All across campus this week, students have been filling out
those mysterious teaching evaluations that seem to disappear into
the depths of UCLA after they are slipped into their equally
enigmatic manila envelopes.
Evaluations, which allow for individual comments and numerical
ratings of a teaching assistant or professor, have a greater impact
on an instructor’s career than students might realize.
Evaluations serve two purposes, said Larry Loeher, director of
the Office of Instructional Development.
“One is to improve the quality of an instructor’s
teaching skills; (they are also) used as data in the promotion and
tenure process for faculty members,” Loeher said.
Evaluation forms originate in the Office of Instructional
Development, an honors and undergraduate program of the College of
Letters & Science that extends its services to the other
colleges as well, Loeher said.
OID distributes about 300,000 questionnaires per year to aid
professors and TAs in assessing and improving their teaching,
according to OID’s Evaluation of Instruction Program Web
site.
“(There’s a) university mandate that all departments
have to have evaluations of some sort,” said John Hoover, OID
office manager. “They are not required to use our service;
most departments do use us.”
Once completed, the evaluations are returned to OID where
numerical reports are put together, Hoover said. These summaries
are returned to the individual departments along with the original
questionnaires.
In the English department, the summaries and original
evaluations go back to the faculty, said Joan Aberbach, English
personnel coordinator.
“Teaching evaluations are meant for the individual
instructor so they know what the students like and, in some cases,
dislike,” Aberbach said.
Summaries of the evaluations are kept by the English department
chair’s office. Though the chair may not actually review
them, Aberbach said the chair does “try to make sure the
instruction is going well.”
Some students, however, worry that the individual faculty
members gloss over the results of their evaluations, which may not
be that useful anyway.
“I question whether they are actually helpful for the
teacher and whether they actually look at them,” said
third-year communications student Shelli Griss.
Loeher maintains that this is not the case.
“(Faculty members) appreciate useful student
comments,” Loeher said.
Medical history Professor Robert Frank said when his evaluations
come back ““ usually eight or nine weeks into the next quarter
““ he looks over the numerical summaries and comments.
“If something looks out of place, I might take a closer
look at it,” he said.
Frank emphasizes the importance of evaluations.
“Students should be very aware that the evaluations do
figure into promotions and advancements in pay,” Frank
said.
Individual faculty members hold onto their evaluations so that
they can produce them when necessary. If a professor has no
evaluations for a particular class, Frank said “it raises a
flag.”
He points out that this method of evaluation is much more
reliable than an online forum such as BruinWalk.com where students
can post professor reviews. Frank said a student who is unhappy
with a class is more likely to make the effort to give information,
often a negative review.
Regardless of the evaluation technique, many students are
skeptical that their peers fill out the forms accurately and
thoughtfully.
“I don’t think students take (evaluations) as
seriously as they should,” said Alicia Caton, a fourth-year
sociology student.
Third-year sociology student Dinh Tran said she takes
evaluations seriously, but her responses don’t always reflect
her feelings about the course.
“I try to be nice because some teachers really suck, and I
feel bad,” she said. Â
Loeher, however, said he feels students do take evaluations
seriously, though there are occasional comments like
“so-and-so wears a green tie too much.”
“The more thoughtful students are, the better the results
are,” Loeher said.
Loeher added that there are some faculty members who don’t
want students to be involved in the evaluation process, but he
disagrees.
“Students are good observers of instruction,” Loeher
said. “(Not allowing student input is) like a person eating a
meal and not being able to tell the chef if they liked it or
not.”
In response to complaints about the current evaluation form, the
Academic Senate is reviewing a new questionnaire right now, said
Margaret Avila, the staff contact for the Senate’s Teaching
Committee.
The Teaching Committee will provide comments on the new form
later this year. With reports from Shane Nelson, Daily Bruin
Reporter.