From: Starr, Chelsea To: Bratcher, Adrienne Thursday, October 22, :23 PM I so move. Chelsea Starr

Transcription

1 Faculty Senate Meeting with Vote- Occurring 10/21-10/26/2015 From: Greene, Frederick Sent: Wednesday, October 21, :40 PM Cc: Mitchell, Byron;Starr, Chelsea;Greene, Frederick Subject: RE: Student Evaluations Dear Senator Bratcher: The ENMU Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Student Evaluations adopted the following Memorandum to disseminate to the Faculty Senate and ENMU Faculty pending approval. These are the suggestions that we believe should be disseminated to increase student participation rates this semester. Because of time constraints they may need to go out before the November 5, 2015 Senate meeting. Cordially, FVG From: Bratcher, Adrienne To:Greene, Frederick Cc: Mitchell, Byron; Starr, Chelsea; Greene, Frederick; Aragon, Regina; Stockly, Sue Thursday, October 22, :21 PM Senators, The document looks great and I can certainly send this out to faculty senate to request that they vote in favor of your recommended document going forward to Dr. Laurenz for dissemination to all faculty. Do I have a motion and a second from your committee? Thank you for your hard work as well as your continued work on this ad hoc committee. I commend your work and appreciate that we have great recommendations to send out to faculty. Dr. Adrienne Bratcher Assistant Professor/Clinical Supervisor ENMU Communicative Disorders 1500 S. Ave K, ENMU CDIS Station #3 Portales, NM adrienne.bratcher@enmu.edu From: Starr, Chelsea Thursday, October 22, :23 PM I so move. Chelsea Starr

2 From: Greene, Frederick Cc: Mitchell, Byron; Starr, Chelsea; Aragon, Regina; Stockly, Sue Thursday, October 22, :18 PM I move, as indicated in your response, that the ENMU senate approve the document for dissemination. FVG From: Bratcher, Adrienne To:Andersen, Gillian; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Flores, Geni; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Marden, Kerriann; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Starr, Chelsea; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Attachments: MEMORANDUM 2015.docx (14 KB)[Open as Web Page] To: ENMU Faculty Senate MEMORANDUM From: Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Student Evaluations Date: October 21, 2015 RE: Adoption of Interim Suggestions to Increase Student Participation Rates on Faculty Surveys The Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Student Evaluations recommends the following Suggestions to increase the response rate for student evaluations for Fall, 2015 Semester. Research from AAUP and other sources suggests that these faculty actions may increase the response rate for online evaluations: These suggestions may also be used to help improve response rates for inclass students. 1. Remind students by ENMU and Blackboard of the evaluation dates and deadline. Online Evaluations dates for Fall, 2015 are November 9 thru November 22, The recommendation is that each and every faculty member should send out at least two reminders of the evaluation start and end dates. 2. All Mediasite instructors are encouraged to announce these dates during at least two MediaSite lectures. 3. Explain the importance and create a sense of student investment in the process. Students should understand that their involvement and participation will help improve the academic experience for all students. 4. Emphasize and stress the anonymous nature of evaluations and assure that students understand that individual grades will not be impacted by their participation. 5. Reassure students that their responses will be taken seriously and valued by the faculty. 6. Remind students to check their ENMU to access the link for completing the evaluation.

3 7. Instructors may choose to offer a group incentive for participation rates above a selected percentage. The ENMU administration has agreed to support this effort by implementing the following actions: a. Three Faculty reminders concerning the evaluation dates and deadlines. b. Three student reminders concerning the evaluation dates and deadlines. c. Two Blackboard Announcements to students regarding the dates and deadlines. Respectfully Submitted, Faculty Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Student Evaluations Senator Chelsea Starr Senator Byron Mitchell Senator Frederick Greene Thursday, October 22, :28 PM This message was sent with High importance. Senators, Please find attached the proposal coming from the Ad Hoc Committee on Student Evaluations. As you can see from Senator Greene s below we need to move forward and vote on the proposal. The proposal comes from the Ad Hoc Committee with a motion by Senator Starr and a second by Senator Greene for faculty senate to accept the proposal, adopt the recommendations and send it forward to Dr. Laurenz so that the recommendations can be implemented during this fall semester student evaluations. Please send a vote for or against in response to this by Monday at noon. Thank you and a special thank you to Senators Greene, Starr and Mitchell! From: Benham, Bailey Thursday, October 22, :30 PM I am for the evaluation. Bailey C. Benham From: Sumption, Linda In response to the message from Bratcher, Adrienne, 10/22/2015 Thursday, October 22, :49 PM

