Motion US07/08-19 – Amend
US07/08-7 regarding required course evaluations to include explanatory text on
the uses of the evaluations
Sponsored by: Joint
Senate-Academic Affairs Committee on On-Line Course Evaluation Implementation
For Senate Action: May 14, 2008
Moved to amend US07/08-7,
passed March 12, 2008 to replace the Preamble and include the following text
(new text shown in italics) to explain implementation and use of the required
student course evaluations questions as follows:
Student Evaluation of Teaching and Learning
Preamble:
This legislation defines expectations regarding student course evaluations at
the University of Oregon, especially as they relate to annual faculty reviews
and the promotion, tenure and post-tenure review process.
Certain aspects of teaching, such as the ability to create a positive learning
environment, are appropriately and necessarily assessed through student
evaluations. Evaluations provided by students can be effectively used by all
faculty to gain insight into their teaching, and to identify ways to improve
their classroom performance. Evaluative data provided by students include
responses to both quantitative and qualitative questions.
It is important to emphasize
that student evaluation of teaching is not the sole means by which faculty
teaching performance is assessed. In particular, peer teaching evaluations are
also a required component of every promotion & tenure case.
I. Student Evaluation of Teaching
1. The on-line questionnaire system will be used to evaluate all courses with 5 or more students.
2. The following university-wide questions will be included at the beginning of
the evaluation form:
Please share with us your basic
perceptions of the course:
1.
What was the quality of this course?
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
2.
What was the quality of the instructorÕs teaching?
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
3.
How well organized was this course?
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
4.
How effective was the instructorÕs use of class time?
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
5.
How available was the instructor for communication outside of class?
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
6.
How clear were the guidelines for evaluating students' work in this
course?
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
7.
The amount that I learned in this course was:
Exceptional
| Good | Adequate | Somewhat inadequate | Unsatisfactory
Please share with us your
thoughts on the course:
1. Please comment on the instructorÕs
strengths and areas for possible improvement.
2. Please comment on the strengths
and areas of possible improvement for the course as a whole.
Please tell us a little bit
about yourself:
1.
How often did you attend class?
90-100%
75-90%
50-75%
25 to
50%
Less than
25%
Does not
apply
2.
How many hours per week did you spend on this course, other than time in
class?
More than
10
8 to
10
6 to
8
4 to
6
2 to
4
Less than
2
3.
What grade do you expect in this course?
A
B
C or
P
D
F or N
á Data from the first 7 questions are to be made centrally
available to students.
á Departments may include additional questions beyond these
as they see fit.
3. Students shall be clearly
informed, either verbally or through instructions on the on-line questionnaire,
that results of their evaluation play an important role in faculty development,
in future promotion and tenure decisions and in post-tenure reviews.
4. For the qualitative
questions, the on-line forms must indicate that only electronically signed
evaluations may be used in promotion/tenure and post-tenure reviews. (ORS
351.065 (f) (g)). In addition, the forms shall clearly state that the faculty
member responsible for the course will have access to the written comments, but
only after the grades for the course have been submitted.
5. A standard course evaluation
report shall include the distribution of responses and the mean scores for each
of the 7 quantitative university-wide questions. For comparison, the
distribution of responses and mean scores from 1) classes of a similar size
within the instructor's department; 2) classes of the same level within the
instructor's department; and 3) all classes within the instructor's department
will also be provided.
II. Procedure for Administration and Use of Student Evaluations.
1. All on-line course evaluations are to be conducted during dead week.
Students will not have access to the system prior to or after this period.
2. After grades have been submitted, the faculty member shall be given access
to both the quantitative and qualitative evaluations.
3. The department archives the standard course evaluation report and the
qualitative evaluations in the personnel file of the faculty member
for use in future faculty evaluations.
4. Quantitative evaluations
should be analyzed using valid statistical measures and the most relevant
comparator groups. Review of the written evaluations should be conducted by a
comprehensive reading of the comments.
Web page spun on 15 May 2008 by Peter B Gilkey 202 Deady Hall, Department of Mathematics at the University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1222, U.S.A. Phone 1-541-346-4717 Email:peter.gilkey.cc.67@aya.yale.edu of Deady Spider Enterprises |