Class time for end-of-the-semester reviews and tying up loose ends might no longer be taken up with course and instructor evaluations if experimental online versions currently being tested are deemed successful.
The two rating systems - Student Instructional Rating System and the Student Opinion of Courses and Teaching - are being completed online as part of a pilot trial this semester by three academic departments.
SIRS rates instructional practices in the classroom, and SOCT collects feedback on undergraduate courses. They now are compiled with computer Scantron forms filled out by students and computed in the scoring office.
The online evaluations are meant to be more convenient for faculty and students, Assistant Provost for Undergraduate Education June Youatt said.
"We think it's worth trying because it will provide a greater convenience for students and will help faculty not have to distribute and collect the forms," Youatt said.
Departments of Management, Social Work, and Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media are trying out the new evaluation method.
Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media Chairman Mark Levy said his department signed on because most of the faculty and students are computer-savvy and can offer useful input.
"We are the most digital, online department in the university," Levy said. "It's what we teach about, do research about, and anything that is in cyberspace is of interest to us."
On Monday morning, about 5,000 e-mails were sent to students enrolled in classes in the three departments, directing them to a Web site to complete the evaluations. Youatt said in the first couple of hours, almost 400 forms were filled out.
The main concern about electronic evaluations is student response. Even though the online form might be more convenient for students to do on their own time, officials are concerned students will not take the time to complete it.
"A concern I have is the response rate," Department of Management Chairman John Wagner III said. "Students are less likely to respond by wire than they are in class.
"We'll try it and see how it works out."
Family community services senior Karen Motley shares that concern.
"It's better to fill it out at the end of class," she said. "There would be more participation that way; online, there wouldn't be."
But psychology sophomore Heidi Chow said the online evaluations are a good idea.
"It's more convenient," she said. "It won't waste time in class."
Another concern to be weeded out in the trial run is the issue of privacy, but Youatt said the process remains confidential.
Faculty members cannot see the results until after grades are submitted. They will receive a compiled summary of numerical scoring and comments, and results remain anonymous, Youatt said. She added that there is no way for faculty members to find out who has or has not filled out the forms.
"Some students have been, over the years, concerned about confidentiality, and this handles that completely," she said.
Electronic evaluation also will save money for the university in its quest to go paperless, Youatt said.
After this spring semester pilot program, Youatt said the number of responses along with student and faculty input will determine the future evaluation method.
"If students don't respond, it's not a successful system," Youatt said.
Staff writer Sonia Khaleel contributed to this report.
Meghan Gilbert can be reached at gilbe109@msu.edu.
