Even as the faculty is undertaking an important conversation about the problematic use of student evaluation tests for the purposes of tenure and promotion, we nonetheless remain in an interstitial period in which our colleagues up for review will need to discuss their scores in their self-report, as outlined in the bylaws. Consequently, chairs should be aware of this data to inform your program evaluation letters for tenure and promotion files, and to help mentor your pre-tenure faculty.
Each chair/coordinator has access to view student evaluation scores for courses within your program's HEGIS code (POSC, BIOL, etc). Your log-in through http://smcm.mce.cc/results with your individual password will permit your access to both your own individual evaluation scores and those of your program colleagues. New chairs are updated each fall; if you are unable to access your departmental scores, please email the Associate VP of Academic Affairs to ensure your info was correctly added to the permissions matrix.
SOME IMPORTANT GUIDING PARAMETERS:
These scores are confidential information and may not be shared or discussed with any other parties, including other tenured colleagues, outside the context of an official evaluation (pre-tenure, tenure, or promotion review). You are of course free to reference these scores with the instructor.
Note that our change in software platforms has now allowed chairs and coordinators to access student comments as well as statistical data, content which has historically only been viewable by the instructor. Please be especially mindful of the fact that, for the purposes of tenure and promotion, the focus is squarely on the statistical data (in fact, the revised bylaws preclude inclusion of student comments from the online evals in files). While it may be helpful to have an overall sense of themes emerging in these comments, this content is largely intended to be a conversation between the student and instructor. The "ICES" scores are part of a broader campus metric and may be helpful in framing your suggestions, concerns, or questions about teaching.
The Provost's office also maintains access to all student evaluation scores. In my capacity as associate dean of faculty (and by definition outside the evaluative chain), I review scores at the end of each semester in an effort to identify pre-tenure or visiting faculty in need of additional support. I'm at your disposal if you'd like to discuss any concerns, or if you'd like to talk through strategies toward a better classroom experience for both your faculty and your students. The CITL is also an excellent resource for all faculty to consult with questions or concerns about their teaching.
Finally, I fully understand having to grapple with extensive research documenting the biases and flawed assumptions behind the merit of student evaluations. While this criterion persists in our bylaws for evaluation and promotion, please help your pre-tenure colleagues to both be aware of this data while also clearly articulating the other means by which your department qualifies and quantifies teaching excellence.