
Strengths vs. areas to improve
30 Industry relevance26 Real-world exposure17 Entrepreneurship13 Innovation focus10 Networking links
31 Limited industry exposure23 Few international opportunities17 Lack of digital skills7 Less focus on sustainability
In their own words
Short, unedited comments from this cohort
Key strength“Build up a strong graduate profile”
Key weakness“Lack of field experiences”
Key strength“practical knowledge”
Key weakness“Strength the bond between lectures and students some what low. Industrial training duration is not enough .”
Key strength“English medium degree
Specialization process”
Key weakness“Too much time taken for completion.
Lack of animals in faculty farm
Lack of awareness programmes about higher studies, scholarships and industrial job market”
Key strength“Helps to combine theoretical knowledge with practical and it exposure me to the industry.”
Key weakness“As my opinion less industry orieneted.”