4 I vote in support. Linda J. Sumption, Ph.D. Associate Professor of English Station 19 Room 113D, JWLA Eastern New Mexico University Portales, NM From: Greene, Frederick Thursday, October 22, :16 PM I vote yes Senator Greene From: Stockly, Sue Thursday, October 22, :34 PM Hi, Adri. I vote in favor. Thanks! Sue Dr. Sue K. Stockly, Associate Professor of Economics College of Business From: Kyle, Valerie Thursday, October 22, :07 PM I approve these recommendations From: Schwartz, Richard Thursday, October 22, :57 PM I approve. --Rich Dr. Richard A. Schwartz Assistant Professor of Music Saxophone and Jazz Studies College of Fine Arts ENMU Station S. Ave. K Portales, NM 88130

5 From: Andersen, Gillian ; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Flores, Geni; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Marden, Kerriann; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Starr, Chelsea; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Thursday, October 22, :34 PM This message was sent with High importance. I am almost reluctant to say anything here, but I am wondering if there is an opportunity to discuss these recommendations before we adopt them? Gillian From: Marden, Kerriann To: Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Flores, Geni; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Starr, Chelsea; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :08 AM I m inclined to agree that this may warrant some discussion. It seems that when the senate committee provided an extensive review of all available online student evaluation options last year, the conclusion was that the best way to handle this effectively was to get a universitywide system in place which would reduce the burden of all of these notifications for online faculty. The university declined to invest in such a system, and so now, these recommendations seem to shift the responsibility (and the workload) back onto faculty. This isn t much of a concern for those of us who teach face-to-face, but for the fully online programs, I imagine that this is an unwelcome added chore. Also, it seems like if we adopted these guidelines campus-wide, it would be light work to change guidelines to mandates by simply altering the wording from should to must. If the university values these evaluations and relies them for personnel decisions, then it seems that the university should be taking a bit more responsibility for facilitating the process. It seems that having timed announcements built into the template Blackboard shell once, at the design level before it is loaded into each of our courses, would be a lot more effective than expecting each individual instructor to a) remember and b) implement a series of reminders in every class. Regards, Kay Kerriann Marden, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Anthropology

6 Forensic Science Program Director ENMU Station 53, 1500 S Ave K Portales, NM (Phone) (Fax) Kerriann.Marden@enmu.edu From: Starr, Chelsea To: Marden, Kerriann; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson- Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Flores, Geni; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :48 AM In reply to the comment about these being musts, as a member of the committee I would like to emphasize that this memo represents only the FIRST part of our mandate, which was to come up with strategies to increase response rate for students evals that could be implemented THIS semester. We will continue to work on long-term strategies and have indeed looked at different campus-wide reporting systems. Thanks, Chelsea From: Marden, Kerriann To: Starr, Chelsea; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Flores, Geni; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :53 AM Chelsea, Just to clarify, I wasn t trying to imply that the committee had not done due diligence. I think you ve done a nice job of summarizing the potential immediate solutions. However, if these guidelines are set forth (and especially if they prove effective for even a few classes), it seems that the economical and easiest solution for Admin will be to make these the expectations for all faculty, and then to lay blame directly on any faculty who continue to have low online evaluation percentages. I m not finding fault with your recommendations, but I do see the potential for this to all too easily become incorporated into faculty workload. Kay From: Starr, Chelsea To: Marden, Kerriann; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson- Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Flores, Geni; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin

7 Friday, October 23, :55 AM Hi- I guess I don t agree that making a few announcements is an addition to faculty workload, even given your worst-case scenario. Cheers, Chelsea From: Flores, Geni To: Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Greene, Frederick; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :05 AM Dear Fellow Senators, I am very happy that there is opportunity for discussion of the proposed guidelines for increasing student responses for returning evaluations. Quite honestly, my intention was to cast my vote against the guidelines as they are now written, not because I feel the committee did a poor job in researching and putting forth this document, but for precisely the reasons stated by Dr. Marden. While I agree with Senator Starr in that it is not a huge burden to make a few announcements in our classes, I feel I cannot face my constituency and say I voted for a proposal that will make such announcements an expectation and may well lead to them becoming mandatory. I feel we reserve the right as faculty to not be compelled to offer incentives or steady reminders to our students to complete evaluations. This is not a judgment call on doing so; it is a decent gesture. But it should not become an expectation in my opinion. Sincerely, Geni From: Greene, Frederick To: Flores, Geni; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Stockly, Sue; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :36 AM Dear Fellow Senators: I would like to reiterate what Senator Starr has indicated. The Ad Hoc Committee is in the process of evaluating systems, strategies, and policies to address the long term issue of student evaluations. We will present to the full senate suggestions and recommendations with time for discussion and feedback. Most of you may recall the oral presentation that was given at the October 1, 2015 Senate Meeting. The Memorandum that was presented simply reduces these suggestions to written form. Because the evaluation process begins November 9, 2015 we provided the written suggestions to assure that enough time was available for faculty members to implement the suggestions if they choose to implement them. Please understand that these suggestions are a temporary BANDAID to simply attempt to

8 improve online response rates before a permanent solution is adopted. As Senator Starr indicates, this was part of the committee mandate. I think it would be a mistake to presume that if we adopt temporary suggestions to improve participation that this will somehow alleviate or harm the mandate to find permanent solutions to the current process. The Ad Hoc Committee is committed to and seriously engaged in fulfilling the mandate of finding a permanent solution. It is simply not possible to implement any permanent solution of substance in one semester. Cordially, Senator Greene From: Stockly, Sue To: Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :59 AM Here s my contribution to the discussion. First, it s great that we are discussing these issues and bringing up different viewpoints. The concerns that have been expressed are important concerns, but there is a broader context to consider. This is the third year that Faculty Senate has been working on suggestions for improving both the student evaluation process and the form that is used. Each new committee has built on work the previous committees did. The first year I chaired that subcommittee and we spent quite a bit of time reading current research on this process. We saw that the literature indicates over and over again that the goal of increasing student participation in the evaluation process is best achieved with faculty input. This suggestion from the literature was confirmed by the subcommittee s work last year and again this year. Basically, students, especially online student, don t value participation in faculty evaluations without strong encouragement from faculty and explanations as to why these evaluations matter and how they are used. The ENMU Administration has not refused to implement the suggestions from last year s committee. This is a process that takes a while and we first needed to have adequate personnel in place. Dr. Laurenz asked Faculty Senate last spring and again this fall to please continue working with him on figuring out how to improve the process. My understanding is that he liked what last year s committee suggested and wanted the process of improving the system to move up a notch and to include staff and administrators who are directly responsible for managing student evaluations. As was reported at the last Faculty Senate meeting, the administration recently hosted a demonstration of the Class Climate software system. The demonstration was received quite positively and Dr. Laurenz is continuing to work with this year s subcommittee to improve and even overhaul the process. I personally am impatient with how long this has taken. I would like that we just switch to Class Climate this semester. Of course the process has to include more faculty opinions than just mine and changing administrative processes has never been quick or easy. I sincerely feel that we are making solid progress and hope that maybe as soon as next semester we ll see more substantial changes. For now, though, let s do as our subcommittee suggests and get faculty more involved in encouraging students to participate in the evaluation process. Thanks, Sue

