In a move that, at least on a trial basis, will put an end to the use of the venerable green sheets, the Arts and Sciences Council approved a new course evaluation form Thursday that will attempt a more quantitative approach in evaluating courses and professors. Despite their nearly-unanimous approval of the form, however, the faculty stopped short of allowing for the release of this course data to undergraduates.
Combining 32 machine-readable questions-each one answered on a scale of one to five-with additional space for written comments, the new form is designed to allow for the gathering of more data that can be compared between different courses and professors. The council also approved a more complete course description form for faculty to fill out.
The eventual goals of the forms are the improvement of teaching, aiding in faculty promotion decisions and enabling students' self-assessment, said form architect Robert Thompson, dean of Trinity College. Question topics range from general appraisal of a course and professor to very specific questions on a student's experience.
After students complete them at the end of this semester, the forms will be processed by a central University office that will tally the data. Eventually, the forms will be sent to the appropriate departments; however, their future after that is uncertain.
While the vote was a significant accomplishment for Thompson and Provost Peter Lange-who have been searching for better ways to evaluate teaching-the council's decision to delay the vote on whether to release data to undergraduates appeared to be a setback for Duke Student Government.
DSG Vice President for Academic Affairs Jason Bergsman has lobbied to have the data from the new form released to undergraduates. In fact, there was a proposal before the council to do just that, but faculty declined to even vote on the question, putting the decision off until the fall. Bergsman's predecessor, junior Drew Ensign, attempted to create an online evaluations system for students last year, but Bergsman has decided to work with Thompson on one system.
The faculty decided Thursday it is DSG's responsibility to work out the mechanics of a potential distribution of the data. In particular, decisions still need to be made regarding who will condense the information and what type of information will be released. Only then will the council consider releasing the data to students.
The new form was originally presented to the council at its Dec. 14 meeting, but it decided to put off the vote to allow time for reflection and revisions to the form.
Among the revisions were: the addition of a preamble explaining the purpose of the form; the deletion of a question evaluating the professor's proficiency of the English language; and the addition of space for professors or departments to add their own questions.
But some faculty members still expressed skepticism at having student evaluations, partly because of some students' tendencies to offer harsh, unproductive, criticism. "[Student evaluations] take the emphasis off the content of the course-which most of us would agree is most important-and place it on subjective judgments," said David Sanford, professor of philosophy.
In the end, however, the inevitability of some system of evaluation appeared clear. "I doubt very seriously that we could justify to the community that we not provide an opportunity to our students to evaluate courses," said Steven Baldwin, chair of the council and professor of chemistry.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.