California Lutheran University

Online Course Evaluation Team

Date and Location: Wednesday, October 15, 2008

President’s Conference Room

Time: 1:30 p.m.– 2:30 p.m.

Attendees:Jillian Benson, Julius Bianchi, Karissa Faulconer, Bruce Gillies, Herb Gooch, Halyna Kornuta, Melinda Wright

Regrets:Cathy Alexander, Patrick Schmidt, Maria Kohnke, Ron Hagler, Michael Graham, Edward Julius, Myungsook Klassen, Sean Kreychik

Minutes

  1. Pilot Review and Discussion
  1. Response rates and comparisons
  2. Karissa showed charts that were posted on the Assessment website of the percentages of returns and responses.
  3. Faculty/director feedback
  4. Survey in process
  5. One item was to respond to the edited comments
  6. Bruce said his faculty would prefer un-edited comments
  7. Jillian mentioned edited comments because of a past event
  8. Karissa is sending out a reminder email today (10/15/08) for the faculty to complete the survey
  9. Student Responses
  10. New link on the Assessment website
  11. Student technical concerns
  12. Were sent out to Sean, Patrick and Michael to attend to.
  13. Halyna may have to meet with them separately to go over those.
  1. CourseEval contract
  2. Think about cost and compare
  3. Don’t have much to compare to
  4. A few thousand each semester just to pay for printing. That does not include reams of paper for running reports or pay for workers to stuff and enter the data.
  5. We should put a high value on CoursEval because of the quick turn-around
  6. Julius: set up is 7500, 2400 hosted, annual for software=6000, 2400 hosting, first year is 9900
  7. CoursEval is for unlimited surveys\evaluations
  8. Herb asked if it would make sense to develop this “in house” Julius disagrees
  9. Over the summer we were given a pilot for free
  10. Sean=involvement will be minimal now that he has made sure the system works with LDAP.
  11. Patrick: will be working with Provost to make sure the data is cleaned up. Karissa said working with him on this has been smoother than over the summer
  12. Difficulty with 15 week courses will be with the cross-listed classes
  13. AA Will meet with Maria to find out what to do with these courses
  14. Support from Academic Affairs
  15. Julius asked about the work load compared to paper and pencil
  16. Jillian mentioned how they are still getting calls about past evaluations and why they were not received
  17. A few log in troubles but did not hear from very many faculty about this. Karissa thinks Julius’ slides helped.
  18. Karissa: emails are already done, just need to change the dates.
  19. Halyna: need to work on the wording over time. Can cut back, the only ones who would need the wordy emails would be the freshmen or new students.
  20. Karissa mentioned Julius making a video for students like the faculty one
  21. Big concern: response rate
  22. Set up labs
  23. Set up old computers in labs temporarily so students can complete
  24. Faculty want some level of control
  25. Example: Students taking the evaluations at the same time and place like they do with the paper and pencil evaluations
  26. Halyna has heard that some students have held group discussions about what to put on evaluations
  27. Can be standardized and positive
  28. Although, sometimes in this situation students are “influenced” by the negative people and tend to write negative comments
  29. Halyna thinks it would be a great research project. Ex: positive to negative comments
  30. Herb suggested that the response ratemight go down if they are doing them on their own opposed to as a group
  31. Another thought is that the students filling out evaluations on own are going to be motivated to do it because they have negative comments to say
  32. Jillian thinks it will bring more positive comments if she is doing it on her own
  33. Herb: key is instructors
  34. Need to get them to help, especially adjunct
  35. Problem: Adjunct do not always use their CLU email
  36. Julius mentioned adding something to their contract that explains the evaluations
  37. Problem is with a time gap from beginning of semester when they get contract to the end of the semester when the evaluations go out
  38. Suggestions to get faculty involved
  39. Talk about at a faculty\chair meetings
  40. Faculty forum
  41. Address issues
  42. Herb: Encourage faculty to put something on the web(example: WebCT, ERES) that goes to the survey
  43. Add in syllabi
  44. Academic Affairs created a syllabus template for CoursEval
  45. Academic Affairs is going to send it to Bruce
  46. Students feel that no one looks at evaluations
  47. Herb: Go to Echo and have them make an article about CoursEval
  48. Really need to get communication out there
  49. Get student council involved
  50. RA events
  51. Difficulty: can’t withhold grades or anything like that
  1. Team Recommendation toProvost
  2. Leanne has been informed, need to have an official approval
  3. Recommendation to move forward with CoursEval: Yes
  4. Consensus was to move forward (everyone at meeting said yes)
  1. Future Projects
  2. Has unlimited survey capabilities
  3. Look at procedure to use
  4. Example: Flashlight
  5. Has a procedure and people on campus who can help
  6. Students use a lot
  7. Jillian thinks we should keep Flashlight
  8. Does CoursEval have the option for people to only see their department?
  9. Example: when you log on to Flashlight you can only see what you have access for.
  10. Faculty: interested to look at questions for ART
  11. Change one question at a time to ease students and faculty in to the changes
  12. For the pilot questions were added that questioned the process of online evaluations. This could be done for the departments too.
  13. Would be worthwhile to see how other people\institutions use CoursEval to their benefit
  14. Another conversation for ART (Herb) and TLC (Julius): can we take out older data and import to CoursEval.
  15. Example: Program Review
  16. What about courses with less than 5 students?
  17. Right now classes with less than 5 do not get evaluated
  18. Example: music, practicum
  1. Next Meeting Agenda