9 Dr. Sue K. Stockly, Associate Professor of Economics College of Business From: Andersen, Gillian To: Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Bratcher, Adrienne; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :05 PM My constituents deserve an opportunity to review this document; otherwise, I am not doing my job as their representative. If this requires a vote on Monday, I would be reluctant to say yes. Gillian From: Bratcher, Adrienne Friday, October 23, :15 PM Hello, Thank you for all the questions and discussion. First, the document was provided so that you can by all means share with your constituents and then vote. That is the means by which such should occur with all senate business. We all check our and this is not lengthy, I do not see why a vote cannot occur within a 5 day time frame. Second, this item is time sensitive so that it can be implemented this semester for the upcoming student evals and even if you are reluctant to implement these, they are not incredibly time taxing. Third, this is the first and as mentioned in senate the preliminary recommendation to be put forward and the final and full recommendations will be provided after the committee finishes. Fourth, this proposal came to the senate for a vote with a motion and a second, however, thanks to Senator Pollock and Schwartz for providing a secondary. Please send your vote, thank you. Dr. Adrienne Bratcher Assistant Professor/Clinical Supervisor ENMU Communicative Disorders 1500 S. Ave K, ENMU CDIS Station #3 Portales, NM adrienne.bratcher@enmu.edu

10 From: Andersen, Gillian To:Bratcher, Adrienne; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :29 PM I see your point, Adrienne; however, time is not the only issue for my constituents (obviously, it is not much trouble to students). I have forwarded the document to my constituents and hopefully they will have time to review it over the weekend. Gillian From: Starr, Chelsea ; Andersen, Gillian; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Friday, October 23, :44 PM I vote yes From: Mitchell, Byron To: Starr, Chelsea; Bratcher, Adrienne; Andersen, Gillian; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Saturday, October 24, :41 AM I vote yes From: Pollock, Darren Saturday, October 24, :31 PM Hi Adrienne, I have been instructed by my constituents to vote NO on this proposal. thanks..darren

11 From: Aragon, Regina Monday, October 26, :10 AM Several faculty members not just in my department have expressed concern regarding 1. And 7. Item 1. Remind students by ENMU and Blackboard of the evaluation dates and deadline. Online Evaluations dates for Fall, 2015 are November 9 thru November 22, The recommendation is that each and every faculty member should send out at least two reminders of the evaluation start and end dates. As stated, it seems to include all classes. Folks feel like the best input will be from students that attend their face to face courses are the students that are qualified to provide useful input. Those students will be in class when evaluations are given. So item 1. should not be expected for face to face sections. Item 7 Instructors may choose to offer a group incentive for participation rates above a selected percentage..: Folks had serious concerns about the ethical implications of individual instructors offering incentives, but they could see university-wide incentives as being ok. I move that (1) Any reference made to face to face be removed from the memo (2) Modify Item 1. so that it is clear that this is intended for online students (3) Remove Item 7. (4) The modified memo can be shared with faculty, noting that this is under discussion by faculty senate. Then they can implement any suggestions, should they wish. (5) The vote be postponed until our next Faculty Senate meeting The Ad-Hoc committee did not retract the motion and thus due to Robert s Rules of Order, the secondary motion presented by Senator Aragon did not go forward. The voting continued on the motion on the table. From: Ahmadian, Mo In response to the message from Bratcher, Adrienne, 10/23/2015 Monday, October 26, :20 AM My vote is NO. Thanks

12 From: Andersen, Gillian Monday, October 26, :17 AM I vote NO, and here are the justifications for this vote (since there is no time to meet and discuss this): a number of my constituents (mainly instructors who do not have the protection of tenure) are concerned about the growing emphasis on student evaluation of faculty. The following from one constituent typifies the views of several people in the department: "[Two] reminders seems like more than enough notice. I do question the stress on students completing the evaluations. This may lead to unhappy students having additional time to compose spiteful evaluations for instructors they do not like, or in the case where a student is failing a class, using verbal revenge to disparage the instructor. Is it wise to let students think that their evaluation may be responsible for a faculty member s continued employment?" A tenured faculty member stated that she has a problem with #7 because of student privacy (after all, evaluations are supposed to be anonymous). Two other department members are concerned that it may be unethical to give students extra points for an activity that is unrelated to course material. Finally, in our department's FEC Guidelines (and I imagine in some others across campus), student evaluations are already noted as the "primary" means to determine teacher effectiveness (for instructors). Unlike tenured faculty, our contracts run from year to year; thus, we can easily be terminated at the end of a contract period. It then seems unfair to add to even more emphasis to student evaluations. From speaking to other senators, I understand that this issue has been visited before, but I was not on senate at those times (and I am sure there are others who were not involved with those discussions either). While I can understand that Dr. Laurenz wants more students to complete evaluations, I (and a number of my constituents) question this approach (especially when we cannot meet as a body to discuss these recommendations). Gillian From: Painter, Chad To: Aragon, Regina; Mitchell, Byron; Starr, Chelsea; Bratcher, Adrienne; Andersen, Gillian; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson- Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Monday, October 26, :50 AM On behalf on the Communication faculty, I tentatively vote yes. However, like Senator Aragon and her constituents, we echo the reservations regarding items 1 and 7. Chad Painter, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Communication Eastern New Mexico University

13 From: Bogdanov, Dusko To: Painter, Chad; Aragon, Regina; Mitchell, Byron; Starr, Chelsea; Bratcher, Adrienne; Andersen, Gillian; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Benham, Bailey; Browder, Dawn; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Monday, October 26, :52 AM HPE Department votes Yes. Regards, From: Browder, Dawn To: Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Cooper, William; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Monday, October 26, :52 AM I vote NO. Several faculty members take issue with #7 giving incentives for evaluations. Dawn E. Browder, Ph.D. From: Cooper, William To: Browder, Dawn; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Flores, Geni; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Monday, October 26, :55 AM On behalf of the Physical Sciences, I vote NO. Thanks, Billy From: Muhlbauer, Micki Monday, October 26, :04 AM We in the art department had a majority vote yes on the Student Evaluations Proposal. Thanks, mic muhlbauer

14 From: Flores, Geni To: Cooper, William; Browder, Dawn; Andersen, Gillian; Bratcher, Adrienne; Stockly, Sue; Greene, Frederick; Starr, Chelsea; Marden, Kerriann; Sumption, Linda; Acheson-Brown, Daniel; Ahmadian, Mo; Aragon, Regina; Benham, Bailey; Bogdanov, Dusko; Erf, Greg; Hersey, Anna; Hurtado De Vivas, Romelia; Kyle, Valerie; Mitchell, Byron; Muhlbauer, Micki; Nazario, Andy; Painter, Chad; Pollock, Darren; Schwartz, Richard; Short, Shelly; Wells, Robin Monday, October 26, :04 AM The large majority of the C&I Department was in full agreement with the proposal. Therefore, I will vote YES, though I maintain my reservations. From: Aragon, Regina Sent: Monday, October 26, :49 AM Cc: Stockly, Sue Subject: my vote Adrienne, If Senator Greene does not retract his motion, if we must vote today, then my vote will have to be no. Thanks. Regina From: Sumption, Linda Monday, October 26, :49 PM I vote no. In the past, I ve seen some very interesting and really outrageous -- incentives for student evals. I d be happy to share the anecdotes sometime. Linda J. Sumption, Ph.D. From: Marden, Kerriann Monday, October 26, :27 PM From one of my constituents: Eastern's student evaluation system was never designed to be a reward system for students who participate. The purpose of the evaluations is to provide one kind of information to a complex personnel decision making process; not a process to evaluate student participation. Because the system is ultimately anonymous, the information has limits. It really is more a "diagnostic" tool than a "summative" tool. Student evaluations show issues that FEC's and chairs can use to help the faculty member with formative efforts and can suggest information, combined with other sources, to make summative decisions.

15 Take the evaluations for what they are. They are information. Studies have shown that they are in large part valid because the students have a self-interest in participating. Don't add an issue of perhaps spoiling their validity by enforcing their administration. Wells, Robin Monday, October 26, :09 PM Sorry my department did not get their vote counted. Hope it wouldn t have made a difference. Currently out of 12 faculty members, the vote is 6-2 in favor with 4 still needing to cast their vote (which could then be a tie ). Senators Represented in Discussion 21 out of 26 total Senators (Quorum) Votes Summarized: Greene in favor Bratcher- in favor Starr- in favor Benham- in favor Sumption- against Stockly- in favor Kyle- in favor Schwartz- in favor Andersen- against Pollock- against Marden- abstain Aragon- against Ahmadian- against Painter- in favor Bogdanov- in favor Browder- against Cooper- against Erf/Muhlbauer- in favor Wells- abstain Mitchell- in favor Flores- in favor 12- in favor/ 7- against The motion passed and the document will be forwarded to Dr. Laurenz.