How many times have you filled out a teaching evaluation and felt
unsatisfied about your response? Sure, the instructor comes to class
prepared for each meeting and is fair to all regardless of race or gender,
but the class may have still been a load of bunk. You may have been
frustrated because you felt like you did not get to express your true
feelings. Four ambiguous questions are not enough to properly evaluate
teaching performance.

As reported on page one of this issue, SGA, the faculty senate, and an ad
hoc task force are currently working to pass a new evaluative system that
should prove to be more comprehensive as well as more informative to
students. If this bill is passed soon by the faculty senate, students will
not only be able to more thoroughly voice concerns about classes, but will
also have the chance to review the results of the evaluations when
scheduling for classes the following semesters.

For any educational system to function properly, evaluations should be
utilized to gain necessary feedback so that beneficial changes can be made
and task-minded individuals can be rewarded for jobs well done.

There are not many of us around anymore who recall the Lame Monkey
, an underground tabloid published to give more informal
information to students about teachers. Without having an internal safety
check to insure the most accurate information, students still flocked to
this bit of information as if it were the absolute gospel. If a teacher
were praised in this publication, the entire campus knew about it and
his/her classes were full quickly after registration began. Conversely, if
an instructor did not fare well, all eyes were watching to see if that
person was not a worthy educator.

Having information like this published internally by the university will be
a completely proactive step. First, it will show willingness on the part of
administration and faculty to admit its mistakes and will hopefully show
good faith efforts in correcting them. It will also show strengths and give
the university direct knowledge about who is doing well and should be
commended. Secondly, a monitoring system could be instituted to insure that
the most honest and unbiased information is reported. With students and
faculty working together, this can be easily achieved.

The faculty senate will discuss the new evaluation system at its next
meeting on Nov. 21. If they pass it, new evaluations and published results
could be seen as early as next year.