Difference between revisions of "WASC 2005-03-07"

From Murray Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{wascheader}}
Present: Richard, Brad, Jean, Niles, Csilla, Nate
1. Introductions
1. Introductions


2. Overview of WASC Process
2. Overview of WASC Process (see [[WASC|WASC home]])


3. Discussion
3. Discussion - what are the issues we should consider as possible topics for further study
* Q: What are the issues the students see as the big deals?
* Q: What are the issues the students see as the big deals?
** Weekly homeworks, especially in the core
** Weekly homeworks, especially in the core
** Not enough freshman humanities courses
** Not enough freshman humanities courses
** Underuniting (across the board)
** Underuniting (across the board)
* Uniting
* Course evaluations
* Course evaluations
** Evaluations are ridiculous: some people feel we shouldn't have them, some people feel they are underutilized
** Evaluations are ridiculous: some people feel we shouldn't have them, some people feel they are underutilized
Line 19: Line 22:
** Experimental class to see how things work out
** Experimental class to see how things work out
** Integrated core
** Integrated core
* Faculty evaluation and teacher ideas
* Faculty evaluation  
** Better system of award/penalty
** Better system of award/penalty
** More transparency: what is a raise for, how was it evaluated
** More transparency: what is a raise for, how was it evaluated

Latest revision as of 04:00, 23 March 2006

WASC Home

Present: Richard, Brad, Jean, Niles, Csilla, Nate

1. Introductions

2. Overview of WASC Process (see WASC home)

3. Discussion - what are the issues we should consider as possible topics for further study

  • Q: What are the issues the students see as the big deals?
    • Weekly homeworks, especially in the core
    • Not enough freshman humanities courses
    • Underuniting (across the board)
  • Course evaluations
    • Evaluations are ridiculous: some people feel we shouldn't have them, some people feel they are underutilized
    • New online version is available for core courses (apparently much better)
    • Students are much more critical face to face than on the forms
    • Ch 1: take 5 people to lunch right after class and ask how things went
    • Technological: most people aren't ready to implement solutions that exist; Caltech could facilitate this
  • New ways of teaching
    • Lectureless teaching of Ph, Ch, EE, etc
    • Experimental class to see how things work out
    • Integrated core
  • Faculty evaluation
    • Better system of award/penalty
    • More transparency: what is a raise for, how was it evaluated
  • Improving teaching
    • Get faculty to go to other faculty member courses (not enough)
    • Undergraduate TAs
    • Video tape + feedback (but painful)