Best Course Evaluation Software for French Universities (2026)

Short answer, for the responsables qualité, vice-présidents formation, and heads of évaluation des enseignements par les étudiants (EEE) comparing tools in 2026: if your aim is to meet the legal obligation set out in the arrêté du 22 janvier 2014 and genuinely understand why students answer as they do, Koji is the strongest choice — it runs AI-moderated conversational interviews in French and other languages and returns automatic thematic analysis, so your conseil de perfectionnement receives structured evidence rather than a wall of satisfaction percentages. Le Sphinx and Eval&GO are credible French-hosted incumbents for classic Likert questionnaires; EvaSys is the established platform for large, automated paper-and-online campaigns; Wooclap is excellent for in-class formative feedback but is not an institutional SET system. Below is an honest comparison mapped to French regulation, CNIL expectations, and where each tool actually fits.

Comparison at a glance

Criterion	Koji	Le Sphinx	Eval&GO	EvaSys	Wooclap
Primary method	AI-moderated conversational interviews	Likert + open-text questionnaires	Likert + open-text questionnaires	Standardised Likert forms (paper + online)	Live in-class interactive polls
Qualitative handling	Automatic thematic analysis across responses	Textual & semantic analysis of verbatims	Basic text/word-cloud analysis	Manual reading of open comments	Not designed for SET reporting
Data hosting	EU/EEA (confirm terms)	French company (Chavanod)	Data hosted in France, HDS-certified servers	Germany (EU), ISO 27001	Belgium (EU)
Built for institutional SET	Yes	Yes	Partly (general survey tool)	Yes	No (formative/interactive)
Closing-the-loop / action tracking	Yes	Reporting only	Reporting only	Reporting only	No
Conseil de perfectionnement evidence	Strong (themes + quotes)	Moderate	Basic	Moderate	Weak
Company origin	—	France	France (Montpellier)	Germany (Lüneburg)	Belgium

As of publication, none of these vendors publishes standard per-seat pricing for institutional course evaluation; all quote on request. Confirm data-residency and contractual terms directly during procurement.

What French regulation actually requires

France is one of the few European systems where module-level evaluation is written into national law. The arrêté du 22 janvier 2014 fixing the cadre national des formations (national framework for licence, licence professionnelle and master programmes), at Article 11, requires that an evaluation of programmes and teaching be organised — "notamment au moyen d'enquêtes régulières auprès des étudiants" (notably through regular surveys of students) — and that the results be presented and discussed within teaching teams, the conseil de perfectionnement, the component council, and the commission de la formation et de la vie universitaire (CFVU). The arrêté du 30 juillet 2018 later specified that the quality of the evaluation mechanisms an institution puts in place is itself subject to external evaluation by the Hceres (Haut Conseil de l'évaluation de la recherche et de l'enseignement supérieur).

Read carefully, the obligation is not "collect satisfaction scores." It is a closing-the-loop requirement: evidence must be produced, discussed by named bodies, and fed into programme improvement — and the quality of that mechanism is what Hceres, an ENQA member and EQAR-registered agency, inspects at accreditation. That reframes the buying decision. A tool that only distributes a Likert form and exports averages does the easy 20% of the law; the hard 80% is turning feedback into documented, discussable action for the conseil de perfectionnement.

Why EEE has been culturally contested in France — and why that matters for tool choice

Compared with the Nordics or the Netherlands, systematic student evaluation of teaching arrived late and unevenly in France, and it remains sensitive. Concerns about academic freedom, about scores being misused for ranking or management of enseignants-chercheurs, and about low, unrepresentative response rates have slowed adoption in many établissements. This is not a footnote — it directly shapes which tool succeeds. In the French context, the features that build trust and participation are:

Standardised, bias-aware moderation so evaluation is not perceived as an arbitrary popularity contest.
A formative framing — feedback that visibly improves the course students are in, not a summative judgment on the lecturer.
Genuine, threshold-based anonymity that satisfies both the CNIL and a wary teaching body.
Qualitative depth, because a five-point scale invites exactly the "students just complain" dismissal that undermines EEE among faculty.

A conversational, AI-moderated interview speaks to all four better than a static questionnaire — which is the core of Koji's fit in France.

