| What changes, if any, do you think need to be made to the faculty evaluation procedures or forms? |
| # | Response Date | Comment |
| 1. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:02 PM | More emphasis on student learning and regular feedback given to students; active learning strategies used in the classroom; more emphasis on participation in faculty development |
| 2. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:05 PM | They should reflect classroom teaching and assessment more. |
| 3. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:05 PM | I can only speak to the Librarian evaluation forms, but they need to be updated to address the role of the Librarian as a teacher in the cla!
ssroom and not just a preson answering questions on the Reference Desk. |
| 4. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:08 PM | Some of the questions are repetative. |
| 5. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:10 PM | Needs to ask the hard questions - for instance should have a question essentially asking "Is this person a good teacher?" |
| 6. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:12 PM | I am a new part time faculty and have not been evaluated yet so I cannot comment on this. |
| 7. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:13 PM | p-t faculty must be evaluated more often: the first AND second semesters, and then every other semester after that. And we must be compensated for this very heavy work--flex credit is fine, if pay for evals is not an option. |
| 8. | Wed, 10
/10/07 7:14 PM | Participation in college/district committees should be required every few years so the same folks don't end up having to do all the work.
There should be a way to get faculty who are not terrible teachers but need to improve to attend CAG or other teaching improvement workshops as a requirement within the year and then get re-evaluated to see if improved. |
| 9. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:25 PM | Organization and clarity |
| 10. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:29 PM | All forms should be online so that they may becompleted online. |
| 11. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:30 PM | An actual clear description of process and responsibilities. (for example: Timetable- "peer evaluators are selected" (by WHO? Who is responsible to make this happen in August?) "orientation is conducted" (again, WHO? Does the faculty member have to schedule it? ) Who calls the TRC pre-evaluation conference? Etc.... |
12. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:30 PM | none | | 13. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:33 PM | all faculty should need to demonstrate competence in their field of expertise, evaluated by peers. |
| 14. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:37 PM | some of the criteria are out of date- too much to put here |
| 15. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:46 PM | Expand emphasis more on teaching and learning rather than on just logistical things like starting on time. |
| 16. | Wed, 10/10/07 7:54 PM | The forms need to be more practical and instruction related. We also need to accomodate variance for cultural differences -- not all of our students come from cultures which encourage cri!
ticism and honest feedback to teachers. |
17.| Wed, 10/10/07 7:57 PM | At the very least there needs to be some variety in the self evaluation document from semster to semester for the tenure track folks instead of answering the same question over and over again. Especially true because some of the questions don't lend themselves to the repeated design. |
| 18. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:00 PM | CONFIDENTIAL!!!!! i believe that a ft faculty member with a grudge agains a pt'r elected to do her evaluation. this terrifies me, because i have spoken in opposition to this person before and i feel like my job might be in danger for my next review........ |
| 19. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:07 PM | I don't think we should change the forms. I think we should ensure that the process is being following correctly and that peer evaluators are doing !
a thorough job of evaluating and documenting the evaluation. If the process is followed as required and the evaluation is discussed completely with the evaluatee, the proceess, in my experience, is adequate and complete. In my experience observing others, it is those who do a poor job of evaluation and/or who are unwilling or unable to say the hard things to their peers that are jeapardizing the process. It is not the form that is the problem; tt is those who do not take the time to carry out the process carefully. |
| 20. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:16 PM | Increase the percentage of the evaluation content on college/department/division work.
Evaluation of behavioral problems should be allowed in the evaluation. |
| 21. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:21 PM | They have already been made... |
| 22. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:30 PM | none |
| 23. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:40 PM | Forms: Summary Checklist ensuring evaluation on criteria (4214 for p/t faculty)....needs to be cleaned up. No room to write, print is crooked, paper has dark spots and smears on it. Very unprofessional document. |
| 24. | Wed, 10/10/07 8:57 PM | Less subjective
Clearer language about expectations
Get rid of S/A, A, D, S/D |
| 25. | Wed, 10/10/07 9:13 PM | I would like the Dean from my area to participate in my evaluation, and get a real evaluation, rather than a two or three sentence summary of my efforts. I can't believe that ft'ers get paid for such shoddy work. |
| 26. | Wed, 10/10/07 9:15 PM | minimize |
| 27. | Wed, 10/10/07 9:31 PM | None. |
| 28. | Wed, 10/10/07 9:38 PM | The data on the forms should match. |
| 29. | Wed, 10/10/07 9:40 PM | Ask the same questions you ask students (on the scantron form) and the peer faculty doing the review. Don't include the evaluatee's self-evaluation as o!
