"On a scale of one to five, please rank the effectiveness of this lecture." Students face questions like this every semester in an attempt to castigate or reward their instructor and his or her class. It is an opportunity to provide insight for the improvement of the instructor and also to encourage or dissuade future generations of students from taking the class. But once this information cozies itself into a manila envelope, many believe that it begins a journey toward eventually educating the student body. In most cases, this is true. But when the Michigan Student Assembly's Advice Online committee recently requested last winter's evaluations from several LSA departments, it met with fierce opposition. It is the departments' responsibility to release this information - failing to do so compromises the potential impact of the surveys and violates the law.
Opposition to the surveys runs high; there is a prevalent belief that contests the validity of scantron-type surveys. There is no doubt that the surveys are biased and flawed for a variety of reasons. For example, female professors tend to receive lower marks than their male counterparts. Similarly, professors teaching large lectures receive lower average scores. It remains divisive as to whether the positive effects outweigh the negative repercussions, but on the positive side, grading does not play a role in students' evaluation of a particular professor's merit.
This ambiguous mishmash detracts from the support Advice Online may receive from University officials. The departments vehemently state that they will not release the data for a variety of reasons - they have even threatened to end the use of the surveys entirely. Despite constant badgering by MSA, many departments, particularly English and the foreign languages, remain firm in refusing the assembly's request. It is vital to both current and future students that the University release this information without further protest. Students are the surveys' source of information and should have the right to access their results.
Beyond ethical reasons, the departments' refusal violates the state's Freedom of Information Act. A July 1997 Michigan Supreme Court ruling stated that personnel records are not covered by FOIA's privacy exemption. In addition, the University administration admitted that it would entangle itself in controversy if it kept course evaluation records private. In a memorandum to deans, directors and department heads dated Oct. 2, two University lawyers affirmed that "this new Supreme Court decision will require the University to release records such as evaluations ... ." On Wednesday, MSA sent a letter to Chief Freedom of Information Officer Lew Morrisey demanding that the University cooperate and release the much-needed information. The University clearly has backed itself into a corner - they must release the evaluation information or face a lawsuit.
There is no reason why the University should withhold this information from students. Without the information, Advice Online is critically hampered due to a lack of uniformity between those departments choosing to cooperate and those who do not. English, foreign language, math and physics students would be at a great disadvantage compared with those in other departments. It is neither fair nor legal to conceal this information. The benefits reaped award added knowledge to the student body.
11-07-97
| Next Article |
should be sent to: daily.letters@umich.edu | should be sent to: online.daily@umich.edu |