National Technical Institute for the Deaf

Table of Contents

I. ABOUT THE SRS

I. 1. Introduction
I. 2. Connects to the Teaching Mission of NTID/RIT
I. 3. Provides Access to Students' Perspectives
I. 4. Derives from Faculty-Approved Recommendations

I.4.a. Task Force Charge
I.4.b. Task Force Recommendations

I. 5. SRS Offers Multiple Forms to Match Various Faculty/Staff Roles

II. ADMINISTERING THE SRS

II. 1. Online System
II. 2. How to Request SRS Surveys

II.2.a. Submit a New Request Each Quarter
II.2.b. Forms for Classroom Teachers and Individual Service Providers
II.2.c. Forms for Team Teachers
II.2.d. Use of the SRS for Special Circumstances

II. 3. Selection of Formative Items

II.3.a. Choosing from the Formative Item Pool
II.3.b. Communication Scales
II.3.c. Customized Rating Items
II.3.d. Customized Open-Ended Items

II. 4. What to Tell Your Students

II.4.a. Emphasize why the SRS is important to you and to NTID/RIT
II.4.b. Emphasize that the SRS is confidential
II.4.c. Explain how the student ratings will be used
II.4.d. Prepare them to take the survey
II.4.e. Schedule class time for students to take the survey
II.4.f. Monitor your students’ participation rate

III. UNDERSTANDING THE SRS REPORT

III. 1. Comparison Groups

III.1.a. Similar Courses
III.1.b. All NTID Courses

III. 2. Comparison Group Standard Deviation Values
III. 3. Obtaining Copies of Your Reports

III.3.a. Reports for Courses Taught Outside Your Department
III.3.b. Electronic Reports
III.3.c. Copies of Reports

IV. ADMINISTRATIVE USE OF THE SRS RESULTS

IV. 1. Student Ratings Are Insufficient By Themselves
IV. 2. Chairpersons Keep Faculty/Staff Alert to SRS Mechanics
IV. 3. How to Interpret Summative Item Ratings
IV. 4. Use of Formative Item Ratings
IV. 5. How to Increase Reliability of SRS Results

V. USING THE SRS RESULTS FOR PERSONAL/PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

V. 1. Benefits

V.1.a. Benefits Using the Formative Evaluation
V.1.b. Benefits Using the Communication Bank of Questions
V.1.c. Benefits Using the Comment Box Feature

V. 2. Guidelines

V.2.a. Formative Assessment
V.2.b. Guidelines for Using Communication Items

VI. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES

VII. POST SCRIPT

VII. 1. Early Term Assessments

VII.1.a. Benefits of Early Term Assessment
VII.1.b. Guidelines for Conducting Early Term Assessment

VIII. APPENDICES 

VI. 1. Survey Sample—Classroom Teacher
VI. 2. Survey Sample—Service Provider
VI. 3. Summary of Student Responses Cover Letter
VI. 4. Summary of Student Responses (SRS results)
VI. 5. Tips and Best Practices to Improve Student Participation

I. ABOUT THE SRS

I. 1. Introduction

"SRS" refers to the NTID Student Rating System. It is an anonymous online survey of student perceptions of their formal classroom and one-to-one educational encounters with faculty/staff at NTID/RIT. The SRS consists of statements, selected by the faculty/staff requestor, to which a student responds using an agreement scale. Textboxes are also available on the online form for optional comments. A sample survey and report appear in the last section of this handbook.

A group of four summative items can be requested to fulfill RIT policy relating to tenure and appraisal of tenure-track faculty. A summary of student ratings on the summative items is automatically reported to the chairperson. The summary of student ratings on summative items is also sent to the faculty/staff requestor, along with all related comments.

A large pool of formative items is also available, from which the faculty/staff requestor may choose up to 20. A summary of student ratings and comments on the formative items is sent only to the faculty/staff individual who requested them.

Students are cautioned that their opinions are an essential component of the large amount of information used to evaluate faculty and staff. Chairpersons are also reminded that student input is only one source of information about faculty/staff skills and accomplishments and should be used in conjunction with other information.

I. 2. Connects to the Teaching Mission of NTID/RIT

The SRS supports the teaching mission of NTID/RIT:

The primary mission of the National Technical Institute for the Deaf is to provide deaf students with outstanding state-of-the-art technical and professional education programs, complemented by a strong arts and sciences curriculum that prepares them to live and work in the mainstream of a rapidly changing global community and enhance their lifelong learning.

