Electronic Course Evaluation Task Force (ECETF) Proposal

Rationale

Sacramento State conducts a majority of their teaching evaluations using pencil and Scantron type forms. The practice of collecting teaching evaluations in this manner is costly, demands large amounts of staff time to collect and process the forms, delays feedback to faculty, consumes large quantities of storage space, and is environmentally unfriendly. Across the country, many universities are moving the collection of teaching evaluations to an online one for streamlining and cost efficiency purposes. It is time that Sacramento State explores the idea of collecting teaching evaluations online. A thorough investigation into the benefits as well as the potential disadvantages of collecting teaching evaluations online needs to be conducted to examine this issue. Further, it is not recommended in this proposal that departments change the tool that they are using to conduct their teaching evaluations, but that a task force simply investigate the effects of a shift to an electronic medium that is less costly, does not demand large amounts of staff time to collect and process forms, affords feedback to faculty in a timely manner, does not require physical storage space, and is environmentally friendly.

Considerations

It is important for Sacramento State to consider the efficacy and viability of a transition from a pencil and Scrantron format to an electronic one. Questions such as the potential impact that a change would have on the quality and quantity of student evaluations, process of establishing a secure and reliable online teaching evaluation platform, and considerations of an appropriate timeline for instituting such a change needs to be carefully considered.

Proposed Task Force

It is proposed that the Electronic Course Evaluation Task Force (ECETF) be formed to assess the viability and potential strategy to shifting teaching evaluations to an electronic format at Sacramento State. The composition of the Task Force would include nine members from relevant university units and be co-chaired by the Directors of the Center for Teaching and Learning (Kimo Ah Yun) and Academic Technology and Creative Services (Jean-Pierre Bayard). The ECETF membership will be comprised of:

Kimo Ah Yun, Director, Center for Teaching and Learning

Jean-Pierre Bayard, Director, Academic Technology and Creative Services

David Lang, Chair, Curriculum Policies Committee

Wendy Cunningham, Chair, Faculty Policies Committee

Jing Wang, Director, Office of Institutional Research

Doug Jackson (or designee), AVP for Information Resource & Technology

Kathryn Kay, ASI VP for Academic Affairs

Ann Stoltz, Nursing, Department Chair

Harry Theodorides, Academic Information Technology Committee

In addition to Task Force members listed above, the appropriate Human Resources representative will be consulted during all phases of the proposed pilot study.

Tasks and Timeline

While the proposed EECTF would decide the important issues to consider and timeline for proceeding with this project, it is recommended to this group that a pilot study with a select group of Departments be undertaken and the following timeline be considered.

Spring 2009

-Review literature on electronic evaluations to identify the important concerns to consider.

-Collect and review literature on “best practices” of collecting electronic course evaluations.

-Research UARTP issues associated with shifting evaluations to an electronic format.

Assuming that the Task Force deems that a pilot study is warranted after accomplishing the above three tasks, the following items will be considered in the development phase of the pilot study.

-Develop guidelines for selecting which Departments are eligible to participate in the pilot test.

-Determine the number of Departments that will be eligible to participate in the pilot test.

-Recruit Departments willing to participate in a pilot test on the use of electronic teaching evaluations for the Fall 2009 semester.

-Consider options for individual faculty within Departments to “opt out” of the pilot test.

-Consider software and hardware resources to pilot test electronic course evaluation pilot study.

-Identify important outcomes to study during the pilot test.

Fall 2009

-Provide a report to Faculty Senate Executive Committee (and subsequently the Faculty Senate if warranted) and Academic Affairs outlining the rationale for conducting, selected departments and procedures for undertaking the pilot study.

Assuming that there are no issues raised by the Faculty Senate and/or Academic Affairs after review of the above report that would prevent the pilot study from being executed, the following two items will be completed.

-Test electronic platform for collecting electronic evaluations to ensure system robustness.

-Execute electronic evaluations for selected Departments.

Spring 2010

-Present report and recommendations to Faculty Senate Executive Committee and Academic Affairs.