Skip to main content Skip to main content

Email Submitted to Summarize Oral Suggestions


TO:  SRI Task Force
FROM:  Layton Seth Curl
RE:  Summary of Oral Suggestions

SENT: Monday, March 24, 2014


Greetings Everyone,

I’m glad the SRI summary idea generated discussion; perhaps it can be worked into an agreeable consensus. Here is the proposal as I initially envisioned it. The concept is malleable and the details may of course be modified as the group sees fit.

First, I saw three issues at hand which I was attempting to address:

1)   Use of Comments

2)   Bulk of Work

3)   Duration of Access


The basic idea is to have the faculty member read all of their SRI comments and provide a 1-2 page summary broken into themes (e.g. organized, engaging, too much info on PowerPoint etc.). Then the department chair would review both the comments and the summary. She could either concur or dissent. In the event of the former, the following levels of review would not review the individual comments. They would only consider the summary provided by the faculty member and vetted by the chair. In the event of the latter, the following levels of review would be tasked with reviewing the comments and summary, weighing in on both.

The process is intended to be formative for the faculty member as she reflects on the comments and works to address any relevant areas of concern raised by her students. For example, if students indicated the faculty member’s course lacked organization, the faculty member would note that in her summary and express a strategy for improvement. I say relevant, as any comments given that are irrelevant (e.g. you have great hair) or inappropriate (e.g. your accent was annoying) would simply be discounted at this juncture by the faculty member. Additionally, no actual comments would be used in the summary. The summary pages would become part of the portfolio, providing a summative element as well.

Regarding deletion of the actual comments, my initial idea was that they would remain until the end of the review period. I left review period vague, as I had yet to give it enough thought. I envisioned them in Digital Measures (DM) for the faculty member and chair to review. My thinking was that the comments would be deleted after the review. That could be done annually (i.e.  after each year) or after milestones (e.g. tenure, promotion, and 5-year reviews). Right now I’m reading over the group emails from the end of last week again, considering if there is any disadvantage for the comments being deleted annually.

Secondly, here are the tangential recommendations. These should help facilitate the former.

-      All SRIs to be completed online for in-class, online, and extended campus courses. (This would create a uniform procedure).

-      Students’ grades to be released after the student has completed their SRIs. (This would help ensure a robust sample, and it may be accomplished with Banner). If a student opts not to do it, their grades are released 30-days later. Note that a decline to answer option would also be in place, providing an alternative to the punitive element. Thank you Winston for pointing out the need to address that part.


I hope everyone enjoys the slower pace of this week!

Best regards,



Edit this page