| Conference Registration Edit Registration WebCT Homepage | |
|
|
|
| Friday, 22 July 2005: 8:30 AM-9:30 AM | |||
| Nob Hill A-B (San Francisco Marriott) | |||
| L-7: Evolution of a Course Evaluation: From Pilot to Established Program | |||
| Detailed Description: | Evaluations of any type must suit the needs and conditions of their environment, and issues necessary in the early stages of a program might not be relevant in a mature program. This presentation charts the changes and evolution of a faculty and course evaluation during the five year period when a fully online program, designed to allow students to complete their first two years of higher education, developed from a pilot to an established program. | ||
| Presentation Format: | Paper | ||
| Topic: | Measuring outcomes: Student achievement and course success | ||
| Target Audience: | Course Designers, E-learning Managers, Faculty and Other Instructors, Institutional Research and Assessment Staff | ||
| Appropriate Audience Level: | Beginning or new users of WebCT, Experienced WebCT users | ||
| Abstract Text: | When considering course or program evaluations, response items once necessary in the early stages of its development might not be relevant to those in a more mature phase. The following presentation charts the progression of a faculty and course evaluation during its first five year period—from planning to implementation to evaluation and review. The program was designed for students to complete the first two years of their collegiate education online and focused upon web-based general education courses adhering to recent decisions from SACS requiring online programs to roughly match those of traditional programs. In addition to surveying student concerns, the faculty were initially asked to participate in two evaluations: one instructional and the other administrative. As the administrative glitches lessened over time, this survey provided fewer insights, and a subset of those questions were combined with the instructional survey, creating a single instrument. We then observed that faculty response began to decline, so we further adapted the surveys, now dividing instructors into two categories: online novices and online veterans. As the program proved its success, the next stage in the process was to transfer its administration from the System to a governing body residing within one of the institutions. Elements necessary for a pilot evaluation were no longer relevant, and a new committee evaluated the faculty self-evaluations once more. Occasionally others within the System would request copies of our evaluations. It was at this point that we realized the initially counter-intuitive realization that providing them with our latest evaluations may not be suitable for their needs, and that our earlier versions might be more effective for their stage of program development. This realization led to the concept of our current proposal. Samples of the questions used and selected data from the program will be presented. | ||
| Session Leader: | H. Hilliard Gastfriend Board of Regents of University System of Georgia | ||
| Co-Presenter: | Catherine L. Finnegan Board of Regents of University System of Georgia | ||
See more of The 7th Annual WebCT User Conference