ne of the summary criteria ratings because evaluattees don't address the things you are asking on the summary form. Everything should match if we are doing these rankings. You can't ask it on the evaluator's form and than ask for student and evaluatee ratings when you did not ask it. I can't invent information that you did not ask for. |
| 30. | Wed, 10/10/07 10:15 PM | Evaluators need to be tested to ensure they are following ALL the policies and procedures before performing an evaluation. |
| 31. | Wed, 10/10/07 10:17 PM | The process itself has no real teeth. If you're doing a minimal or even a lousy job, you can continue to get away with it, and there is no reward for doing stellar work. Your raises will continue to come from just getting older on the job. |
| 32. | !
Wed, 10/10/07 10:31 PM | HEY! About that last ques
tion you so slyly slipped in... Spring Break legally cannot be, and SHOULD not be considered as linked to Easter! Stop your religious education. Pedagogically, spring break would best be in the middle of the semester, several weeks before Easter. (8 weeks without a single day off is a killer for students and teachers alike, and that's what an Easter spring break gives us...) |
| 33. | Wed, 10/10/07 10:34 PM | Nothing!!!! It doesn't apear to be broken so what are we trying to fix? |
| 34. | Wed, 10/10/07 11:01 PM | Apart from class instruction, faculty need to be evaluated on their contributions and participation in campus wide work. Also, their involvement in professional organizations, membership on community boards, etc should be considered and valued. |
| 35. | Wed,!
10/10/07 11:04 PM | The student and teacher evaluator forms don't make sense looking at it wholistically. I know they are supposed to be aligned based on contractual obligations, but the questions are sometime weird trying to force that alignment. Also, there is no form for evaluating "other professional obligations." Some faculty do a lot, some nothing, so I think there needs to be a way to deal with that. |
| 36. | Wed, 10/10/07 11:19 PM | New questions need to be added to the evaluations. The questions must be directed so that an idea of the difficulty as well as the enjoyment of the class are known. Ideally, the forms could be given to the students while they are taking the class as well as a 1-2 year follow up. |
| 37. | Wed, 10/10/07 11:44 PM | It's not really the forms that are a problem!
-- it's the process/procedure. The deans, at times, know nothing abo
ut the discipline. The training is random enough so that the evaluation depends much more on the evaluator than the evaluatee -- suggesting that the training itself is flawed. I would suggest that even the purpose of evaluation isn't all that clear -- it would be excellent to have the students, faculty member, evaluator and administrators agree on the goals. I don't know for certain, but I would guess that other districts are much better than this than we. Note: SLOs are about to come into the picture on this window, and I think the faculty/UF have to be very concerned about this. |
| 38. | Thu, 10/11/07 12:11 AM | fewer criteria |
| 39. | Thu, 10/11/07 12:28 AM | tenured faculty should be evaluated only by management |
| 40. | Thu, 10/11/07 1:50 AM | The!
forms do not really reflect what is important nor do they give any way to give constructive feedback. |
| 41. | Thu, 10/11/07 4:59 AM | Bring them up to date. They are very old. For example, some questions are "yes" and "no" but still include "strongly agree" etc.
I have been a DVC for over 20 years and the evaluations haven't changed! |
| 42. | Thu, 10/11/07 7:05 AM | Mandatory training for Faculty evaluators. Some questions are yes/no. More prep time for student evaluations (ESL STudents). Reframe evals as staff development not critique. |
| 43. | Thu, 10/11/07 4:09 PM | Require evidence (rather than self-report) of fulfillment by FT faculty of non-classrooom responsibilities (mtgs, cmtes, office hours, lab hours by arrangement, course outline/curriculum development). Require evidence (rather than self-report) of professional growth (prof development, cmtes, mentoring). Peer evalution should be a semester-long judgement of ability to teach to SLO's and to manage a classroom (e.g. fair, polite, does not discriminate, engages students) rather than a one-day snapsot. |
| 44. | Thu, 10/11/07 4:34 PM | None |
| 45. | Thu, 10/11/07 5:54 PM | The evaluation should be exclusively narrative
. The check boxes are not useful. The questions should be repharased to reflect the value system and goals of the institution and the individual character of the department. The evaluation should be exclusively narrative.