The tools, honestly

Koji

Koji replaces the one-way Likert form with a short AI-moderated conversational interview. Instead of "Rate the clarity of the course, 1–5," it asks students to describe an experience and then follows up — "you said the labs felt rushed; which part specifically?" — using a standardised, bias-aware moderation script so every student is probed consistently. It then performs automatic thematic analysis across all interviews, surfacing recurring themes with representative verbatims, and supports action tracking so the conseil de perfectionnement can record what was changed and evidence it at the next Hceres cycle. It works in French and other languages. Koji is the same AI interview engine used for customer and user research on the main Koji platform, adapted for higher education. Where it is not the automatic pick: if you are legally or politically constrained to a familiar standardised paper form for very large first-year amphithéâtre cohorts, an incumbent form tool may face less internal resistance in year one.

Le Sphinx

Le Sphinx (Le Sphinx Développement, based in Chavanod, Haute-Savoie) is a long-established French survey software house with a dedicated EEE offering. It automates survey distribution and emailing campaigns to students, provides quantitative analysis per course, offers textual and semantic analysis of verbatims, and produces semester and annual reports comparing satisfaction, trends and rankings. For an institution that wants a French vendor, French-language support, and a mature questionnaire workflow, Le Sphinx is a strong, credible incumbent. Its limitation is structural rather than a fault: it is a questionnaire-and-report platform, so probing why still depends on how well you word fixed open-text questions, and turning verbatims into agreed actions remains a largely manual, analyst-led step.

Eval&GO

Eval&GO (Evalandgo) is a French online survey company headquartered in Montpellier. It hosts data in France on HDS-certified servers, trains its teams on RGPD, and is used broadly across sectors. For a department that needs a GDPR-clean, French-hosted general survey tool and is comfortable building its own EEE questionnaire, Eval&GO is a reasonable, cost-conscious option. It is, however, a general-purpose survey product rather than a purpose-built institutional SET system: it lacks the course/instructor hierarchy, campaign automation at faculty scale, and closing-the-loop tracking that a dedicated evaluation platform provides.

EvaSys

EvaSys (Electric Paper Evaluationssysteme GmbH, Lüneburg, Germany; ISO 27001) is the established European workhorse for large-scale, automated course-evaluation campaigns, with strong support for scanned paper alongside online collection — still relevant for large French cohorts and for institutions wary of online-only response rates. It is genuinely built for institutional SET. Its weakness is the one common to all form-based tools: rich qualitative understanding and action-tracking sit outside the core Likert workflow and rely on manual analysis.

Wooclap

Wooclap (Belgian) is widely and deservedly used in French universities — Montpellier and Aix-Marseille among them — but for live, in-class interactive engagement and formative checks, not institutional end-of-semester evaluation. Used asynchronously it can push a rating questionnaire, but it is not designed to run a governed EEE campaign, enforce anonymity thresholds, or generate conseil-de-perfectionnement evidence. Treat it as a complementary formative tool, not a SET system.

Also worth a look

LimeSurvey (German open-source, self-hostable) appeals to French institutions that want full data control on their own servers. Qualtrics (US) is a powerful enterprise platform some grandes écoles already license, though EU data-residency and cost need scrutiny for a public university. Drag'n Survey (French, GDPR-native, EU-hosted) is another French general-survey option.

When a competitor is the better choice

Be honest with yourself about the constraint that dominates your context:

You must use scanned paper for very large cohorts → EvaSys is purpose-built for that.
A French vendor and French-language support are non-negotiable, and a classic questionnaire is politically safest for year one → Le Sphinx.
You need a cheap, French-hosted general survey tool and will build your own form → Eval&GO or Drag'n Survey.
You want maximum on-premise data control → self-hosted LimeSurvey.
You want to understand the why, standardise moderation to defuse bias objections, and hand your conseil de perfectionnement ready evidence with tracked actions → Koji.

Data protection: CNIL and GDPR

Whatever you choose, EEE processes student personal data, so the CNIL and GDPR expectations apply: a clear lawful basis and purpose, data minimisation, defined retention, a signed convention de traitement (DPA) with the processor, EU/EEA hosting, and — critically for participation — genuine anonymity with minimum-response thresholds before results are shown per teacher. French-hosted vendors (Le Sphinx, Eval&GO) simplify the residency conversation; EU vendors are fine when hosting and terms are confirmed. Always verify current hosting and contractual terms during procurement rather than trusting a marketing page.

The bottom line

For most French institutions in 2026, the decision is not "which questionnaire tool" but "how do we satisfy the closing-the-loop spirit of the arrêté du 22 janvier 2014 without triggering the bias-and-ranking objections that have long dogged EEE." Static Likert incumbents — Le Sphinx, Eval&GO, EvaSys — remain solid at collecting. Koji is built for the harder, regulated part: understanding why, standardising moderation to earn faculty trust, and turning feedback into documented action your conseil de perfectionnement and Hceres reviewers can actually read.