Further, the Preamble to RIT's policy on Annual Review of Faculty (E7.0) establishes a tie between effective teaching and the evaluation and development of those who provide instruction to students:

Rochester Institute of Technology is committed to promoting academic excellence. As stated in our mission, teaching, learning, and scholarship are our central enterprises, and effective teaching continues to be the hallmark of RIT.

This policy on Annual Review of Faculty establishes guidelines for the evaluation of the performance of each faculty member against established Institute criteria (B.2., below) and in accordance with the mission and goals of the department, college and Institute. The results of the review will be used to:

• Encourage and foster continued professional development.
• Provide part of the required documentation in the pre-tenure review process of tenure-track faculty.
• Promote the improvement of individual performance.
• Determine annual merit increments.

An underlying principle of this policy is that faculty evaluation and faculty development are closely related and work in concert to help faculty meet individual and institutional goals.

This policy assumes the dignity and academic freedom of individual faculty members, and its implementation shall be guided by mutual trust.

I. 3. Provides Access to Students' Perspectives

"Standardized student evaluations as established by college policy" are explicitly stated in RIT policy E7.0 on Annual Review of Faculty as one of the required elements of each college's or academic unit's review process. The schedule for obtaining student ratings is also stipulated in the policy (part B.5.c):

For non-tenured faculty these evaluations shall be conducted in all sections taught during the period of review. For tenured faculty they shall be conducted in at least one section of each course taught during the period of review.

Now that the SRS has become an online tool, students have the opportunity to type in comments to supplement their ratings. Both the ratings and comments are anonymous. Comments are seen only by the faculty/staff individual who requested the survey and are not sent to the individual's chairperson.

I. 4. Derives from Faculty-Approved Recommendations

I.4.a. Task Force Charge

In the early 1990s, an NTID task force was charged with the responsibility of developing guidelines for obtaining student ratings. In the 1993 Task Force report, Student Ratings of Educational Services, the charge was described as follows:

…the NTID Dean expects that systematically collected student evaluation data will become one component of the annual performance appraisal of NTID faculty who provide education services to deaf RIT students. The Task Force is charged with recommending an appropriate mechanism for this to occur, and a process for critiquing these recommendations.

The scope of the charge was broad, to include:

… teaching, counseling, tutoring, workshops, and clinical services such as audiology and speech therapy.

The information to be collected was to serve two functions—summative and formative:

The Task Force charge emphasized the design and implementation of a summative system to be used by all faculty who provide services to deaf students. The literature states that the improvement of performance be the primary goal of any evaluation system and that a summative system must be used in conjunction with a properly designed and functioning formative system.

The Task Force recommendations were approved by faculty vote in June, 1993. When the RIT policy on Annual Review of Faculty was revised in 1997, the schedule for obtaining student ratings stated in that policy superseded the Task Force recommendations regarding frequency of administering the SRS.

I.4.b. Task Force Recommendations

Key sections of the Task Force recommendations are reproduced here for ease of reference (from pp. 3-7 of the Task Force report of 1993).

The System

• Establish a student rating system that includes a mandatory summative component and a parallel, but separate and voluntary formative component.

The Instruments

• For Summative (Mandatory):
  • Select two to five global items that rate overall effectiveness of the faculty.
  • Beginning the third year, summaries of student responses to summative items will be reported to the faculty member and supervisor with accompanying comparison group information.
  • These summaries will highlight significant differences from the comparison group mean. A significant difference is defined as one or more standard deviations above or below the mean for the appropriate comparison group over several measurement cycles.
• For Formative (Voluntary)
  • Design a pool of items from which faculty may select items “cafeteria style.”
  • Comparative information will not be developed for formative items.
  • Report the summary of student responses to formative items directly and only to the faculty member being rated. Information concerning student responses to the selected items will not be identified in the data bank by individual faculty name.

Reporting Results

• Maintain student anonymity at all times. The faculty member should not interact with students while the ratings are being conducted, nor should the faculty member see the input prior to its analysis.
• Ratings should not be administered at the same time as exams.

Points to Note

• Student ratings must never be used as the sole measure of effectiveness. When making personnel decisions, student ratings data must always be used in conjunction with other measures of effectiveness such as peer ratings, self-ratings, samples of educational materials and administrative observations.
• Orientation in the appropriate use of student rating information should be provided to all administrators using this data in faculty appraisals.
• Administrators are cautioned against the illusion of "artificial precision" in the use of such data.
• There must be an effective monitoring mechanism of the student ratings system.
• Confidentiality of the data must be maintained at all times.