The check boxes are not useful. The questions should reflect the value system and goals of the institution and the individual character of the department. The forms shall be updated periodically (using 20 year old forms is anachronism). |
| 46. | Thu, 10/11/07 6:03 PM | More flexibility is needed to address other aspects of teaching not covered onthe form. For example, does the instructor turn in grades on time? Does he/she cover all the material in the course outline in sufficient depth? Are SLO results turned in? Are out side of class contributions being made to the department/division/college, etc. etc. etc. |
| 47. | Thu, 10/11/07 6:24 PM | The student evaluation form for counselors should be examined. It asks questions that often times do not come up in the counseling session. |
| !
48. | Thu, 10/11/07 6:26 PM | Managers should play more of a part in this procedures. Its to watered down. If only faculty participate they are going to cover their backs and not mark each other down. |
| 49. | Thu, 10/11/07 6:59 PM | Only faculty in the same department should evaluate faculty, not english evaluating math or speech evaluating art. |
| 50. | Thu, 10/11/07 9:22 PM | None. They're perfectly superfluous and that's the way they should be kept. |
| 51. | Thu, 10/11/07 11:23 PM | Online instruction evaluation options available |
| 52. | Fri, 10/12/07 2:50 AM | None |
| 53. | Fri, 10/1!
2/07 4:55 AM | I have never seen this document. |
| 54. | Fri, 10/12/07 6:59 PM | The questions do not evaluate for quality of instruction and faculty performance |
| 55. | Fri, 10/12/07 7:24 PM | question re did you or did you not get a syllabus the first day is not a % question ...... |
| 56. | Sun, 10/14/07 6:03 AM | Better, more pertinent questions |
| 57. | Mon, 10/15/07 3:28 AM | more than one faculty member should do the evaluation in the event there are differences in teaching style; they should observe for more than an hour or however long the person being evaluated needs them in class to see through an assignment; there should be a less top-down approach and more discussion around the evaluation process |
| 58. | Mon, 10/15/07 4:46 AM | Have the forms get to the issues of classroom techniques that work, use of technology in the classroom. |
| 59. | Mon, 10/15/07 1:39 PM | The format is awkward. Equal weight is given to starting class on time and knowing the subject matter. |
| 60. | Mon, 10/15/07 7:14 PM | No changed needed. They work fine for peer-to-peer evaluations. |
| 61. | Mon, 10/15/07 11:10 PM | The current evaluation forms are badly outdated and no longer apply to many of our classes, particularly online classes. |
| 62. | Mon, 10/15/07 11:13 PM | more focus on growth from year to year |
| 63. | Mon, 10/15/07 11:22 PM | Part timers' evaluations should be done on more than one day, by more than one faculty member. I see too much personal animus/bias go in to these evaluations. Also, the person evaluating should have some knowledge of the subject matter, and not just be another member of the department. |
| 64. | Mon, 10/15/07 11:34 PM | Make them more relvant to the actual courses.
Include sample graded exams and percent grades A's etc compared to dept. average. |
| 65. | Mon, 10/15/07 11:45 PM | simplify so esl students can understand them |
| 66. | Mon, 10/15/07 11:58 PM | Rather than "reinventing", look at some other districts who have just put together new evaluation forms. The questions need to be focused for all types of class, learning and communication. |
| 67. | Tue, 10/16/07 12:54 AM | Clarity is needed in general. I'm not looking at a form now so I can't remember specifics, but I perhaps it should be easier to give "yes" or "no" answers or an opportunity to explain some of the answers. |
| 68. | Tue, 10/16/07 1:31 AM | include providing evidence of fostering learning relative to course and program SLOs ... e.g. assignments and exams aligned with SLOs, class session designed to promote attainment of SLOs, etc. |
| 69. | Tue, 10/16/07 1:58 AM | Ask meaningful questions about the teacher's performance, not if they start the class on time every day!!! |
| 70. | Tue, 10/16/07 3:32 AM | I dont think any changes need to be made. I think that the process is fair and fine as is. I think that the UF has politicized the process so much that it has created a huge wedge between full time and part time instructors, especially since Preference re-hire started. I believe that the UF communicates in some way or other that full time faculty are against part timers' rights, which has been hugely damaging. |
| 71. | Tue, 10/16/07 4:18 AM | I think they
're not bad, it all depends on how you use them. |
| 72. | Tue, 10/16/07 4:25 AM | Make the questions useful as a staff development for new faculty. The questions now only seek to insure everyone meets a rather low standard competence. |
| 73. | Tue, 10/16/07 5:04 AM | Need changes to accommodate all types of courses (hybrid, online, f2f) and all types of programs (academic, vocational, performance). |
| 74. | Tue, 10/16/07 7:35 AM | questions on the student' evaluation forms |
| 75. | Tue, 10/16/07 7:53 AM | Make everything match |
| 76. | Tue, 10/16/07 4:56 PM | tied to slo's |
| 77. | Tue, 10/16/07 5:20 PM | I think that evaluations should be based on more than just one visit to a classroom.
