UNC aims to use online course evaluations in the future

After a trial run of online course evaluations revealed problems, UNC used paper for all evaluations this semester. But the effort to move evaluations online has not been abandoned.

Lynn Williford, assistant provost for institutional research and assessment, said the online program was labor-intensive to administer and led to lower response rates.

But the biggest issue by far was that the program was not compatible with Oracle’s PeopleSoft Campus Solutions, the new student information system being implemented this year.

“It was a good program, even though it needed a few tweaks,” Williford said. “But ultimately it just was not going to work with the new student information system.”

The Center for Teaching and Learning began leading the effort to create an online evaluation in 1999 and started designing a program with ITS in 2002.

For the future, Williford said UNC likely will purchase an online evaluation program from an external vendor instead of using the program developed by ITS.

The online version used the same questions as the paper version but allowed students to fill out the evaluation on their own time within a given window.

Aside from compatibility issues, the biggest problem with the online version was student response rates.

Williford said response rates from the online versions were varied and unpredictable, ranging from 30 percent to 100 percent, while response rates from the paper version are often close to 100 percent.

“To get a small response rate, particularly under 50 percent, would mean that the information is just not going to be as valid or useful,” Williford said.

The online evaluations were tested for three semesters beginning in spring 2006 in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication, Kenan-Flagler Business School and the Department of Psychology.

Journalism professor Dulcie Straughan said confusion about how long the evaluations were available meant some students could fill them out after they had received their final grades.

“There was some feeling that really would color the way students did their evaluation,” she said.

But despite these problems UNC still hopes to move evaluations online in the future.

“It wasn’t a bad system,” Williford said. “The feedback we collected from students and faculty for the most part was very positive.”

Williford said the University is exploring ways to improve response rates such as offering extra credit points or withholding students’ final grades until they complete the evaluation.

Student Body Vice President Todd Dalrymple, who has been involved with the project for two years, said the online version would also benefit students because the results could be made public.

“If it’s possible to get a similar response rate, I think it’s a win for everybody,” Dalrymple said.



Contact the University Editor at udesk@unc.edu.