I. 5. SRS Offers Multiple Forms to Match Various Faculty/Staff Roles

Classroom teaching is only one of several ways in which faculty/staff interact with students. They also provide one-to-one interactions and educational services. The SRS rating items for such individual interactions have been written so that students can contribute their opinions to the professional development and personnel decisions affecting faculty/staff who work with students on a one-to-one basis. Customized SRS forms are available for these five groups:

1. Counselors
2. Tutors
3. Audiologists
4. Spoken communication instructors
5. Academic advisors

II. ADMINISTERING THE SRS

II. 1. Online System

The SRS is administered online (paper forms were discontinued as of Winter Quarter, 2009). The form for faculty/staff to request surveys is online and the form for students to provide their responses is also online. An automatic electronic system initiates and manages collection of student responses. The quarterly timeline is:

• Weeks 3-7—Survey requests are accepted from faculty/staff and approved.
• Beginning of Week 9 (Monday at 10:00 a.m.)—Students are automatically informed via email that they have one or more SRS forms to complete. Students not completing forms receive up to 3 automatic reminders; once completed, they are removed from the reminder distribution list.
• Week 10 (Tuesday)—Surveys with less than 50% participation rate are noted and faculty/staff requestors are notified.
• End of Week 10 (Sunday at 11:59 p.m.)—Survey access is closed.
• Break Week—Reports are distributed.

II. 2. How to Request SRS Surveys

II.2.a. Submit a New Request Each Quarter 

Quarter-by-quarter survey requests are necessary because non-tenured, tenure-track, and tenured faculty/staff follow unique schedules of SRS administration that cannot be automated. In addition:

• Forms may not be needed for all sections of all courses. If teaching more than one section of a given course, tenured faculty may choose which section of a course will be surveyed.
• If you are in a quarter when you are required to administer the summative items of the SRS, it is your choice which (if any) formative items to add to your surveys.
• If you are in a quarter when you are not required to administer the SRS, you may still choose to gather information from your students, using formative items, summ ative items, or both types of items.
• Faculty/staff that provide individual services (counselors, tutors, audiologists, spoken communication instructors, and academic advisors) determine the timing of SRS administration and provide the list of students who are to receive an SRS survey.
• It is up to the requestor to confirm course information, student numbers, and demographic information.

II.2.b. Forms for Classroom Teachers and Individual Service Providers

You can request surveys during the quarter (Weeks 3-7 only) at : https://www.ntid.rit.edu/srs/sp/. You will receive an email at the beginning of Week 3 reminding you that it is time to request surveys. You can use the link in the email to access the SRS request site.  

II.2.c. Forms for Team Teachers

Each individual who teaches in a team submits a separate request for the summative and or formative part of the SRS (if needed or desired).

II.2.d. Use of SRS for Special Circumstances

• Part-time, visiting, adjunct instructors and lecturers If you teach in any of these positions and you receive an annual appraisal from an NTID chairperson, you will be expected to administer the SRS to your students according to the agreement you have with your chairperson .
• Adjunct instructors in another college of RIT

  If you are teaching a course for another college and that college requires you to use its form, then do so. You should check with your NTID chairperson to see if he or she wants you to complete an NTID student evaluation.

• Small Class Size

  For confidentiality reasons, if there is only one student in your class or if you are providing a service for only one student , an SRS survey cannot be generated. At least two participation forms are needed in order to report student responses. To solve this problem, you can group together related courses/services with small numbers and submit one survey request. This will generate one report .

II. 3. Selection of Formative Items

II.3.a. Choosing from the Formative Item Pool

The formative item pool contains over a hundred items on many aspects of educational interactions with students. Some faculty/staff repeat a small number of formative items in every survey in order to monitor their effectiveness in a specific area of interest over time. Additional items may be selected to assess a particular objective, often pertinent to a new element in their student interactions (e.g., a new textbook, change in technology, a different type of stud ent assignment, a new group process, or a revised assessment strategy).

II.3.b. Communication Scales

•  
  1. Speech Communication Scale (6 items)
  2. Sign Comm unication Scale (11 items)
  3. Communication Outcome Scale (3 items)

Three communication scales were derived from a research study of teachers' classroom communication during the period 20021 to 20051. The study used a 2 0-item survey of students' perceptions of teachers' sign, spoken, and visual communication skills in the classroom. On the basis of statistical analysis of the results, items were grouped into three scales:

These scales can be chosen as formative items when you request your SRS survey. Individual items in a scale cannot be chosen independent of each other. For example, when choosing the Speec h Communication Scale, all 6 items must be chosen together and will count as 6 of the maximum of 20 formative items.

