1. Faculty Perceptions
of Fall 2011 IDEA
Preliminary Report to CNU Faculty Senate
April 2012
By Deborah Moore, Director, OAEA
for IDEA TaskForce & CNU Faculty

2. Purposes of the Survey
• gather information about Fall 2011 IDEA
experience . . . targeting the online. . .
• learn what information you would like to
have about IDEA timeline, reports, etc.
• identify what you need to know about the
reports to help you improve instruction in
your classroom and those planned
collectively by your department.

3. Background Information
Response Rate: 192 submitted of 394 invited
(49%); 8 reported “none of my classes were
evaluated this fall”)
By subgroup: (not all respondents provided a
response to the status item)
Adjunct, 30 of 148 (20%)
Restricted, 44 of 78 (56%)
Probationary, 31/53 (58%)
Tenured, 80 of 115 (70%)

4. Which best describes your
status in Fall 2011?
Answer Response %
adjunct 29 15%
restricted 47 24%
probationary, hired before Fall 2011 26 14%
probationary, new hire as of Fall 2011 8 4%
tenured 82 43%
Total 192 100%

5. Home Departments

6. Which type of administration
did you experience this Fall?
Answer Res- %
ponse
none of my classes were evaluated this fall 8 4%
online only, short form 82 43%
online only, diagnostic form 40 21%
online, both short and diagnostic forms 34 18%
paper only, diagnostic form 24 13%
paper and online, short form 2 1%
paper and online, both short & diagnostic 2 1%
Total 192 100%

7. Knowledge about the IDEA
0%
10%
15%
50%
25%

8. Importance: Teaching Effectiveness
Overall, how important is IDEA to you with respect to
your own teaching efforts and improvement practices.

9. Satisfaction: Teaching Effectiveness
Overall, how satisfied are you with IDEA with respect to your
own teaching efforts and improvement practices.

10. Importance: Evaluation
Overall, how important is IDEA to you with respect to CNU's
process for instructor/course evaluation?

11. Satisfaction: Evaluation
Overall, how satisfied are you with IDEA with respect to CNU's process
for instructor/course evaluation?

12. Teaching Effectiveness:
Importance by Satisfaction
(Q1.6)Overall, how satisfied are you with IDEA with respect to your own teaching efforts
and improvement p...
Somewhat Somewhat
Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very Satisfied Total
Dissatisfied Satisfied
Not at all
4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Important
Very Unimportant 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 6
Somewhat
(Q1.5)Overall, how 1 4 3 2 4 0 1 15
Unimportant
important is IDEA to you
with respect to your
own teaching efforts
and improvement Neither Important
prac... 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3
nor Unimportant
Somewhat
1 3 6 15 14 17 1 57
Important
Very Important 2 3 5 3 19 41 1 74
Extremely
0 0 1 0 3 8 5 17
Important
8 11 15 24 41 69 8 176
Total

13. Evaluation: Importance by Satisfaction
(Q1.8)Overall, how satisfied are you with IDEA . . .instructor/course evaluation
Very Somewhat Somewhat Very
Dissatisfied Dissa-tisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Total
Not at all
Important 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 5
Very Unimportant
2 4 0 2 0 0 0 8
Somewhat
(Q1.7)Overall, how
Unimportant 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 7
important is IDEA .
. . for
instructor/course Neither Important
evaluation nor Unimportant
0 2 4 7 1 1 0 15
Somewhat
Important 1 5 6 7 20 4 0 43
Very Important
1 6 9 6 17 20 3 62
Extremely
Important 3 5 9 2 8 7 2 36
Total 14 26 29 24 46 32 5 176

14. Please rate the following aspects of the your IDEA experience:
I
s
, if
ue
-
nd
ct
IF
as
iss
t ru
ea
eF
y
ew
m
lve
ns
ur
th
of
nt enc
ei
en
so
s
ith
wa
ov
rt
ch
re
nie ri
ew
pr
ea
fo
ve xpe
to
n
.
.
te
tio
im
rts
m
or
FI ble
ple
on e
ra
sf
to
po
lp
nc ne
he a
ist
m
he
ive
re
F.
ts
n i nli
g t as
Statistic
co
in
or
in w
to
ct
ha o
s. EA
m
o
ep
t t the
je
et nt
ad
yt
e
tie ID
ob
bl
yr
pl e
as
ivi y
EA
m sm
ea
en t
em
ct m
ni ha
ct
se
ID
co es
er
ele
l a se
ve t t
wa
us
t h ss
d. e
sw
on gh
ne o u
s. to s
le th
wi of A
to
IF
e c ou
ue
on t
du n
eF
n. ow
r s ow
he he
ur ow
or I th
ag
ad e
it.
lin
I h ffic
sc w
co w h
tio h
pe w h
ne le
ed
all
on
se
w
ol
w
O
ed
no
no
er
yc
ne
ne
e
e
Ov
Th
Th
Ik
Ik
Ik
Ik
M
m
Mean 4.14 4.14 3.63 3.36 4.03 3.82 3.60 3.28
Online, Short Form SD 0.90 0.63 0.80 0.81 0.93 0.94 0.99 1.25
N 73 72 71 72 73 72 72 72
Mean 3.77 4.05 3.92 3.21 3.81 3.74 3.42 3.33
Online, Diagnostic
SD 1.04 0.69 0.75 0.57 0.60 0.97 1.06 1.42
Form
N 39 39 38 39 39 39 38 39
Mean 3.78 4.09 3.65 3.41 4.00 3.79 3.47 3.26
Online, Short &
SD 0.88 0.58 0.98 0.88 0.95 0.77 0.90 1.11
Diagnostic Forms
N 34 33 32 33 34 34 34 34
Mean 4.17 3.06 3.37 3.11 4.04 3.96 3.83
Paper, Diagnostic SD 0.76 0.64 1.07 0.68 0.91 0.91 1.01 NA
N 24 18 18 18 24 24 24
Neither
Strongly
Disagree Agree/ Strongly
Scale values Disagree Agree=4
=2 Disagree Agree=5
=1
=3

