Faculty Evaluation System

Approved: September 2000 Revised: July 2017

2

Table of Contents

I. Statement of Philosophy ...................................................................................................................... 3

II. Purpose for Evaluation of Faculty Performance .................................................................................. 3

III. Components of the Faculty Evaluation System ................................................................................... 3

1. Student Evaluation of Instruction Form ........................................................................................ 4

2. Faculty Self-Evaluation Form ....................................................................................................... 4

3. Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty Form ........................................................................................ 4

4. Faculty Evaluation Process for Courses Offered via Online Format ............................................ 5

IV. Procedures for the Annual Review of Faculty Performance ................................................................ 6

V. Document Confidentiality .................................................................................................................... 6

VI. Maintenance of Evaluation Process ..................................................................................................... 6

VII. Schedule of Faculty Evaluation Process for each Academic Year ...................................................... 6

VIII. Examples of Forms ............................................................................................................ 8-22

Appendix A – Part-Time Instructor Appraisal – Lecture Classes ..................................... 8-11

Appendix B – Part-Time Instructor Appraisal – Non Lecture Classes ............................ 12-14

Appendix C – Student Evaluation of Instruction ............................................................. 15-16

Appendix D – Faculty Self-Evaluation Form .................................................................. 17-18

Appendix E – Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty ............................................................. 19-20

Appendix F – Online Course Evaluation ........................................................................ 21-25

3

I. Statement of Philosophy

It is essential to ensure a consistently high quality of instruction with a supportive, growth- oriented environment for both students and faculty at Wharton County Junior College (WCJC). Consequently, it is the responsibility of the College not only to provide evaluation of faculty members, but also to provide faculty with systematic support for improvement of instruction.

All performance evaluations should foster building relationships based on trust, mutual commitment, and team effort. Intellectual honesty, rigor, and fairness are essential throughout the process. This system is designed so that individual faculty members are responsible for their own instructional improvement. Such a process ultimately will result in a better teaching and learning environment.

The faculty evaluation process is oriented toward both summative and formative ends and promoting excellence in teaching and learning. The intent is to foster individual development and reinforce best practices in instruction. This process serves as a mechanism for evaluating job performance; it is not intended to be a punitive or disciplinary instrument.

II. Purpose for Evaluation of Faculty Performance

The purpose of evaluating faculty performance includes:

1. Assess and promote excellence in the teaching/learning process. 2. Meet the educational needs of students and community by continually monitoring

instructional performance. 3. Provide a constructive framework for evaluating faculty performance by

identifying areas of strength and areas for improvement in classroom instruction and service to the institution.

4. Provide a basis for professional growth and development.

III. Components of the Faculty Evaluation System

Note – Part-time faculty are evaluated similarly to full-time faculty (similar instrument and process). Students evaluate part-time faculty using the Student Evaluation of Instruction forms as described below. The summary and aggregate score are used in an evaluative fashion by the part-time faculty member and supervisor. New PT faculty will also be evaluated the first semester via the Part-Time Instructor Appraisal Procedures – Lecture Classes or Part-Time Instructor Appraisal Procedures – Non-Lecture Classes (Appendix A and Appendix B). Regular PT faculty may be evaluated at any time using the Part-Time Instructor Appraisal Procedures.

4

1. Student Evaluation of Instruction Form

The responses on Student Evaluation of Instruction form (Appendix C) are correlated per item with the Faculty Self-Evaluation and the Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty. Each item on the evaluation is rated according to a Likert scale. The ratings on the Likert scale are as follows:

• Strongly Agree (5 pts) • Agree (4 pts) • Neutral (3 pts) • Disagree (2 pts) • Strongly Disagree (1 pt)

These student responses are compiled into a summary report and provided to each faculty member. Normally this occurs by the end of the spring semester each year. This report provides each faculty member with aggregate data (merging all student responses from all courses), as well as data sorted by course. Faculty members are to use these data as part of the self-evaluation process.

An opportunity for written comments from students is provided at the end of the Student Evaluation of Instruction form. Any student comments submitted will be included in the summary report given to each faculty member.

