Faculty Meeting December 12, 2007
Teaching and Learning Committee Info-Share
Topic: Student Course evaluations administered at the end of the semester / term.
Committee consensus: Move to on-line grading evaluations asap.
We are at a crossroads:
 Scantron machines we currently use need to be replaced
Step I
Weigh benefits and problems of Scantron Method. See Flowchart (Assessment Website)
 SUM: ineffective, inefficient, and antiquated.
 Scantron process uses too much HR time in Provost’s office (scan to electronic, etc.)
 evaluations get lost somewhere in the process (from beginning to end)
 time factor: we use evals for hiring/keeping adjuncts, ART process, and for revising
courses. The evals do not return to the people who need them in time to hire/let go
adjuncts, or to revise courses.
Committee also studied current CLU response rates (not 100%).
Conclusion: shift to an electronic course evaluation delivery of our same questions.
Step II
Pilot program. ISS provided software and it was piloted with Michele LeBlanc’s 2
spring courses last semester, 2007. the pilot included one administration in a computer
lab and the other at a computer location of students’ choice. Results: Process
cumbersome due to software limitations; successful from students’ and Michele’s
perspectives.
Step III
Committee re-evaluation and research of last 10 year trend into electronic evaluation
procedures in higher ed institutions. Topics included: response rates, comparison of
delivery systems
Conclusion: appraise faculty and begin talking with Vendors of evaluation software.
Review and contribute to software criteria.
Step IV
Julius and Halyna talk with and choose vendors to visit campus in spring.
Step V
Open meetings with vendors and core group to attend all demonstrations and
presentations and provide feedback using criteria.
Step VI
Choose vendor and begin selective implementation.