Online Student Evaluations

1
Online Student Evaluations Paper or
Plastic? Archie George Kathy Dean Jason
Mayer University of Idaho now with Information
Technology Services
2
Outline

• Brief history of course evaluations at the
  University of Idaho
• The new evaluation form
• The student portion
• The faculty portion
• The report portion
• Problems/Solutions
• Future Design

3
History of Course Evaluations at the University
of Idaho

• Same paper form for 12 years
• Over 32,000 forms scanned every term
• Hardware/software support
• Five weeks of time to sort, scan, compile and
  distribute reports
• Accuracy issues
• Open-ended responses not recorded
• Confidentiality issues
• Off-campus courses not consistently surveyed

4
Why Change

• New dynamic form
• No data entry
• Online accessibility
• Larger time frame to complete evaluation
• Demographics gathering capability
• Instant online access to reports
• Student confidentiality
• Save time and

5
Student Component

• Process
• Email notices to students links to system
  included
• Login to system using standard student access
  procedure
• Choose course/instructor to evaluate
• Fill out online form
• Click submit button
• Repeat process for each course/instructor
  evaluation

6
Student Component

• Advantages
• Student has time to think about responses
• Can complete evaluations at students convenience
• Systematic method of measurement same for all
• Accurate data collection

7
Student Component

• Disadvantages
• Perception that students are not a captive
  audience as in classroom
• Some students have difficulty using the technology

8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
Instructor Component

• Process
• Automated email at beginning of semester
• Instructors customize their own forms
• Automated email during evaluation period
• Instructors encourage students to use the system

12
Instructor Component

• Advantages
• Standard questions for comparison purposes
• Instructors get to choose their own items
• Delete/view form capability
• Can revise form multiple times before first
  evaluation is done

13
Instructor Component

• Disadvantages
• Some faculty not comfortable with the technology
• Delete/view form capability is inflexible Need
  edit and save capability
• Difficult to deal with special cases
• System does not allow for department items to
  be added

14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
Reporting Component

• Process
• Reports for current semester are made available
  after grades are submitted
• Available online to instructors and
  administrators
• No instructor level reporting for courses with
  less than 5 students enrolled

20
Reporting Component

• Components
• Detailed report (reports each students response)
• Summary report (reports aggregated summary for
  Likert-type items only)
• Department Summaries
• College Summaries
• University Summaries

21
Reporting Component

• Multiple levels of access
• Administrator access
• Course instructors access
• Student access (not a part of online system)

22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
Problems and Solutions

• Response rates
• Abnormal course begin/end dates
• Faculty buy-in
• Student log-in/PIN
• Washington State University students
• Technology ( i.e. Internet access, browser
  type/version)

34

Future Design

• Standard, customizable report templates
• Form save option
• Form edit feature
• Downloadable spreadsheet for results

35
http//www.webs.uidaho.edu/ipb/studentevals
36
Comments/Questions?
Kathy Dean University of Idaho kdean_at_uidaho.edu