Online Course Evaluation Process
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Teaching and Learning Committee, faculty representatives from ART, FEC, FADC Committees
I liked. . .







Discussion and debate with other faculty
Progress made – thank you!
Q&A
Point about the “experience”; about putting written response first
This will hopefully enable faster and secure feedback – which will help faculty
development especially with our adjuncts.
Conversation on order of qualitative and quantitative compromise: 2 questions,
quantitative, and final fill-in on summary – perfect solution
The ease of responding and the organization / layout (for the most part)
Concerns I have . . .
















That a small sample of faculty (CTL committee) will make decisions
based on their biases
Priming of student answers
Control (for example, what f student is drunk?)
Cognitive context
Students can opt out
I don’t recall faculty discussion on this
Students might be frustrated by process
Fewer written responses
Privacy: How do I know the evaluator is not being immediately
influenced at the time of doing the evaluation?
Jumping into tech with little evidence
Making a lot of custom surveys by school or departing
Faculty not listening to research findings on what works
Are we adding the “next” button at the TOP of the instruction page?
Are the last questions on eval form included (e.g. compared to other
instructors. . . )?
I thought the suggestion to put open ended questions first is a good idea
Well done
To make this successful, I need:




Further discussion on whether qualitative or
quantitative should go first
All suggestions followed up
To have control – se paper method if I choose
Suggestions: the Cal Lutheran logo is large –
takes up too much real estate on the screen make smaller and decrease need to scroll