TEACHER AND COURSE EVALUATION COMMITTEE REPORT
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS
Committee Members:
Issue
Inza Fort, Sharon Gaber, David Gay, Paul Hewitt, Kathy Van
Laningham, Tom Jensen, Mark Killenbeck, Charles Rosenkrans
The Teacher and Course Evaluation Committee recommends that:
Frequency of student
evaluations
1. University of Arkansas Academic Policy Series 1405.15, Board
Policy 405.1, and Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board
stipulate that students’ evaluations of teachers and courses are an
important component in evaluating faculty teaching performance
and should be considered on an annual basis. Hence, student
evaluations of teachers and courses must be gathered for all class
sections (i.e., every course, every semester) with more than four
students enrolled.
Self, peer, & student
evaluations
2. Meaningful evaluation of teachers and courses should include more
than student evaluations of a particular course or teacher. Teacher
and course evaluations should include self and peer evaluations as
well as student evaluations (for summative and formative
purposes).
Annual reviews of
teaching
a. Students’ evaluations of teacher and course evaluations will
be completed for all class sections (i.e., every course, every
semester) with more than four students enrolled.
b. Annual performance reviews of teaching for nontenured
tenure-track faculty, graduate student instructors, and for the
first three years for nontenure track faculty must include
student evaluations of each course and teacher,
supplemented by self and peer evaluations.
c. Annual performance reviews of teaching for tenured faculty
and nontenure track faculty beyond their first three years must
include student evaluations of each course and teacher, and
when feasible supplemented by self and peer evaluations.
Enhanced reviews of
teaching
3. Self, peer, and student evaluations of teaching should be more
extensive for third-year reviews, promotion, and tenure decisions.
The faculty of each college should develop policies and procedures
for these enhanced evaluations. For example, for self-evaluations,
faculty may need to construct a teaching portfolio, course portfolio,
and document changes in course content and delivery that have
occurred. Peer evaluations might entail closer examinations of
class materials and/or classroom observations. Additional items
might be asked on student evaluations of teacher and course forms
and there might be some open-ended questions for comments that
would be shared with reviewers.
Online student
evaluations of
4. Students’ evaluations of teachers and courses will be conducted
online. The online evaluations would allow for quicker turn around
teachers and courses
PICES & University
Core
for faculty feedback, be more sustainable, reduce time taken in
class, standardize administration, and allow students to evaluate all
their courses in the same timeframe. The university should develop
the processes for implementing the online system by benchmarking
with other universities. Faculty will have input of the online system
and processes.
5. Recognizing that all courses are not the same (e.g., face-to-face
versus online, recitation versus lecture, studio versus lab), it is
important that any teacher and course evaluation instrument have
multiple questions from which to draw upon. Given that, the
committee recommends that the Purdue Instructor and Course
Evaluation System (PICES) be utilized for student evaluations
(PICES is an enhanced online version of the Purdue Cafeteria
System, e.g., 600 items versus 200 items). The university core
items are:
Overall, I would rate this course as:
Excellent - Good - Fair - Poor - Very Poor.
Overall, I would rate this instructor as:
Excellent - Good - Fair - Poor - Very Poor.
English Language
Question
6. State law requires that students have a way to rate their instructor’s
spoken English. To accommodate the PICES nomenclature, the
existing required English language question “I can understand my
instructor’s spoken English” would be changed to:
Overall, I would rate my instructor’s Spoken English as:
Excellent - Good - Fair - Poor - Very Poor.
College & Program
Core
7. Faculty in each college may select up to 5 items to serve as the
college core in the evaluations and programs, as defined by
department faculty, may select up to 5 items to serve as the
program core in the evaluations.
Faculty Selected
Items
8. Faculty/Instructors may select up to 5 items for the students’
evaluation of the instructor and course.
Department Chair
Education
9. The university will provide education for department chairs on the
use and interpretation of students’ evaluations of instructors and
courses as well as alternatives for self and peer evaluations. The
education will include the use of multiple items/indicators of quality
instruction
Implementation
10. The new online students’ evaluations of teachers and courses will
be tested in the spring 2011 and implemented in the fall 2011.