Course Evaluation Ad-Hoc Committee Recommendations

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
University-Wide Course Evaluation Committee Peter Biehl, Chair, Department of Anthropology Krissy Costanzo, Committee Staff Support; Academic Affairs March.
Advertisements

Academic Program and Unit Review at UIS Office of the Provost Fall 2014.
Writing an Effective Proposal for Innovations in Teaching Grant
Institutional Course Evaluation Solution Faculty Senate Executive Committee September 12, 2012 Carol VanZile-Tamsen, Ph.D.; Associate Director, Office.
New Web-Based Course Evaluation Services Available to Schools and Departments Presentation to Faculty Council November 6, 2009.
Conversion of Faculty Evaluations to an On- Line Format Catherine Hackett Renner SUNY Geneseo Larry Piegza Gap Technologies, Inc. OnlineCourseEvaluations.com.
Pace University Assessment Plan. Outline I. What is assessment? II. How does it apply to Pace? III. Who’s involved? IV. How will assessment be implemented.
The SACS Re-accreditation Process: Opportunities to Enhance Quality at Carolina Presentation to the Faculty Council September 3, 2004.
Student (and other) Course Evaluations Response Rates, Relevance and Results Kathleen Norris Plymouth State University, NH.
+ Measuring Teaching Quality in the Online Classroom Ann H. Taylor Director, Dutton e-Education Institute College of Earth and Mineral Sciences.
Redesign of Beginning and Intermediate Algebra using ALEKS Lessons Learned Cheryl J. McAllister Laurie W. Overmann Southeast Missouri State University.
Academic Assessment Task Force Report August 15, 2013 Lori Escallier, Co-Chair Keith Sheppard, Co-Chair Chuck Taber, Co-Chair.
Academic Year.  Still working well 17 reports submitted, 1 missing  9 of 18 departments expressed concerns about assessment 4 departments reported.
End of Course Evaluation Taimi Olsen, Ph.D., Director, Tennessee Teaching and Learning Center Jennifer Ann Morrow, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Evaluation,
TEACHING EFFECTIVENES AND ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE ALISON ANTES JENNIFER STANSBURY KOENIG STEPHANIE KLATZKE CHRIS LAWRENCE LILI MA PHIL MCCARTNEY KENNETH.
NC STATE UNIVERSITY Campus Systems and Calendar Systems: a self assessment Sarah Noell, ITD, Project Coordinator Harry Nicholos, ITD, Technical co-chair.
Final Update on the New Faculty Course Evaluation & Online System November, 2003.
Evidence of Student Learning Fall Faculty Seminar Office of Institutional Research and Assessment August 15, 2012.
On-line briefing for Program Directors and Staff 1.
Students Course and Teacher Evaluation Please refer to notes at the bottom of this slide.
Visioning 2 Committee 15,800 by 2018 JoyceArmstrongFamily Sciences 13 JessicaGullionSociology GovernorJacksonFinancial AidMarkHamnerInstitutional Research.
Teaching Council Recommendations to the Faculty Senate DRAFT 2/9/09 & 3rd DRAFT Feb 13, 2009 for use by the FS Exec Committee, March 4, 2009.
eXPlorance Blue: The new electronic student course evaluation system
OSU Faculty Senate Diversity Committee Dwaine Plaza & Evviva Weinraub The purpose of the Faculty Senate sponsored survey is to explore the current attitudes,
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
School Development Implementation and Monitoring “Building a Learning Community”
The Use of Formative Evaluations in the Online Course Setting JENNIFER PETERSON, MS, RHIA, CTR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SCIENCES.
Maximum Student Credit Hour Load per Semester POLICY 8.22.
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
Advanced Writing Requirement Proposal
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Master Academic Planning
Taught Postgraduate Program Review
CAÑADA COLLEGE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
Academic Program Review
Going Beyond Course Design: Implementing Online Delivery Standards
The assessment process For Administrative units
Message from ExecAGC Nick Antonakis – Chair Nikki Banks Ann Alexander
2007 Article VII # ELFA 8 Education, Labor, and Family Assistance
Master Academic Planning
Student Learning outcomes assessment
Grand Rapids Community College Faculty Evaluation System
Strategic Enrolment Management Planning OVERVIEW
Course Evaluation Committee
Academic integrity at UB: Status & Initiatives
Governance and leadership roles for equality and diversity in Colleges
Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update
Considerations in Engineering
Overview UNC Charlotte will soon offer Acalog/Curriculog as an electronic academic program and course approval system for creating, modifying, and accessing.
Middle States Update to President’s Cabinet October 8, 2018
Qualtrics Proposal Gwen Gorzelsky, Executive Director, TILT
Heather Brod, Executive Director of Faculty Affairs and FAME
QUALITY OF EDUCATION PROPOSED ACTION PLAN FALL 2018
OUHSC Graduate College Program Review Overview and Timeline
Assessing Academic Programs at IPFW
Reaccreditation and Illinois
Department of Curriculum & Instruction
Deconstructing Standard 2a Dr. Julie Reffel Valdosta State University
IDEA Student Ratings of Instruction
Administrative Review Committee
Taught Postgraduate Program Review
2019 Spring & Fall Timeline May 10, 2019
Institutional Course Evaluation Solution
Fort Valley State University
Accreditation follow-up report
Senate Meeting Summary
Promotion & Tenure workshop
Budgeting Conversation
COURSE EVALUATION Spring 2019 Pilot August 27, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Course Evaluation Ad-Hoc Committee Recommendations