II.3.c. Customized rating items

The SRS formative item pool is intended to be expanded to accommodate the needs of the users of the sys tem. Faculty/staff are encouraged to recommend new questions to the SRS Advisory Group to be added to the formative item pool.

II.3.d. Customized open-ended items

The on-line open-ended items cannot be modified. Students can enter their comments with each individual question or in the general comment box located under the summative questions.

II. 4. What to Tell Your Students

Research shows that the greatest incentive to students is instructors’ encouragement to them and instructors’ explanation of why course evaluations are important to them. Using “best practices” to administer the SRS yields higher rates of return and greater validity of results. Please remember these tips and best practices:

II.4.a. Emphasize why the SRS is important to you and to NTID/RIT .

• Student opinions will help guide ongoing improvement of the course.
• Student opinions can positively affect your professional development.
• Student ratings are a required part of the evaluation system at RIT.
• Share examples of how past evaluations have helped improve your teaching effectiveness.

II.4.b. Emphasize that the SRS is confidential .

• The login requirement ensures that only enrolled students can participate. Login ensures that student ratings can be given only once per survey.
• Student ratings results are kept anonymous. No student identifying information will be associated with the ratings or comments.
• You will see only a summary of collected results, not any individual rating.
• Student ratings will not affect their grades.

II.4.c. Explain how the student ratings will be used.

• You will receive a summary report of the summative and formative items on the survey, including comments. Your department chairperson will receive a summary report of only the summative items on the survey, without comments.

II.4.d. Prepare them to take the survey.

• Surveys are available during Weeks 9 and 10.
• Students receive automatic email notifications that surveys are available to them. The emails include the URL and instructions.
• Send out your own reminders to increase student participation (see sample, Appendix VI.5).
• Departments can post a reminder message on their Website and/or bulletin board.

II.4.e. Schedule class time for students to take the survey.

• Schedule computer lab time so all students can access the survey at the same time. 
• Ask students to bring their laptops to class, or borrow laptops from the Help Desk. 
• Include an assignment for the survey in myCourses. 
• Do not administer the survey during exam week. 
• Do not celebrate the end of the quarter during the same class time that celebrates the end of the term (ratings should not be associated with food, balloons, awards, etc).

II.4.f. Monitor your students’ participation rate.

• On Tuesday of Week 10, you will receive an email notification if less than 50% of your students have participated in your survey.
• You can request an update of your rate at any time during the survey open dates by contacting Sue Roethel in Academic Affairs at smrnvd@rit.edu.

III. UNDERSTANDING THE SRS REPORT

III. 1. Comparison Groups

Average ratings and standard deviations are provided for two comparison groups, "Similar Courses" and "All NTID Courses."

III.1.a. Similar courses

For comparison purposes, the SRS report includes an average rating for "Similar Courses." This value is a rolling average based on all surveys returned in a given category of survey form during the five years prior to the current quarter. This means that the Similar Courses average is recalculated every quarter. The group of similar courses in your report was deter mined by your answers to questions on the SRS request form regarding student motivation, student participation, and primary course goal.

The statistical analysis used to determine which variables yielded significant differences in students' responses in cluded all of the information provided on the SRS request form. This consisted of course characteristics (department in which the course was offered, number of students in the course, percent of well-motivated students in the course, student participation , and primary goals of the course) and faculty characteristics (rank, years of experience at NTID, and years in education). Consistent differences in how students responded to the summative items were associated with (a) level of student participation, (b ) percent who were highly motivated, and (c) primary goal(s) of the course. Of the 27 different combinations of response options to these items (each item has three possible responses and 3 x 3 x 3 = 27), only 5 reached statistical significance. Ongoing analysis of the resulting groups of similar courses will determine if adjustments are needed over time.

III.1.b. All NTID Courses

As for the Similar-Courses average, the “ All-NTID-Courses” average (or the average for a given individual service) includes all surveys returned in that category of survey form during the five years prior to the current quarter. This means that the All-NTID-Courses average is recalculated every quarter.

III. 2. Comparison Group Standard Deviation Values

The standard deviation of ratings for each of the two comparison groups (Similar Courses and All NTID Courses) is provided as a context in which to interpret your students' responses to the four summative items. Ratings are indicated as follows:

a) Average— If your rating s are within a standard deviation of the average for the given comparison group, this means that the ratings from your students are similar to those received by the middle one-third of instructors in the comparison group.
b) Above Average—I f your average is higher, your ratings are among the top one-third of the comparison instructor group.
c) Below Average—I f your average is lower, your ratings are among the lower one-third of the comparison instructor group.