2. Faculty Self-Evaluation Form

Individual faculty members rate themselves by completing the Faculty Self-Evaluation form (Appendix D), as objectively and impartially as possible. Based upon self- evaluation findings or related areas of interest for self-improvement, the faculty member s h al l n ot e proposed professional development activities planned for the next academic year. Each item on the Faculty Self-Evaluation form is paired with an item from the Student Evaluation of Instruction form. In addition, faculty rate themselves using the same Likert scale.

Each faculty member shall list the professional development activities from the previous academic year and shall list the proposed activities for the next academic year.

3. Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty Form

The supervisor completes the Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty form (Appendix E) using information from various sources. These include, but are not limited to:

• summary reports for each faculty member (note – the aggregate mean response for each item on the Student Evaluation of Instruction form is printed on each Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty form. The summary report allows the supervisor to perform a gap analysis on each item by comparing the

5

faculty member’s self-evaluation response to the aggregate mean of the students’ responses.),

• observation of instruction, • review of syllabi, • evaluation of other duties, • feedback from department heads or other supervisors, and • feedback from Online Faculty Evaluation Reports, if relevant.

The Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty form is broken into three parts. Part one corresponds to the items on the Student Evaluation of Instruction form and focuses on classroom instruction. Part two covers the accuracy and currency of course syllabi, and part three encompasses other duties such as committee work, cooperation, and administrative duties. The supervisor should include written comments in the evaluation of each instructor. These comments increase the usefulness of the evaluation to aid instructors in development and growth.

The supervisor schedules a formal face-to-face conference with each faculty member. The private meeting provides a forum for an open exchange of information. During this conference the supervisor discusses performance and plans for professional growth that is related to performance. Proposed action plans resulting from this conference are noted in the suggestions for professional development section and are reviewed during the instructor’s next evaluation.

Should the faculty member not agree with the supervisor's ratings, the faculty member has up to five working days to provide additional written comments listing and explaining his/her objections. These written comments are attached by the supervisor to the completed evaluation document, forwarded to the appropriate dean, and then forwarded to the VPI. At the discretion of the VPI, a follow up conference may be called between the instructor, the supervisor, and the VPI.

4. Faculty Evaluation Process for Courses Offered via Online Format

The evaluation criteria to assess the teaching and learning environment of courses offered via distance education is equivalent to that used to evaluate face-to-face instruction. Many online courses are evaluated in both fall and spring semesters, as are some face-to-face courses, since some courses are offered only in the spring semester.

Students enrolled in online courses complete the Student Evaluation of Online Instruction form (Appendix F). This form contains comparable evaluation criteria to the Student Evaluation of Instruction form.

The faculty member and supervisor receive an Online Faculty Evaluation Report by the end of the spring semester. The report includes student feedback from both the fall and spring semesters. The report provides an aggregate mean (merging all student responses

6

from all online courses), as well as data sorted by course. The data from this report is also utilized to complete the Online Faculty Self-Evaluation form and the Supervisor Evaluation of Online Faculty form.

IV. Procedures for the Annual Review of Faculty Performance

1. Immediately following the formal conference, both parties sign the Supervisor Evaluation

of Faculty form. 2. A copy of the completed document is given to the instructor to aid in professional

development and enhancement of instruction and performance. 3. The supervisor forwards the original document to the appropriate dean, who then

fo rw a rd s to the VPI for review and approval. 4. Upon the VPI’s approval, signed copies of the evaluation document are sent

electronically by the VPI Office to the Division Chair (copy to the dean) to forward to the faculty member and the department head/program director if applicable.

5. Originals are forwarded to the Human Resources Office to be placed in the instructor’s personnel file.

V. Document Confidentiality

Evaluation documents and materials prepared and gathered in this process are treated as confidential and limited to authorized persons such as the supervisor, the faculty member being evaluated, the Dean, the VPI, and the President of the College, except as provided in the Texas Government Code, Chapter 552 (the Public Information Act).

VI. Maintenance of Evaluation Process

A Faculty Evaluation Committee is established each year to review the evaluation process and recommend modifications for improvement. This committee consists of ten members who serve staggering years. The VPI appoints one member from each instructional division; Faculty Council selects two faculty members, and the Director of Distance Education serves as a member. The VPI names the committee’s chairperson.

Timetables, based on the above recommendations and guidelines, are implemented and maintained by the VPI.

