In response to the article regarding the class evaluations (“Evals in need of examination,” Sept. 28), I agree that it is a rather tedious/long evaluation and really does not have pertinent questions to better evaluate the class. In essence, it is an after-the-fact condition with some fears built into the questions. I believe the content and structure should be reviewed and modified to fit the needs of current students. The evaluation should not be held over the heads of students, preventing them from getting a better grade by three to five points if they do not complete the evaluation. That’s more of a coercive tactic and not necessarily ethical.
If studies show that only a percentage of evaluations written or online are typical for classes, then educators should be content with those results and work within those parameters. Although, neither should they be limited by these results. If, as a student, I feel strongly enough about a class to comment, you can bet I will. However, if I am too busy or am otherwise occupied, and it is not an important factor, I will let it go.
I do not believe a professor ought to rely solely or even partially on the contents of an evaluation to improve their classroom aptitudes. They ought to interact directly with the students organically rather than virtually to get a better sense of reality. Virtually writing cannot provide tone, inclination, or depth in the same way as a vocal statement can. Thus, I believe a genuine and sincere evaluation can be obtained unhurried if it is built within the content of the classroom setting rather than after-the-fact when it is way-too late. A student should walk away from a class with satisfaction not regret.
If a class is online or virtual only, then another style of evaluation better suited for such should be considered rather than using the same evaluation as that of a ground class. We are, after all, organic beings not virtual beings and need to interact with other beings not other processors.
Class of 2007
We would like to commend publicly the outstanding quality of the Campus Times. This is in large part due to the guidance, integrity and creativity of Elizabeth Zwerling, chief faculty adviser, and the excellent team of editors, reporters, photographers and managers that she has assembled.
The Campus Times is essential for ULV to create a shared and informed community united in its values and priorities. We enjoy and anticipate reading the weekly editions of the award winning Campus Times. Thank you, Elizabeth. And a special thanks to Gary Colby, Kevin Holland, Eric Borer and Maia Kinsinger for the important supporting roles they play, which they do with dedication, skill and commitment.
Sharon K. Davis, professor of sociology
Zandra Wagoner, assistant dean of undergraduate programs
Robert Neher, professor of biology
Iraj Parchamazad, professor of chemistry
Arthur Gonchar, professor of psychology
Seta Whitby, associate professor of computer science
Jeffrey Burkhart, professor of biology
Michael Frantz, professor of mathematics
David Flaten, professor of theatre arts
Richard Gelm, professor of political science
Reed Gratz, professor of music
Ann Hills, associate professor of Spanish
Hector Delgado, professor of sociology
Peggy Redman, director of teacher education
Ernie Thomson, professor of sociology
Karen A. Donahue, associate professor of sociology
Felicia R. Beardsley, associate professor of anthropology
Kimberly Martin, professor of anthropology