How you interpret a given result, whether it appears to be favorable or unfavorable, depends on factors unique to your situation. Identifying these factors might be valuable to inform your professional development plan or a self-appraisal statement. You and your chairperson might discuss how often you have presented the course material, recent changes you might have tried, students' preparedness for the course, or other associated factors that can influence survey outcomes.

Student ratings are only one piece of information, to be viewed alongside other sources of information, including:

• Direct observation by your chairperson
• Peer review
• Self review
• Curricular materials
• Evidence of scholarly activity

Arriving at an understanding of your SRS results, in l ight of a wide variety of types of evidence of your effectiveness in your role with students, is a joint responsibility of you and your chairperson.

III. 3. Obtaining Copies of Your Reports

III.3.a. Reports for courses taught outside your department

All SRS summative reports go to your department chairperson because that is the person who prepares your annual appraisal. You can make copies of your SRS summative reports to share with chairs of other departments in which you teach. SRS data is only on e source of information used by a chairperson in giving appraisal input to your chair.

III.3.b. Electronic reports

For security reasons, SRS reports cannot be distributed electronically.

III.3.c. Copies of reports

Because SRS reports are generated at a given point in time and because the comparative data pool is from a moving window in time (updated each quarter), copies of previous SRS reports for specific courses are not available. It is highly recommended that y ou safely file away the SRS summaries that you prepare for your annual appraisal

and the reports you include as documentation. At tenure and promotion time, you can go back to your annual appraisals for such information.

If you are seeking tenure or pro motion and wish a composite report of your ratings over a specified period of time, a summary can be generated upon request to the SRS Advisory Group. At least 30 days notice is required.

IV. ADMINISTRATIVE USE OF SRS RESULTS  

As stipulated in RIT Policy E7.0 on Annual Review of Faculty, standardized student ratings are a required element in the annual review process. Regarding the use of the SRS to obtain these ratings, the NTID Task Force on Student Ratings included the following caution in its 1993 re port:

It is important to note that the work of the Task Force focused on student ratings of educational services which is only one component of a comprehensive faculty evaluation system. The literature cautions that student ratings can be misused if considered in isolation.

The following guidelines are therefore recommended in the administrative use of SRS results as part of the annual appraisal process.

IV. 1. Student Ratings Are Insufficient By Themselves

Chairpersons , together with their faculty/staff, are responsible for implementing multiple means of appraising an individual's effectiveness in providing educational services to students . . These can include peer review, self review, administrative observations, curriculum materials, and scholarly acti vity, as well as student ratings.

IV. 2. Chairpersons Keep Faculty/Staff Alert to SRS Mechanics

Faculty/staff should be reminded about the frequency requirements for administering the SRS in accordance with RIT policy.

• Tenured faculty must administer the SRS in at least one section of each course taught during the academic year.
• Teaching staff and non-tenured faculty must administer the SRS for all sections of all courses taught during the academic year.
• Faculty/staff engaged in counseling, tutoring, audiology services, spoken communication instruction, academic advising, and facilitation of co-curricular activities must make administer the SRS available to all students served at least more than once during the academic year.

It is also important for administrators to alert faculty to the fact that a summary of summative student ratings results is required as part of the tenure and promotion documentation. Faculty should be advised to keep co pies of their SRS reports for this purpose.

IV. 3. How to Interpret Summative Item Ratings

Summative ratings are the only SRS data sent to chairpersons for evaluation of faculty/staff effectiveness in providing educational services. SRS formative results are not sent to administrators.

Summative student ratings can be used to judge approximate ranking of an individual within a group of faculty/staff. The literature warns against the illusion of "artificial precision" in the administrative use of student ratings.

The individual should consider how his/her mean compares to the average for All Courses and the average for Similar Courses. The average for This Course most often falls within plus or minus one standard deviation for Similar Courses. Facult y/staff who receive comparatively low ratings on one or more summative item (e.g., below the standard deviation of ratings for a given comparison group) should be provided with appropriate professional development opportunities if other measures of effecti veness (e.g., peer review, self review, observations, curricular material, and other evidence) substantiate the student ratings.

IV. 4. Use of Formative Item Ratings

Student ratings on formative items are intended for an individual's professional improvem ent and are shared with an administrator only at the discretion of the individual being evaluated.

