Rick Adams wrote:
> Here is where the break from the thread occurs. The
> original thread discussing collegestudent.com suggested that the site
should not be
> ALLOWED to post such evaluations and, in one post, even went
> so far as to suggest that faculty members who were concerned with the
evaluations
> might, themselves, post false and distorted ones so as to render the
> entire site useless to its users.
Just to be sure the context is correct... :)
I didn't "suggest" that in the sense that I thought faculty members
_should_ do that. I "suggested" it in the sense of pointing out that it was
an option open to faculty members, and one that faculty members may have
already taken. Here's the original post, which should make the distinction
clear:
==============================
G. Marc Turner wrote:
> Interesting thing though, there is an evaluation of someone
> in psychology that has never taught here. There are also instructors who
> are on campus, but don't teach the courses they are listed under (e.g., a
> math professor listed as teaching an intro psych course.) It seems like it
> the site is somewhat user unfriendly, so students post evaluations to the
> wrong school, wrong courses, etc.
On reading the article in the Times yesterday, it occurred to me that if
faculty are worried about this kind of thing, all they have to do is to post
a lot of obviously incorrect evaluations, thus making the site essentially
useless as a guide to which classes to take. Perhaps faculty have already
picked up on that idea.
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
==============================
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
