January 24, 2016
Resolution in Support of Open Course Evaluations
WHEREAS, The California State Student Association (CSSA) is the single recognized voice for the 460,000
students in the California State University (CSU) System; and
WHEREAS, Course evaluations assess instructors and are used to produce feedback which can be used to
improve the quality of education; and
WHEREAS, Institutions nationwide, including many UC’s, have successfully implemented an open course
evaluation system. Open course evaluations allow students and other members of the university access
to the results of course evaluations; and
WHEREAS, Access to open course evaluations offer university community members academic guidance
and critical information on course selection; and
WHEREAS, The anonymous nature of course evaluations allow students to remain protected if course
evaluations are open; and
WHEREAS, The implementation of an open course evaluation system is an improvement over the status
quo, in which third-party sites (e.g. Rate My Professor) present polarized and outdated reviews from
unverified sources; and
WHEREAS, Students, in paying for courses, have the right to know whether past students have benefited
from a certain professor; and
WHEREAS, The lack of transparency regarding both the results and the accountability of faculty
evaluations does not promote confidence in their value causing many students to not spend the necessary
time on evaluations; and
WHEREAS, According to a study done at Western Washington University in 2004, "If all else is equal, a
student is twice as likely to choose an instructor with “excellent” ratings over an instructor with “good”
ratings; however, students are willing to select a “poor” instructor if they believe they will learn a lot from
the class 1; and
1
Wilhelm, W. (2004). The Relative Influence of Published Teaching Evaluations and Other Instructor Attributes on
Course Choice. Journal of Marketing Education, 17-30. Retrieved March 8, 2015.
1
WHEREAS, According to a study published in the Journal of Educational Psychology, "Students will choose
a highly rated course over less highly rated courses even if the workload is greater for that course than
the others 2; and
WHEREAS, Past court rulings involving the University of Wisconsin and the University of Idaho have found
that students have the right to view results of course evaluations 3; and
WHEREAS, University of California, Berkeley provides access to student evaluations and 44% of students
indicated that having access to evaluation data would be necessary to motivate them to complete course
evaluations 4; and
WHEREAS, Yale University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Oregon, UC Berkeley,
University of Idaho, University of Wisconsin, Columbia University, Northwestern University, Brown
University, Harvard University, Cornell University, Dartmouth University, University of Pennsylvania, New
York University, and Princeton University have all successfully implemented open course evaluations; and
RESOLVED, That the CSSA Board of Directors calls upon the Academic Senate, Academic and Student
Affairs, Associated Students and the Office of the Provost to create and charge an Open Course Evaluation
Implementation Committee consisting of a student majority with the planning, development, and
implementation of an open course evaluation system; and let it be further
RESOLVED, that each Associated Students or Associated Students, Inc. will help in the creation of the
Implementation Committee and will make student recommendations to sit on this task force; and let it
be further
RESOLVED, that this Implementation Committee develop an effective and well planned review process
before releasing he open course evaluations to the students; and let it be further
RESOLVED, that upon this review that the Implementation Committee ensure that the evaluations are
confidential but display anonymity, so as to not create an environment which would breed hate speech
or hostile comments toward professors or lecturer; and let it further
RESOLVED, that extensive efforts are made to include all stakeholders, including students, in the ongoing
discussion regarding open course evaluations; be it further
2
Coleman, J., & Mckeachie, W. (1981). Effects of instructor/course evaluations on student course selection.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(2), 224-226. Retrieved March 8, 2015, from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/232419339_Effects_of_instructorcourse_evaluations_on_student_course_
selection
3
Haskell, R. (1997). Administrative Use of Student Evaluation of Faculty. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 5,
21. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v5n21.1997
4
“Improving the Process of Course Evaluation: The Online Alternative for Berkeley,” op. cit., p. 32.
2
RESOLVED, that by also establishing an Open Course Evaluation the Implementation Committee should
present an Open Course Evaluation Implementation Report to the CSSA Board of Directors, Academic
Senate, and the Provost before the close of Spring 2016 outlining an implementation process; and let it
be further
RESOLVED, that as the official voice of all CSU students, the CSSA Board of Directors highly recommends
that the CSU System adopt an open course evaluation system; and let it be further
RESOLVED, That this resolution be sent to all 23 CSU Associated Students, and Associated Students,
Incorporations, all 23 Academic Senates, the Office of the Chancellor, the CSU Presidents, the CSU
Academic Senate, the CSU Board of Trustees, and the CSU Alumni Council.
3