Student ratings on formative items should help to interpret the highs and lows on the summative items. The ratings may also suggest a focus for professiona l development; for example, communication skill development, training in the use of myCourses, technology training, or assistance in curriculum development.

IV. 5. How to Increase Reliability of SRS Results

Issues of reliability are inherent in student ratings. It is not appropriate to single out individual SRS items or to base a judg ment on a single SRS report.

• Because of factors such as type of activity and expected grade, summative student ratings must be collected from several courses or activities over multiple quarters to be representative of an individual's performance and appropriate for appraisal rankings .
• Ratings averaged over fewer than 10 students tend to be unreliable; therefore, summative data must be collected over a sufficient number of quarters to accumulate an adequate sample of student ratings.

V. USING SRS RESULTS FOR PERSONAL/PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

V. 1. General

The SRS helps you gain students’ trust by giving them a confidential way to provide valuable, practical feedback. You can use the results to improve over multiple terms or within one term.

V.1.a. Benefits to using formative evaluation

• Confidential feedback: Use the formative evaluation section to assess your own performance confidentially and alter strategies using feedback from the SRS reports. Unlike the summative results, formative results are not automatically shared wit h anyone but yourself.
• Variety of items: Formative questions may be selected from a large database bank of items when requesting the SRS. Requests for additional statements may be submitted to the SRS administrators for consideration.

V.1.b . Benefits from using the communication bank of questions

Use of the communication scales can help determine whether or not communication issues are contributing to other (seemingly unrelated) problems.

V.1.c. Benefits of the comment box feature

Comments collected for each formative item can help give you a more qualitative idea of your overall performance. Also, students feel less constrained in expressing their message by being able to comment.

V. 2. Guidelines

V.2.a. Formative Assessment

Please be mindful in limiting the number of total items for to avoid student rater fatigue. Target One recommen d ed approach is to target one aspect of your performance by choosing a set of related formative items. By tracking student responses while experi menting with different approaches, you can develop ways to improve your performance over multiple quarters, or over one quarter if using early assessment tools such as Clipboard or even paper and pencil. Alternatively, you might select a sampling of state ments from a variety of categories to get an overall feel for your course.

V.2.b. Guidelines for using communication items

This assessment can be used as part of a total communication development plan that includes communication classes and the Sign Lang uage Proficiency Interview (SLPI).

VI. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES

Here is a list of resources that help develop teaching and communication skills:

• Sign Language Training for faculty (ASLIE course offerings)

• Spoken Communication Strategies and Techniques workshops

• Group Communication Observation Tool (GCOT)

• Sign Language Proficiency Interview (SLPI)

• Communication Sign Language Assessment (CSLA)

• Self-Instruction Lab ASL learning videotapes and DVDs

• Project Access: resources for improving access for deaf postsecondary students

• RIT Teaching Learning Center: resources and services to improve teaching and learning

• RIT TLC links on Teaching Excellence, Packet #7 Improvem ent of Teaching and Assessment

• Communication Forums, 2006-2007:

• RIT and NTID Fellowships, Leaves and Grants

• Senior faculty in your department whom you can ask to observe/mentor you in your work

VII. POST SCRIPT

VII. 1. Early Term Assessments

Though the  SRS currently does not provide a way to administer surveys in early to mid-term, the chance to individually gather and respond to feedback from students within one term can benefit both student and instructor.  

VII.1.a. Benefits of early term assessment

Feedback to students: For the individual student, the end of the term is too late to discover difficulties or obstacles to learning that he or she experienced during educational interactions with you. Gathering feedback from students during the first few w eeks of the term not only provides you with information about how your students are progressing, but this practice also shows them that you are truly interested in benefiting them now, and not only those who enroll in your course in the future.

For any formative assessment, sharing your evaluation plans with the students further demonstrates your commitment to improving your effectiveness.

VII.1.b. Guidelines for conducting early term assessment

SRS does not provide a system for administering the SRS in mid-term. Clipboard is one survey tool readily available through myCourses that is quick and easy to use and to administer. Paper and pencil surveys are always an option, as well, but they do not p rovide the confidentiality that is necessary for this process. Assess in the third week to give time for students to experience the class and for you to adjust strategies.

VIII. APPENDICES  

VIII.1. Survey Sample—Classroom Teacher

VIII.2. Survey Sample—Service Provider

VIII.3. Summary of Student Responses Cover Letter

VIII. 4. Summary of Student Responses (the SRS results)

VIII.5. Sample email message to students

For more information, contact:

Sue Roethel
NTID Academic Affairs
LBJ 60-2850
smrnvd@rit.edu
585-475-5326