Where: WOU Portal
When: Until 6:15 p.m. Friday, Dec. 12
By Allison Opson Clement News Editor
Western’s new course evaluation system is being used for the first time across campus, returning to students the ability to provide feedback on classes and professors for the first time in a year.
CollegeNet’s What Do You Think? program was chosen last spring, and after testing over the summer, this is the first time it will be used on a university-wide scale.
Dr. Mary Pettenger, chairperson of the Joint Committee on Course Evaluations, said that it is definitely past time to resume regular evaluations.
According to Pettenger, there were several problems with the former system and the university had a hard time keeping the program operational.
“It’s been a long process to try to come up with a new system,” Pettenger said.
The old paper system, prior to Western’s latest online evaluation system, was prohibitively expensive, and difficult to manage, according to Pettenger. Data access is also much easier with the new CollegeNet system.
According to CollegeNet.com, What Do You Think? saved the University of Oregon over $200,000 in paper, printing, scanning and labor in the first year of use.
Dr. Mark Perlman, president of the Western Oregon University Federation of Teachers (WOUFT, Western’s faculty union), said not having course evaluations is not option, because faculty members need to have a tool to judge their work.
“Students should have a voice, and we want to hear what their answers are,” Perlman said. “We’ve gone long enough without having a system; it’s kind of embarrassing.”
First year Westin Kmetz said it is good to have course evaluations, because the teachers gain a better understanding of student opinions and perceptions in their classrooms. Keeping communication open between students and teachers is important, Kmetz added.
“When you don’t get feedback as a teacher, I feel like you keep doing the same things,” Kmetz said. He feels that evaluations are useful to help the teacher understand what they are doing right or wrong.
Dr. Bryan Dutton, chair of WOUFT’s bargaining team, said evaluations are important.
“I really value it because it’s a way to make improvements,” Dutton said. “It’s clear that faculty are pleased that evaluations will be a regular part of our process.”
Yet, the evaluations can’t do anything if they’re not filled out.
“In order to get reliable data, we need to figure out a way to get students to respond,” Pettenger said.
“It also improves response rates when students believe they are being heard,” said Dr. Cat McGrew, former chairperson of the Joint Committee on Course Evaluations and current director of academic affairs. “No one wants to waste their time, so knowing you can make a difference, makes a difference.”
The university administration and the faculty union are in the beginning stages of discussing the impact of potentially using open-ended short-answer questions in course evaluations, according to McGrew.
Perlman said there are people that are skeptical of open-ended questions, and there are some who want open-ended questions.
“I wish I had more freedom in it,” Kmetz said, adding that the multiple choice questions worked for most people. He added that there may be too many meanings behind some answers, which may confuse the teacher over the kinds of responses they are getting.
To clear up communication, said Kmetz, the possibility of adding open-ended responses to the multiple-choice would be the most useful, efficient style. Students wouldn’t have to respond with more if they didn’t have anything else to say, but that would be an option for students who wanted to say more.
“I see it as a positive because it will allow faculty to have a greater understanding of what the numbers mean,” McGrew said of open-ended questions.
McGrew has a file of email print-outs from students who contacted her office, commenting that they wanted a place to explain their responses to multiple-choice questions, or wanted a place to add more about their course or professor. They want to say what they think, McGrew said; they want to be heard.
Perlman said these ten questions do provide enough information for students and professors to start with now. The rest of the discussion, such as the potential for open-ended questions, will take place later.
“We wanted to get the bulk of it rolling,” Perlman said. For now, everyone settled on ten multiple-choice questions, he said.
Faculty objections seem to be not over course evaluations or open-ended questions in general, according to Dutton, but in the implementation. Professors may be concerned about how the questions are asked, shaping the kinds of answers given, as well as what will be done with these responses, Dutton said.
According to Dutton, there is a real science behind the formulation of questions, which is part of why the faculty union has the right to approve the final draft of questions, and open-ended questions will be discussed later.
Perlman explained that there are a variety of factors that impact what kinds of questions are asked, and especially how they are asked.
“We haven’t really explored all the issues with open-ended questions,” said Dutton. He said that conversation will be taking place soon, probably through this academic year, and added that there is no real timeline that can be established until they know all the issues and all the positions that will arise.
