University of Minnesota Morris


UMM Home > Faculty Center > Development Committee > 08-09 FDC Minutes> 10/13/08


Minutes of October 13, 2008
10:45 AM
Blakely Conference Room 8



Jong-Min Kim (Chair), Paul Grove, Seung-Ho Joo, Jess Larson, and Engin Sungur (Ex-Officio)

Invited Guest
Peh Ng
Minutes taken by:
Linda Pederson

FDC Minutes, 09/15/08
Kim asked for any additions, revision, and/or approval of minutes. Members reviewed the minutes, correction noted; minutes approved unanimously as amended.

Academic Inventories
A member question if images could be posted to the web. Sungur said faculty can submit their Research/Scholarly Works, send images, or include a link to images to the FCLT for posting to the web.

Student Evaluation of Teaching (Peh Ng)
Kim welcomed Peh Ng to the meeting to discuss the Student Evaluation of Teaching FDC members received copies of the Morris Student Rating of Teaching Form, Student Release Questions, and the procedure for Student Rating of Teaching Survey. Sungur said in the previous years, the FDC designed the questions for the Student Evaluation of Teaching form, but noted nothing came to the FDC; the FDC wonders why we were not involved. Discussion included what information is available to Administration, students, and faculty, and who is dealing with this issue; Ng replied the Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs and Dean oversees this. Ng said in 2006 a joint all-U senate sub-committee (SCEP) and senate committee on faculty affairs was formed to revise the core questions concerning the Student Rating of Teaching form. Ng said she had sent information to UMM's MCSA, the VC of Academic Affairs Office, the UMM's Executive committee and other campus assembly committees, including the FDC, but was never contacted to attend a FDC meeting. Ng said Senate policy mandates the first six questions and the three written ones, and they are uniform throughout the campuses of the University Minnesota system governed by the U of M's Faculty Senate Ng said the surveys are confidential, and the data from the 6 core questions and the 3 open/written questions may be provided to dept heads and tenure and promotion committees. Ng said the student members of the U of M's Student Senate pushed for the Student Release Questions, but said these Student Release questions cannot be released without the professor's permission. Members discussed how the information is disseminated to the public; Ng said the Student Release Questions and Morris Student Rating of Teaching form are tabulated separately. Ng suggested the FDC invite Dean Contant to a meeting to discuss dissemination of the survey information. Other discussion included:

  • Past years, the report was automatically tabulated, very detailed why does UMM need to tabulate the surveys separately?
  • Policy says the Student Release Questions cannot be used for promotion/tenure, but members fear seeing the information can influence Division Chairs decisions.
  • Discussed what parts of the survey would be available for Administration, students, faculty
  • Dean's office collects information, Lynn Schultz does tabulation
  • Data collected cannot be mixed together, instructor should get everything
  • A member questioned how other committees felt about the form; Ng said some changes were made based on concern.
  • Sungur said the form was designed in 3 parts
  • Rating of Teaching, Questions 1-6
  • Written Comments, developed by faculty (external person said comments should only be seen by faculty). Ng said the written comments explain the number rating. According to Senate policy it is up to the unit how comments are disseminated.
  • Student Release Questions, design to help students decide on courses
  • Members discussed the design of the form, and said Division Chairs should not see the Student Release questions. Ng said Senate Policy requires all information must be collected on the form, and said the FDC should write their concerns to the Dean. Ng said a solution would be to make a two-page document.
  • Form should be separated out for viewing by faculty, student, and Division Chair
  • Division chairs should be more explicit on the standards and how they tabulate.
  • Important issues that need to be addressed on a personal side.

Kim acknowledged Ng for attending the meeting and discussing the Student Rating of Teaching Survey; Ng left the meeting.

The FDC agreed to write a report and send their concerns to the Dean, and noted this should be done before the evaluations are filled out.

FFR 2008 Evaluation Results
FFR 2008 Evaluation results were distributed to the FDC, Sungur noted that these would be used in the spring to design the FFR 09. Sungur said the FCLT is asking approval to post the results to the website. Kim asked approval of the FDC to link the FFR 2008 Evaluation Results to the website; unanimously approved.

New Business
Sungur said we currently have website for faculty to post Research/Scholarly Works, Teaching Methods/Techniques, Academic Technologies, and Public Engagement, and said he has designed a form for Assessment of Student Learning. He said faculty can share on the web what they do for assessing student learning. Sungur said the link is created, but wonders if this should go to the ASLC. Sungur will show the Academic Inventories Web site at the next meeting.

Meeting Date
The FDC meeting is scheduled for November 17, 10:45-11:45 AM in Blakely Conference Room 8. Kim will invite Troy Goodnough to meeting to discuss Environmental and Sustainability issue.

The meeting adjourned at 11:45 AM.