The issues that the form asks to be evaluated are important, but difficult to access with only one exposure to the classroom. |
| 78. | Tue, 10/16/07 5:33 PM | more relevant to each department, or at least division. |
| 79. | Tue, 10/16/07 6:54 PM | One day is a poor reflection, the process outcome is pre directed.
Needs complete overhaul. |
| 80. | Tue, 10/16/07 7:07 PM | The forms address such obvious issues as whetehr class starts on time, but not much is devoted to the craft of teaching. |
| 81. | Tue, 10/16/07 7:37 PM | Self Evaluation areas should reflect more areas to cover competency instead of attending meetings or working the hours to contract. |
| 82. | Wed, 10/17/07 3:14 AM | We need a form for online courses.. evaluate instructors who teach online |
| 83. | Wed, 10/17/07 7:00 PM | I think the forms could focus more on the actual types of teaching we do, the ways we deliver the instruction, including lecture, inductive approach, pair, group, full class discussions, projects, etc. !
The forms could also assume that all teaching could be improved on some level. It seems that we aren't really focusing on improving instruction so much as we are on confirming competency. That seems pointless to me. |
| 84. | Wed, 10/17/07 7:50 PM | form a task group that will modernize and update the forms and streamline the process. |
| 85. | Thu, 10/18/07 4:38 PM | This is a state Ed Code requirement. Evaluating non-tenured contract faculty is important IF any problems that arise are dealt with and a prescribed method of correcting them - including termination - within a certain time period are instigated. Evaluating full-time, tenured faculty by other faculty is useless. Student evaluations (after those have been revised to make some sense)should be administered in every class the faculty member teaches - including Distan!
ce Ed - once every two years. |
| 86. | Thu, 10/18/07 6:57 PM | Forms are outdated and often don't seem to apply to a counselor's work. |
| 87. | Fri, 10/19/07 1:16 AM | All questions should be useful, relevant, and make sense. |
| 88. | Fri, 10/19/07 7:39 PM | I have lots of ideas for this and am working on them; I'd like to participate in this revision process--if I have enough time. I'm working on the process at SRC and can see many areas where our evaluations can be more effective. I'll get these suggestions to the committee whenever it's formed. Revising the evaluation procedure needs to be paired with programs to improve instruction. |
| 89. | Fri, 10/19/07 10:24 PM | Include a way to evaluate compliance with contractual and departmental obligat!
ions beyond teaching and office hours. |
| 90. | Sat, 10/20/07 12:11 AM | I was evaluated recently and it seemed very fair |
| 91. | Mon, 10/22/07 6:00 PM | I'm pretty neutral on this. They work once you figure out the objective of the procees. Definitely keep it simple with potential for expansion when there are problems. |
| 92. | Mon, 10/22/07 11:45 PM | The form should reflect the subject taught and not be generic for everyone |
| 93. | Tue, 10/23/07 12:26 AM | The order of the areas on the evaluation forms should correspond to the student evaluation summary forms and the peer evaluation summary forms. |
| 94. | Wed, 10/24/0!
7 4:55 PM | Faculty need to be paid for all evaluat
ions that they chair. |
| 95. | Wed, 10/24/07 6:17 PM | cross division evaluation...present system is a joke just pick a colleague who is a friend |
| 96. | Wed, 10/24/07 6:25 PM | There should be additional factors on the evaluation forms. |
| 97. | Thu, 10/25/07 12:11 AM | Get all forms into agreement, with regards to question numbers, so that summary statements can be rationally and accurately made.
Reword questions so that they are the same on all of the relevant forms. |