Oakland University Senate
Second Meeting
Thursday, October 21, 1976
3:00 p.m.
128-130 Oakland Center
AGENDA
Submitted by George T. Matthews, for the Steering Committee
I. Old Business:
1. From the agenda of September 16, (New Business) Motion 3 (Burke, Torch) as follows:
MOVED, THAT THE SENATE ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:
THE UNIVERSITY SENATE RECOMMENDS THAT ALL DEPARTMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRES ON STUDENT PERCEPTION OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS INCLUDE THE SET OF QUESTIONS LISTED BELOW FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS. THAT THE RESULTS OF THIS SET BE AVAILABLE TO A DULY CONSTITUTED AD HOC COMMITTEE STRICTLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THIS SET CAN BE USED FOR MAKING RELIABLE ASSESSMENTS OF STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS ON A UNIVERSITY-WIDE BASIS.
(THE SCALE FOR THE FOLLOWING QUESTION IS: RARELY - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - ALMOST ALWAYS)
THE PROFESSOR TEACHING THIS CLASS:
1. IS AVAILABLE TO STUDENTS OUTSIDE THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED CLASSROOM HOURS.
2. SEEMS ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER.
3. MAKES CHANGES TO MEET NEW SITUATIONS.
4. GIVES FEEDBACK SO THE STUDENTS KNOW HOW THEY ARE DOING IN THE COURSE.
5. MAKES CLEAR WHY THE IDEAS IN TH15.COURSE ARE IMPORTANT.
6. ATTEMPTS TO ADAPT TEACHING METHODS TO THE BACKGROUND OF THE STUDENTS IN THE COURSE.
7. GIVES CLEAR EXPLANATIONS OF THE COURSE MATERIAL.
8. COMPARED TO THE OTHER INSTRUCTORS AT OAKLAND UNIVERSITY, I PERCEIVE THIS INSTRUCTOR TO BE
(ONE OF THE WORST - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 -ONE OF THE REST).
9. COMPARED TO ALL THE COURSES i HAVE TAKEN AT OAKLAND UNIVERSITY, I WOULD RATE THIS COURSE AS
(ONE OF THE WORST - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - ONE OF THE BEST).
10. THE AMOUNT OF WORK DONE FOR THE GRADE EXPECTED WAS (EXTREMELY LIGHT- 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - EXTREMELY HEAVY).
11.I HAD A STRONG DESIRE TO TAKE THIS COURSE.
(STRONGLY AGREE - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 -STRONGLY DISAGREE).
12. MY STUDENT STATUS IS:
a. FRESHMAN
b. SOPHOMORE
c. JUNIOR
d. SENIOR
e. GRADUATE
13. MY GPA PRIOR TO THIS SEMESTER IS _________.
Comment:
First (Heubel, DeMont) motion to amend, new wording underlined:
THE UNIVERSITY SENATE RECOMMENDS THAT A QUESTIONNAIRE ON STUDENT PERCEPTION OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS BE PREPARED AND ADMINISTERED BY THE TEACHING AND LEARNING COMMITTEE FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS AND THAT THE RESULTS OF THIS QUESTIONNAIRE BE AVAILABLE TO A DULY CONSTITUTED AD HOC COMMITTEE STRICTLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THIS QUESTIONNAIRE CAN BE USED FOR MAKING RELIABLE ASSESSMENTS OF PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS ON A UNIVERSITY-WIDE BASIS.
Second (Heubel, Tucker) motion to amend:
THAT THE QUESTIONNAIRE ASSOCIATED WITH MAIN MOTION 3 (NEW BUSINESS, AGENDA OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1976) BE DELETED FROM THE MAIN MOTION.
Second Reading: main motion and amendments debatable, amendable and eligible for final vote.
II. . New Business;
1. From the agenda of September [6 (New Business), Motion 4 (Mr. Burke)
MOVED, THAT THE SENATE ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:
THE UNIVERSITY SENATE RECOMMENDS THAT EACH DEPARTMENTAL EVALUATION OF A FACULTY MEMBER FOR REAPPO1NTMENT AND/OR PROMOTION SHOULD INCLUDE AN EVALUATION OF HIS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS BY A COMMITTEE OF HIS COLLEAGUES, BASED ON CRITERIA ADOPTED PUBLICLY BY THE DEPARTMENT, AND CONTAINING AT LEAST THESE THREE COMPONENTS:
1. A THOROUGH DISCUSSION WITH THE FACULTY MEMBER OF HIS GOALS AND METHODS IN TEACHING;
2. A CAREFULLY ADMINISTERED STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE FROM EACH OF HIS COURSES;
3. REPORTS OF VISITS TO HIS CLASSES BY AT LEAST TWO COLLEAGUES ON AT LEAST TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS EACH.
Comment: Oakland University is committed to good teaching as one�perhaps the most important one�of its three main criteria for reappointment and promotion of faculty members. However, our present methods of evaluating teaching vary so much from one department to another, and are so indirect in some cases, that the evidence may not be given the weight it deserves in overall decisions. This proposal alms to give some uniformity to the process, while leaving departments plenty of autonomy in defining their criteria and precise procedures appropriate to various teaching situations. The above recommendations incorporate four general principles in the evaluation of teaching:
a. There are two groups from whom primary data on teaching effectiveness should be sought�student and colleagues- each of whom can contribute important data not available to the others. These can either confirm or qualify each other, and data from both groups is therefore essential.
b. Whatever data is used should be as complete as possible (hence questionnaires rather than random interviews with students).
c. Whatever data is used should be as direct as possible (hence class visits by colleagues rather than hearsay).
d. All evaluations should be in terms of the stated goals and criteria of the department and of the individual faculty member (hence both of these should be explicit).
First Reading: Debatable and amendable, but not eligible for final vote.
FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE SENATE
The Steering Committee has created a subcommittee consisting of Ms. Jane Eberwein and Mr. William Hammerle to confer with a Board of Trustee's subcommittee consisting of Mr. David Lewis and Mr. Arthur Saltzman, on the Great Constitutional Question. The Senate will be informed of events as they unfold.