15. What did you do to encourage or ensure that your students
completed their IDEAs for your classes? (Select all that
apply.)
Set aside
classroom
Discussed time for
Discussed my choice students
the of to bring
importance objectives laptops I didn't do
of student and how and anything to
participation they Offered complete encourage
in IDEA related to rewards for the IDEA
Statistic evaluations the class participation evaluation participation
Online, Short Form
% 88 21 4 6 10
(N=72)
Online, Diagnostic % 72 26 18 15 15
Form (N=39)
Online, Short &
Diagnostic Forms % 76 24 9 9 12
(N=34)
Paper, Diagnostic
% 76 33 10 10 10
(N=21)

16. Which elements of your individual course reports do
you use?
Stats at
end
and
Stat- items I Comments
istic All 1st Page added Other primarily
Online, Short Form
% 51 18 7 1 23
(N=74)
Online, Diagnostic
% 77 5 0 3 15
Form (N=39)
Online, Short &
Diagnostic Forms % 59 12 12 3 15
(N=34)
Paper, Diagnostic
% 50 8 13 17 13
(N=24)

17. Currently the IDEA is administered weeks 13 and 14
of the term. What weeks would you prefer?
weeks
13&14
(don't
change
the
Statis weeks weeks timefra weeks
tic 11&12 12&13 me) 14&15 other
Online, Short Form (N=71) % 3 6 61 25 6
Online, Diagnostic Form
% 3 5 45 42 5
(N=38)
Online, Short & Diagnostic
% 9 6 50 26 9
Forms (N=34)
Paper, Diagnostic (N=24) % 8 13 50 21 8

18. IDEA Webpages
• http://www.cnu.edu/assess • http://www.theideacenter.o
ment/idea/index.asp rg/

19. Preliminary Summary/Highlights
• Survey response rates were acceptable, • Faculty were asked to provide an overall
although low (56%-70%) for subgroups rating of importance and satisfaction
except adjunct (20%). about two contexts of IDEA use: IDEA for
personal teaching improvement, and IDEA
• Nearly every department had faculty as used by CNU for course/instructor
participating in the survey. evaluation.
• As expected more respondents indicated
having participated with an online • In the 1st of 2 contexts, use of IDEA for
experience (160/192 or 83%) and paper personal teaching improvement efforts,
was limited to a small subgroup (26/192 84% or 148/176 respondents indicated
or 14%). A small group had no classes the tool was important (EI + VI + SI).
evaluated and ended their survey after Within that subgroup, 74% were satisfied
reporting their faculty status (8/192 or and 14% were dissatisfied with IDEA.
4%). Although room for improvement, overall
this is a positive outcome.
• Although not ideal, these values can
serve as a benchmark for comparison • Similarly 80% or 141/176 respondents
about faculty perceptions of the online indicated the tool was important (EI + VI
application of the IDEA. + SI) in the context of CNUS use of IDEA
for course/instructor evaluation. Within
• The majority of the respondents indicate this subgroup of those who indicate
good knowledge about IDEA and related CNU’s use of IDEA for course/instructor
procedures (75%); however 25% indicate evaluation is important, 57% were
the need information about both the form satisfied and 32% were dissatisfied.
and procedures.

20. Continued
• Efforts to determine what is • Weeks 13 and 14 (the current
dissatisfying—and addressing the timeframe) was preferred by the
responses should help to shift largest percent of respondents in
these ratios in a more positive the various subgroups (by form),
direction however there was also support
for pushing the administration to
• Strategies instructors used to
weeks 14 and 15.
encourage student completion of
IDEA form are similar except • Regardless of format subgroup,
those involved with the comments were fewer in quantity
Diagnostic form (either paper or and less helpful qualitatively.
online) used slightly more
strategies than those involved
with the Short form.