College Policies
College policies on the conduct of student evaluations in reviews for reappointment, renewal, and repeated terms are less prescriptive than the policies governing reviews for tenure, promotion, or special appointments. Departments have considerable discretion in the nature and amount of data they collect. Nevertheless, there are some important policy parameters to consider.
Collect student evaluation data only as required by the Faculty Manual and the Office of the Dean of the College. Student evaluations provide valuable evidence of teaching effectiveness, but they also require time and energy from many individuals, including the students whose feedback is being sought. Consequently, in addition to reviews for tenure, promotion, and special appointments, student evaluation data must be gathered only for the following review types:
- Comprehensive reappointment reviews for the reappointment of tenure-track faculty, typically conducted during the second and fourth years of appointment.
- Renewal or repeated term reviews occurring after three years of employment at St. Olaf.
Of these types of reviews, only one – the comprehensive reappointment reviews – must include data from written (either paper or electronic) evaluations. Written evaluations may be used for renewal or repeated term reviews as well, but the chair may elect to gather the data through interviews or focus groups instead.
Do not use data from the instructor’s course evaluations. Recommendations for continuing or renewing an appointment should be informed by evaluation data collected specifically for that purpose. The College has always maintained a distinction between course evaluations for purposes of improvement, and teaching evaluations for purposes of personnel decision-making. Course evaluations are intended to promote improvement in the faculty member's teaching, not to serve as the basis of personnel decisions. Furthermore, the stated "audience" for a course evaluation is the course instructor alone. For these reasons, course evaluation results (such as "Gold Form" summaries) should not be used as the student evaluation data for reappointment, renewal, or repeated term reviews.
Consult the relevant sections of the Faculty Manual. There are two sections of the Manual governing student evaluations in reappointment, renewal, and repeated term reviews:
- Section 4 VII: Standards for Faculty Evaluation
- Section 4 VIII: Procedures for Reappointment and Renewals (*includes subsection on "Effective Teaching")
Teaching evaluations are discussed in the Faculty Manual only in regard to tenure, promotion, and the comprehensive reappointment reviews that are often conducted during the second and fourth probationary years of tenure-track faculty. In these reappointment reviews, the department chair's narrative evaluation of the faculty member's performance must "make reference . . . to student evaluations of the faculty member’s teaching solicited through questionnaires and/or narratives.” The Manual does not discuss the role of student evaluations in renewal or repeated term appointments. Guidelines for these reviews, as well as additional guidelines supplementing the Faculty Manual provisions for reappointment reviews, are provided by the Office of the Dean of the College.Faculty Manual criteria for effective teaching: These criteria pertain to all types of appointments at St. Olaf and should be reflected in the questions students are asked. The questionnaire templates provided by E&A for reappointment/renewal/repeated term reviews (both in Word for paper surveys, and in Form Creator for electronic surveys) are based on these criteria and have been reviewed and approved by the Tenure and Promotion Committee.
Consult the policy documents provided by the Office of the Dean of the College. The Office of the Dean of the College establishes additional requirements for the content of recommendations for reappointment, renewal, or repeated terms. These requirements include information about the role of student evaluation data in each type of review.