VII. Schedule of Faculty Evaluation Process for each Academic Year

Step 1. September: Full-time faculty members complete the Faculty Self-Evaluation form and forward to his/her supervisor.

Step 2. October 1 – November 30: Department Head/Program Director and Division

7

Chair complete the Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty. Each instructor schedules a formal evaluation conference with his/her Division Chair.

Step 3. October – November: Formal face-to-face evaluation conferences are held by the

Division Chair (and DH/PD if desired). Discussion includes plans for professional development tied to evaluation.

Step 4. December 1: Division Chair sends completed forms to the appropriate dean for

review and approval. Step 5. December 15: Dean sends completed evaluation to the VPI.

Step 6. January – February: VPI reviews completed evaluation documents. Electronic

copies of signed evaluation documents are returned to the Division Chair (with copy to dean) who forwards to the instructor and DH/PD if applicable.

8

PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR APPRAISAL PROCEDURES:

LECTURE CLASSES

1. A date and a time for the instructional visitation are established by the instructor and program director/department head or division chair.

2. Part I (course outline) and Part II (learning description) are filled out by the instructor

and given to the program director/department head or division chair along with a copy of the course outline at least 48 hours in advance of the class visit.

3. At the request of either the instructor or program director/department head or division

chair, an instructional visitation may be preceded by a conference for discussion of the instructional visitation process.

4. Part III (review of class session) is filled out by the program director/department head

or division chair and returned to the instructor within one week of the classroom visit. 5. Part IV (instructor comments) is filled out by the instructor and returned to the

department or division office (whoever performed the appraisal) within one week after receiving Part III.

6. Part V (summary review) is filled out after the program director/department head or

division chair communicates the results of the evaluation with the part-time faculty member and determines opportunities for professional growth. This communication may occur via telephone, email, or face-to-face.

7. Signatures are added after completion of Parts I through V.

9

PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR APPRAISAL FORM Lecture Classes

Instructor Name ____________________________ Division ___________________________ Department ______________________________ Date/Time of Visit __________________ Campus/Room # ____________________________ Course ____________________________ PART I: COURSE OUTLINE – SUPERVISOR REVIEW

□ Course title & number □ Course objectives

□ Course description □ Course outline (units or subdivisions)

□ Prerequisites, if any □ Evaluation/grading procedure

□ Required/recommended materials such as □ Attendance policy texts, manuals, etc.

□ Standard syllabus prepared by the department is followed PART II: LEARNING DESCRIPTION FOR CLASS SESSION 1. Briefly describe your objectives for this class session/learning experience in relation to the overall

course plan. 2. Describe the method of instruction to achieve these objectives. 3. How will the students participate during this session?

10

PART III: REVIEW OF CLASS SESSION BY SUPERVISOR Course Instruction Strongly

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree 1. The objectives for the class

session/learning experience were achieved.

2. The method of instruction was appropriate in meeting the objectives.

3. The instructor was well prepared for the class session/learning experience.

4. The instructor communicated effectively with students.

5. The instructor clarified the objectives for the students.

6. Students participated in activities as expected by the instructor.

7. Support materials (media, manuals, and equipment) were appropriately and effectively utilized. (Note if not applicable)

SUPERVISOR COMMENTS PART IV: INSTRUCTOR’S COMMENTS

11

PART V: SUMMARY OF REVIEW Instructor Signature ___________________________________________ Date __________________ PD/DH Signature _____________________________________________ Date __________________ Division Chair Signature ________________________________________ Date _________________ Dean Signature _______________________________________________ Date __________________ Vice President of Instruction Signature ____________________________ Date ______________________

12

PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR APPRAISAL PROCEDURES: NON-LECTURE CLASSES

1. A date and a time for the instructional visitation are established by the instructor and program

director/department head or division chair.

2. At the request of either the instructor or program director/department head or division chair, an instructional visitation may be preceded by a conference for discussion of the instructional visitation process.

3. The Part-Time Non-Lecture Instructor Appraisal Form is completed by the program director/department head or division chair and returned to the instructor within one week of the classroom visit.

4. Instructor Comments section is completed by the instructor and returned to the department or division office (whoever performed the appraisal) within one week after receiving the completed Part-Time Non- Lecture Appraisal Form.

5. The Summary of Review section is completed after the program director/department head or division chair communicates the results of the evaluation with the part-time faculty member and determines opportunities for professional growth. This communication may occur via telephone, email, or face-to-face.

6. Signatures are added after completion of all sections.

13

PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR APPRAISAL FORM Non-Lecture Classes

Instructor Name ____________________________ Division ___________________________ Department ________________________________ Date/Time of Visit __________________ Campus/Room # ____________________________ Course ____________________________ Briefly describe the objective for the instructional session.

Course Instruction Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

1. Instructor actively monitors assigned students throughout the instructional session.

2. Instructor demeanor and communication is professional.

3. Instructor is well prepared for the instructional session.

4. Instructor demonstrates an interactive approach during instruction.

5. Instructor actively identifies errors and works to help student understand and correct errors.

6. Student receives feedback on the instructional session in a timely manner.

7. Instructor utilizes various instructional strategies to facilitate student learning.

8. Instructor uses positive reinforcement.

14

Instructor Comments Summary of Review by Supervisor Instructor Signature ___________________________________________ Date __________________ PD/DH Signature _____________________________________________ Date __________________ Division Chair Signature _______________________________________ Date __________________ Dean Signature _______________________________________________ Date __________________ Vice President of Instruction Signature ____________________________ Date ______________________

Student Evaluation of Instruction

Fall 2017

15

Please answer the questions below to provide feedback to help enhance instruction.

About Me: More

than half the time

About half of

the time

About a quarter of the time

Only a few times

Never

1. How often did I miss class? □ □ □ □ □ 2. I complete course assignments when due. □ □ □ □ □ 3. I come to this class prepared for each session. □ □ □ □ □ 4. The required textbooks and/or student resources purchased for

the course are utilized. □ □ □ □ □ 5. The required textbooks and/or student resources purchased for

the course are helpful in meeting course outcomes. □ □ □ □ □ My Instructor:

Strongly Agree

(5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly Disagree

(1)

1. Provided a syllabus and clearly identified expectations/objectives at the beginning of the course. □ □ □ □ □

2. Follows the course syllabus/course outline. □ □ □ □ □ 3. Begins and dismisses class on time. □ □ □ □ □ 4. Provides contact information and responds to my phone calls,

voicemail, and/or email in a timely manner. □ □ □ □ □ 5. Presents the course content in a clear, logical, and organized

manner. □ □ □ □ □ 6. Examinations, projects, papers, or creative activities reflect

content emphasized in the course. □ □ □ □ □ 7. Evaluates examinations, quizzes, papers, or creative activities

in a timely manner. □ □ □ □ □

Instructor Name

ID

CRN

Course No

Subj Code

Student Evaluation of Instruction

16

My Instructor: Strongly

Agree (5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly Disagree

(1)

8. Provides constructive feedback (writes comments on returned work, answers students' questions, offers suggestions for improvement). □ □ □ □ □

9. Communicates effectively. □ □ □ □ □ 10. Encourages an atmosphere of mutual respect and courtesy. □ □ □ □ □ 11. Encourages students to participate in the course and/or

contribute to class discussions. □ □ □ □ □ 12. Expects a high level of academic performance. □ □ □ □ □ 13. Utilizes various instructional strategies to facilitate student

learning. □ □ □ □ □ 14. Is accessible during posted office hours. □ □ □ □ □

Please add Comments:

17

Faculty Self-Evaluation Form

Print Instructor Name: __________________________________

Please evaluate as fairly as possible and use as a tool to enhance your instruction.

Strongly Agree

(5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly Disagree

(1)

1. I provide a syllabus and clearly identify expectations/objectives at the beginning of the course.

2. I follow the course syllabus/course outline.

3. I begin and dismiss class on time.

4. I provide contact information and respond to phone calls, voicemail, and/or email in a timely manner.

5. I present the course content in a clear, logical, and organized manner.

6. The examinations, projects, papers, or creative activities I give reflect content emphasized in the course.

7. I evaluate examinations, quizzes, papers, or creative activities in a timely manner.

8. I provide constructive feedback (written comments on returned work, answer students’ questions, offer suggestions for improvement).

9. I communicate effectively.

10. I encourage an atmosphere of mutual respect and courtesy.

11. I encourage students to participate in the course and/or contribute to class discussions.

12. I expect a high level of academic performance.

13. I utilize various instructional strategies to facilitate student learning.

14. I am accessible during posted office hours.

15. I participate in appropriate professional development activities.

18

Comments: List previous year’s professional development opportunities below, including title and date:

Note proposed professional development for subsequent year below including title, date, and approximate cost: __________________________________________ Instructor Printed Name

_________________________________________ _____________________________ Instructor Signature Date

19

FY 2017-2018

Supervisor Evaluation of Faculty Overall Instructor Rating for HB2504 Compliance:

☐ Acceptable ☐ Unacceptable

Instructor Name: Doe, John The focus of this evaluation is to provide feedback to help enhance instruction. Instructor Initial: _________

Part 1: Course Instruction – Based On Student or Course Evaluations

College Wide Mean

Instructor Mean

Strongly Agree

(5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly Disagree

(1)

1. 0 Provides a syllabus and clearly identifies expectations/objectives at the beginning of the course.

2. Follows the course syllabus/course outline.

3. Begins and dismisses class on time.

4. Provides contact information and responds to phone calls, voicemail, and/or email in a timely manner.

5. Presents the course content in a clear, logical, and organized manner.

6. Examinations, projects, papers, or creative activities reflect content emphasized in the course.

7. Evaluates examinations, quizzes, papers, or creative activities in a timely manner.

8. Provides constructive feedback (writes comments on returned work, answers students’ questions, offers suggestions for improvement).

9. Communicates effectively.

10. Encourages an atmosphere of mutual respect and courtesy.

11. Encourages students to participate in the course and/or contribute to class discussions.

12. Expects a high level of academic performance.

13. Utilizes various instructional strategies to facilitate student learning.

14. Is accessible during posted office hours.

Part 2: Accuracy and Currency of Syllabus

Strongly Agree

(5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly Disagree

(1) 15. Course title, prefix and number, course

description, and learning outcomes correlate with Administrative Master Syllabus.

16. Classroom conduct and academic dishonesty statements are clear.

20

17. Topical outline is complete.

18. Textbooks and required study materials are noted.

19. Attendance policy is clear.

20. Course grading system is defined.

Part 3: Evaluation of Other Duties Strongly

Agree (5)

Agree (4)

Neutral (3)

Disagree (2)

Strongly Disagree

(1) 21. Attends and participates in required

college activities as assigned. 22. Notifies supervisor and follows absence

procedures. 23. Submits accurate student grades to

Registrar’s Office according to schedule.

24. Works cooperatively with colleagues.

25. Handles student issues appropriately.

26. Follows college regulations, policies, and procedures as outlined in college handbooks.

27. Meets department, division, and college deadlines.

28. Assists with department duties as assigned (curriculum development and revision, maintenance of supplies and equipment, etc.).

29. Participates in appropriate professional development activities.

Comments: Suggestions for professional development:

______________________________________________ _____________________________________________ Department Head Signature and Date Instructor Signature and Date

(Signature does not denote agreement, only that evaluation was discussed)

_______________________________________________ _____________________________________________ Division Chair Signature and Date Appropriate Dean Signature and Date

_______________________________________________ Vice President of Instruction Signature and Date

21

Online Faculty Self-Evaluation Form

In addition to the regular faculty Self Evaluation Form, this form is to be completed by faculty teaching fully online courses.

Please evaluate as fairly as possible and use as a tool to enhance your instruction.

Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree

Strongly Disagree NA

1. I have my course prepared and opened on the first day of the semester.

2. I use a variety of teaching techniques (e.g., lesson notes, videos, online discussions, case studies, textbooks, etc.) to clarify course content.

3. I explain material well through written documents and/or audio/visual material.

4. I require students to be an active participant in class. 5. I promote student-to-student and student-to-faculty

interaction and collaboration.

6. I follow a course syllabus. 7. I clearly identify expectations/objectives at the beginning

of the course in the Getting Started Section.

8. I present course materials in an organized manner. 9. I am regularly present in my course (announcements,

emails, discussion board, feedback, etc.).

10. I regularly respond to questions within the timeframe stated in the course syllabus.

11. I help troubleshoot or provide information to students on where they may obtain technical assistance.

12. I grade assignments and exams within the timeframe stated in the course syllabus.

13. I provide constructive feedback (write comments on returned work, answer students’ questions, and give suggestions for improvement).

