Follow us on Instagram
Try our daily mini crossword
Play our latest news quiz
Download our new app on iOS/Android!

Course evals done right

Students now complete evaluations online — and before receiving final grades —  rather than manually at the end of classes. This streamlines the collection, processing and viewing of evaluation data for all involved. By displaying results online in a searchable format rather than forcing students to download a large PDF file of data on all courses, the Registrar has made evaluations easier to access and increased the likelihood they will be used by students. The Registrar-gathered data represent a wider range of student input that is more comprehensive than the limited number of contributions displayed on the USG’s Student Course Guide (SCG). The database also includes a narrative section detailing student-to-student recommendations, which provide the more detailed, SCG-like specific feedback that the PDF file lacked.     

The Registrar’s effort to improve the system is laudable, and the resulting changes have already done much to ensure an easy exchange of information about courses within the University community. But there are several measures the Registrar can take to improve both the usability of the database and the depth of the information it presents.     

ADVERTISEMENT

The interface of the online database needs improvement. Though users can currently search by department and course number, the ability to search by professor or course name is important and lacking, especially for courses that change numbers often or have new professors teaching an established course for the first time. The current drop-down menus, which require selecting several different fields to access an evaluation, can also be confusing to navigate.

Most importantly, the database lacks a section devoted to professor evaluations. Though course material can be critical, more often the professor’s teaching style and the class structure are the most important elements of a course. Including a specific section for student comments on professors would provide students with feedback that extends beyond the quality of course-specific readings or precepts. While the addition of a section that might display critical reviews of professors could raise concerns for the faculty and administration, the leap from course evaluations to professor evaluations is not large. This is especially true because the current student-to-student recommendations often include professor-specific comments.

Given that Princeton is committed to the quality of its undergraduate education, it is imperative that the students have the information they need to make sound choices about their courses. The overhaul of the course evaluation process is a significant step in that direction. The Registrar should be praised for introducing the new system, but several improvements must be implemented before it can reach its full potential for both students and professors.

Want to join the 'Prince' Editorial Board? Visit www.dailyprincetonian.com/join/opinion and submit an application by Feb. 20. 

ADVERTISEMENT