After more than five years of planning, MSU officials uploaded a Web site that shows results of students’ opinions about teachers.
The site, Students’ Opinion of Courses and Teaching, www.soct.msu.edu, allows students, faculty and staff members to see students’ ratings for undergraduate courses and course instructors.
Data on the Web site was compiled from the Student Instructional Rating System forms and SOCT forms, which are collected in classes at the end of the semester.
The site includes data from the spring and fall semesters of 2001.
Patty Croom, project leader of the Web site, said work on the site began in November. She will continue to add data each semester.
“It was envisioned before, but didn’t start work on it until fall,” she said. “It was a team effort, and others did the coding. Our instructions were to have it up in time for annual enrollment, and we did.
“We had to wait until they collected data and we had to have enough data to do the analysis and comparisons.”
But some subjects or class sections are not represented on the Web site. MSU Assistant Provost Barbara Steidle said some forms probably were incorrectly filled out or handed in.
Spanish, English, veterinary medicine and electrical engineering are among the 71 subjects not reviewed on the Web site. MSU offers more than 175 subjects of study.
“If professors did not distribute the forms in their classes, we did not have reactions,” Steidle said.
Also, the Web site contains only undergraduate classes and does not evaluate teaching assistants. Teaching assistants were not included because they are on temporary assignment.
“This was an undergraduate venture, and there was no interest on behalf of the students in expanding it to graduate students,” Steidle said.
Work on the project began in 1997 with the University Committee on Academic Policy. The Academic Council, the university’s academic governing board, voted to implement the Web site in October 2000.
Charles McHugh, former ASMSU Academic Assembly chairperson, said the Web site should have been ready years ago.
“I understand why it would take so long,” the English and secondary education senior said. “It would take at least a year to accumulate the data. It’s a step in the right direction, but this thing has been taking baby steps for going on six years now.”
McHugh said in the past many professors did not administer the forms and even more students didn’t see a reason to complete them.
Most professors saw the evaluations as having popularity questions because students are allowed to rate the workload, McHugh said.
Nathaniel Ostrom, a professor of geological science, said the site could be a good thing for student life.
“Students will use Web sites,” he said. “They’ve been using word-of-mouth for eons - this is an extension of that. As professors, we need to be held accountable for our quality of teaching.”
But Ostrom questions the site’s ability to evaluate teaching.
“If I came in with sandals, a tie-dyed T-shirt and long hair, students might have a different impression of me than if I came in wearing a suit,” he said. “Sometimes I think the evaluations are more of a popularity contest than an actual measure of the quality of teaching.”
Pamela Madson, a psychology senior, said she probably won’t use the Web site.
“If I’m interested in a class or need it, I’ll probably take whatever fits in my schedule,” she said. “The site might provide incentive for professors to change their teaching styles, but that may lead to education being consumer-driven.”