14. I develop assignments and exams that clearly reflect course content.

15. After reviewing my student evaluations I have the following response:

Additional comments (optional):

_______________________________________________ ___________________________________________

Instructor Printed Name Instructor Signature and Date

22

Supervisor Evaluation of Online Faculty

Overall Instructor rating for HB2504 Compliance:

Acceptable Unacceptable

Instructor Name: ______________________________

The focus of this evaluation is to provide feedback to help enhance instruction. Instructor Initial: _________

Mean Strongly

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree

Strongly Disagree

NA

1. Instructor has the course prepared and open on the first day of the semester.

2. Instructor uses a variety of teaching techniques (e.g., lesson notes, videos, online discussions, case studies, textbooks, etc.) to clarify course content.

3. Instructor explains material well through written documents and/or audio/visual material.

4. Instructor requires students to be an active participant in class. 5. Instructor promotes student-to-student and student-to-faculty

interaction and collaboration.

6. Instructor follows a course syllabus. 7. Instructor’s expectations/objectives are clearly identified at the

beginning of the course in the Getting Started Section.

8. The material is presented in an organized manner. 9. Instructor is present regularly in the course (announcements,

emails, discussion board, feedback, etc.).

10. Instructor is available to respond to questions within the timeframe stated in the course syllabus.

11. Instructor helps troubleshoot or provides information on where to obtain technical assistance.

12. Assignments and exams are graded within the timeframe stated in the course syllabus.

13. Instructor provides constructive feedback (writes comments on returned work, answers students’ questions, and gives suggestions for improvement).

14. The assignments and exams reflect course content. Additional Comments:

________________________________________________ ___________________________________________

Supervisor Signature and Date Instructor Signature and Date (Signature does not denote agreement, only that evaluation was discussed) ________________________________________________ ___________________________________________

Division Chair Signature and Date Dean Signature and Date

https://wcjc.blackboard.com/webapps/enterpriseSurvey/execute/serveSurvey?surv_surveyId=_419_1&surv_cmd=preview&nav_bridge=learn_surveys_… 1/3

7/25/2017 DE - Student Evaluation of Online Instruction – Blackboard Learn 23

ONLINE COURSE EVALUATION

In order to enhance the quality and effectiveness of online classes and provide a better learning experience for future students, please complete the following survey. All information submitted to the evaluation system is anonymous and will not be released to faculty until grades have been submitted.

Online Course Evaluation

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

1 Instructor had the course prepared and open on the first day of the semester.

2 Instructor uses a variety of teaching techniques (e.g., lesson notes, videos, online discussions, case studies, textbook, etc.) to clarify course content.

3 Instructor explains material well through written documents and/or audio/visual material.

4 Instructor requires me to be an active participant in class.

5 Instructor promotes student-to- student and student-to- faculty

https://wcjc.blackboard.com/webapps/enterpriseSurvey/execute/serveSurvey?surv_surveyId=_419_1&surv_cmd=preview&nav_bridge=learn_surveys_… 2/3

7/25/2017 DE - Student Evaluation of Online Instruction – Blackboard Learn 24

interaction and collaboration.

6 Instructor follows a course syllabus.

7 Instructor's expectations/ objectives were clearly identified at the beginning of the course in the Getting Started Section.

8 The material is presented in an organized manner.

9 Instructor is present regularly in the course (announcements, emails, discussion board, feedback, etc.).

10 Instructor is available to respond to questions within the timeframe stated in the course syllabus.

11 Instructor helps troubleshoot or provides information on where to obtain technical assistance.

12 Assignments and exams are graded within the time frame stated in the course syllabus.

13 Instructor provides constructive feedback (writes comments on returned work,

https://wcjc.blackboard.com/webapps/enterpriseSurvey/execute/serveSurvey?surv_surveyId=_419_1&surv_cmd=preview&nav_bridge=learn_surveys_… 3/3

7/25/2017 DE - Student Evaluation of Online Instruction – Blackboard Learn 25

answers students' questions, and gives suggestions for improvement).

14 The assignments and exams reflect course content.

Additional Comments:

Character count: 0

Submit