Improving the Online Evaluation Process and Response Rates SAIR 2011

WCU 9,352 students Master’s Comprehensive Mountain location Resident and Distance

History of Evaluations at WCU No university-wide policy on administration, instruments, courses covered, and use of results Scanned, paper forms administered during class time Long wait for results No flexibility in types of reports Poor security– esp. comments

Implementation Timeline 2002 through 2006 Faculty Senate establish ‘teaching evaluation committee’ Provost mandated online evaluations (PACE initiative) Developed SAI instruments based on course types Developed guidelines for results usage Researched available options for administering evals and selected ConnectEdu’s CoursEval Faculty “own” the evaluation process!

Timeline cont.: Course Evaluation Pilot – Spring departments 328 courses (5689 surveys) 45% response rate Problems: log-in and issues lack of experience

Timeline cont.: Establishing Procedures ( ) Scheduling guidelines Low-enrolled courses Student incentives Refined SAI instruments Planned validity study Advertising/incentives Faculty training Summer parts-of-term Instrument defaults Student policy Login issues Faculty SenateImplementation Committee

Lessons Learned Lesson 1: Involve everyone with a stake in the evaluation procedures and results; everyone with experience in processing & administering evaluations Lesson 2: Consider all issues before implementing Lesson 3: Build a strong communication system between faculty and survey administrators

IR Responsibilities Set-up & administer each semester’s evaluations “Help desk” for faculty and students Learn about new tools and related software, reporting, and response rates Communicate to Faculty Senate any issues arising affecting senate policies and survey administration

Overview of Current Policies All course sections, all terms Open period set by course length University-wide incentives allowed Low-enrolled courses Crosslisted courses Periodic response rates & student reminders Faculty evaluation (not course content) Results availability Use in faculty AFE/TPR process IR office responsible for administration Department heads have final say in instrument used

Response Rates over time TermRate Spr % Fall % Spr % Fall % Spr % Fall % Spr % Fall % Spr %

Marketing StrategyDid it work? Large BannersYes PostcardsMaybe sYes Flyers around campusMaybe Radio announcementMaybe GiveawaysNo “Early” grade releaseYES!

“Early” Grade Release Students are encouraged to complete evaluations in order to receive their final grades “early” A list of all students who complete evaluations is sent to the Registrar s go out to students as faculty members submit grades Those who do not complete evaluations get final grades after exam week is over

Overall, what works for us Faculty Senate owns the process Changes are made slowly, with much deliberation Small, centralized survey administration SaaS – few technical issues on our end, backed up data, no questions about data integrity

Features of CoursEval that we like Students and Faculty – Find all associated courses and surveys with one click Consolidation of people without deleting anything Active Directory login Automated s, open/close, results release Response rates – real time, easy to locate and Easy to use administrative tools Customizable s and log-in site

Features we would like More flexibility with reports Advance notice of outages and problems Ability to access individual student responses (for research purposes) Faculty member attached to course cannot be changed More stream-lined set-up

Contact Information WCU’s Course Evaluation website: “Guidelines & Procedures for Administration & Oversight of Student Assessment of Instruction” Institutional Planning & Effectiveness: Elizabeth Alison Joseph ConnectEdu website: