St. Olaf College | Evaluation and Assessment

Evaluation and Assessment
- Evaluation and Assessment
- Administration 100
- 1520 St. Olaf Avenue
- Northfield, MN 55057
- Jo Beld
  Director, E&A
  beld@stolaf.edu
  507-786-3910
  
  Tonya Kjerland
  Senior Research Analyst, IR&E
  kjerland@stolaf.edu
  (507) 786-3390
  
  Anna Scaramuzza
  Office Coordinator, IR&E
  scaramuz@stolaf.edu
  (507) 786-3061

Comprehensive Review of Reappointment, Renewal, and Repeated Term Appointment

Important Initial Considerations: Determining Who Will See the Results

The Faculty Manual gives departments discretion in determining who will have access to student evaluation results in reappointment, renewal, and repeated term reviews. The only requirement in the Manual is that department chairs conducting the comprehensive reappointment reviews must reference student evaluation data in their narrative evaluations of the candidate's performance. While at least one other tenured member of the department is to observe the faculty member's teaching and write a narrative evaluation, the Manual neither requires nor prohibits that member from seeing the student evaluations. And while the chair is also to "consult" with the full-time tenured or tenure-track members of the department who have completed at least two years of service to the College, the Manual is similarly silent on whether those other members should have access to the student evaluations as part of the consultation process. These limited prescriptions apply only to the comprehensive reappointment reviews for tenure-track candidates; there is no mention at all in the Manual of student evaluations in renewal or repeated term appointment reviews.

Departments therefore vary in their practices. However, it is important that both candidates and prospective respondents know who will see the results before the data is collected. E&A recommends the following guidelines:

Candidates should receive an oral summary of the evaluation results but should not see individually-completed evaluation forms or receive a written summary. This recommendation is consistent with the principles of confidentiality in tenure and promotion reviews. It also increases the likelihood of candid student responses.

Departments should determine who will be authorized to see the results before data collection begins, and this determination should be specified in writing. This determination should be part of the department’s planning process prior to the commencement of the review.

The chair’s cover letter and instructions for completing written questionnaires or responding to interview or focus group questions should include information about who will see the results and whether it will be possible to link specific results with individual students. Anyone who participates in a survey or interview is entitled to know who will have access to the results and whether individual responses will be identifiable. The template cover letters on the E&A website and the instructions in the Form Creator versions of the student evaluation forms provide “boilerplate” language about data identifiability and data access. The language should be adjusted to reflect whatever agreements the department makes on these two issues.