Charge of the Committee: The charge of the Course Evaluation Ad-Hoc Committee is to review best practices and procedures for assessing student perceptions of faculty teaching. This committee will make recommendations for a standardized data collection process and develop a universal assessment instrument that has a set of common core questions

Committee Members

Rationale for the proposed changes to the current course evaluation and procedures for dissemination: Research suggests that teacher evaluations are often biased due to focus on instructor characteristics and do not reflect course design, delivery, climate, or actual student outcomes.   Lack of standardized core questions do not permit benchmarking or university-wide trend analysis. Lack of standardized core questions can influence tenure and promotion decisions. Some course evaluations currently utilized do not evaluate key student centeredness constructs to provide meaningful feedback to instructors. Current course evaluation dissemination and analysis processes vary significantly. Exploring various standardized methods can reduce staff time and reduce the inconsistencies that exist with students administering and delivering course evaluations.

Methods Used to Develop New Proposed Course Evaluation A review of the published literature was conducted to assess best practices in course evaluation development. Various existing course evaluations were collected from each of the UT colleges as well as some peer institutions. A thematic analysis was conducted to determine common constructs that were measured in course evaluations that were deemed best practice as well as those commonly measured in UT course evaluations. Based on the thematic analysis, 12 core questions were created. The following questions will be measured by these constructs: Student engagement, Course Design, Course Implementation, Assessment Practices, and Course Impact.

Course Evaluation Recommendations A university-wide course evaluation shall be developed that includes a short set of standardized core questions. Each department and college may add additional questions to the core questions that are tailored to their own unique needs. Prior to the newly developed course evaluation being fully implemented, it shall be presented and discussed with various shared governance bodies such as the faculty senate and graduate council.   Prior to full implementation of the newly created course evaluation a “pilot test” should be conducted to assess any concerns or issues with validity and reliability (see proposed timeline). Full implementation of the new course evaluation shall occur in the fall 2019 Semester (see proposed timeline).

Course Evaluation Dissemination Procedures Due to variability in the dissemination of course evaluations, it is recommended that all course evaluations are distributed during the last two weeks of the regular class schedule. Ideally, if the course evaluation is given in class, this should be done in the beginning of the class period to ensure there is adequate time to fill out the evaluation To improve the course evaluation data collection process, it is recommended that all course evaluations be collected electronically via an external link disseminated through the course blackboard site, email, or other software such as Qualtrics. This external link is to an Enterprise Survey already commonly used at UT.   All course evaluation data collected shall remain anonymous without any student being linked to their individual response.

Due to possible ethical issues, it is recommended that students registered in the course should not be involved in the dissemination and collection of the course evaluation.   All faculty are encouraged to direct students in class to take the course evaluation survey. For those in classroom based courses, course evaluations can be filled out online in class. On the course evaluation form a standard statement should include the following: “The University of Toledo recommends each course taught by its faculty be evaluated with the electronic course evaluation form found here _______________. There are twelve questions. Please answer all twelve including the last three questions asking for written comments. The completed evaluations go directly to the University and the instructor will not be allowed to see your anonymous responses until after final grades are completed.”

Proposed Timeline for Implementation of the New Recommendations December 2018-draft version of recommendations presented to Provost Hsu and staff December 2018-overview of committee recommendations presented to Deans. Meeting with Faculty Senate Executive Committee and Graduate Council Executive Committee   January/February 2019-incorporate any suggested changes to the recommendations. Present the recommendations to Faculty Senate and Graduate Council for endorsement March 2019-Incorporate any changes suggested from the shared governance bodies and present to UT Senior Leadership Team

March/April 2019- work with Online Learning to prepare and deploy pilot test of course evaluation for a small number of courses in summer 2019.   May/August 2019 –Monitor course evaluation process and make any necessary revisions August 2019- Announcement from the Provost Office regarding full implementation of the recommendations October 2019- All department and college questions are submitted to online learning November/December 2019- Deployment of new course evaluation