1 / 16

Enhancing Faculty Reviews with Course Evaluations: Insights and Strategies

Explore the crucial role of course evaluations in faculty reviews, distinguishing between summative and formative feedback. Learn how to utilize faculty and student evaluation forms effectively, and the importance of reliability and representativeness in the assessment process.

hong
Download Presentation

Enhancing Faculty Reviews with Course Evaluations: Insights and Strategies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The role of course evalsin faculty reviews:One perspective John Petraitis CAFE March 25, 2011

  2. Summative vs. Formative • Summative: • Course evals as ends • 1st page of IDEA report • Formative/Developmental • Course evals as means • Remaining pages of IDEA

  3. Logic of IDEA • One size does not fit all • Allows faculty to identify key objectives • E.g., exploration of personal value, vs. creativity vs. understanding principles • Advertise the warts • Reliability and representativeness

  4. Three Key Pieces • 12-itemFaculty Info Form (FIF) • 36-item Student Reaction to Instruction Form (SRIF) • Multi-page Report

  5. FIF • 12 learning objectives

  6. FIF • Which of the 12 objectives do I chose? • Depends on course • Depends on instructor • Depends on section • Depends on dept • Recipes for disaster • Choosing all of them • Choosing none of them (by not filling out FIF)

  7. SRIF • Two kinds of Q’s • 36 questions linked to 12 learning objectives. • Extraneous influences, e.g., • Discipline • Student motivation • Class size

  8. Marriage of FIF &SRIF • Weighting of students responses (on SRIF) for results/report • M = 0 • I = 1 • E = 2

  9. The Report (page 1) • Reliability and Representativeness • Reliability • Based on number (not percent) of respondents • Would adding a few more respondents potentially alter the results dramatically? • Representativeness • Based on percent (not number) of respondents • 65% response rate is considered representative

  10. The Report (page 1) • Reliability and Representativeness • Reliability • Based on number (not percent) of respondents • Would adding a few more respondents potentially alter the results dramatically? • Representativeness • Based on percent (not number) of respondents • 65% response rate is considered representative

  11. The Report (page 1) • Reliability and Representativeness • Representativeness is key • If representative, reviewers could use page 1 as summative and formative • If not representative, reviewer might use if it helps the candidate

  12. The Report (page 1) • Averages: • Section A: “I” and “E” objectives • Adjustments to IDEA Ratings • Discipline (national comparisons) • “Extraneous Influences” on student ratings are used to adjust scores or ‘level the playing field’ • SRIF Item #39: I really wanted to take this course regardless of who taught it • SRIF Item #43: As a rule, I put forth more effort than other students on academic work • Class size

  13. The Report (p. 2-3) • Improving Teaching Effectiveness (food for thought)

  14. IDEA and your review file • Do your own formative evaluation • What can you learn from pages 2-3? • Show your interest in professional development • Do it even if IDEA is not reliable or not representative • Do your own summative evaluation • Make it easy. Make it clear.

More Related