For the first time since the early 1990s, students are able to rate their teachers in areas such as organization, difficulty of class, and ways to improve the classroom environment.

The purpose of the survey is to be “formative” for teachers. “Even experienced teachers can learn something about his teaching craft. The best outcome would be if a teacher changes something he or she does to make a better classroom experience,” said Principal Paul Barker.

The Evaluation Design Team, consisting of English teacher Dick Paaby, Science Department chair Rebecca Jansing – Kaestner, Foreign Language Department chair Danica Zavodny, Fine Arts Department chair Michael Shupe, and Fine Arts/Foreign Language teacher Richard Wojewodzki,  “refined” the survey and “modified language in a couple of questions and added a question about student experience with technology,” said Barker.

The survey is issued through Survey Monkey, and was released to students to evaluate religion teachers on November 2. Teachers were encouraged to have at least two of their sections take it.

The results will be posted on an Excel spreadsheet and given to the teacher to discuss with the department chair, or, in the case of department chairs, with Vice Principal of Academics Gary Scholl.

The assessments will be done over six or seven weeks, according to Barker. The department order of assessments was assigned in a “pick a name, any name” structure, said Barker.

“Students are the best judges of how students feel about sitting in the classroom. The survey communicates to them that we’re interested in what they have to say,” said Barker.

The surveys have the possibility of making “a real impact,” said Barker. “I question any teacher that’s here that doesn’t see the value of hearing the voice of students. It’s not the Tribunal or anything – it’s encouraging a more reflective community.”

Religion Department Chair Joseph Gallen said, “I am really enthusiastic about the possibilities because of the systematic way it gives students a voice, and then, it also is going to be the reflection of how they understand what’s going on.”

Jansing – Kaestner does see potential problems in the surveys. “The data can be skewed one way or the other based on a student’s attitude or the day. This really should be taken more than once with the same group of students,” said Jansing-Kaestner.

“The surveys are anonymous, so it’s a way for students to let their personality conflicts get in the way of the actual purpose of the survey. It is an honesty issue. Are kids going to be overly critical or say ‘I don’t care’ and give all positive marks,” said history teacher Brian Powell.

This method has been utilized for teacher evaluations of the administration and “school atmosphere” so it was a “natural progression” for the Evaluation Design Team to lead the development of student surveys, according to Jansing – Kaestner.

“Mr. Barker had an original set of questions similar to the teacher’s evaluations. We went back and forth on who should take it, how it should be taken, and what questions to use. We added technology, like how much do students use computers in class,” said Jansing – Kaestner.

After the original meeting, the committee offered “input from teachers” by sending out a mass email. “One suggestion was a question about long term assignments,” said Zavodny.

Gallen sees this as a positive step, especially in regards to the religion department, “Especially since it’s a religion class, I think their [the students] understanding is really critical in what we’re trying to do. I’m very glad that we’re the first ones to do it too, because I think, with some personal bias, that the religion course is kind of the reason why the school is here. Therefore, to give it this kind of emphasis and attention I think is a very good thing.”

“I hope to gain a little insight as to how students feel about learning in the class and how I can better serve them,” said Zavodny.

“Information is power. I’m not going to get any better if people aren’t going to tell me I’m falling short. I like any opportunity to better myself and I want to know what my students think. I want to get better as a teacher always. I don’t want to stay stagnant,” said Powell.

Powell expresses special interest in the questions concerning organization, workload, and teacher grading practices. “For example, I know there are questions about organization and I am not an organized teacher. I don’t need my 13 or 14 year olds to tell me I’m not organized. But if there’s something I don’t realize, I want to know about it.”

Powell sees the surveys as a positive step. “The surveys are common, maybe not at the high school level, but being a college preparatory school with 99.9 percent of kids going to college, this is another area that John Carroll is preparing kids for college, for the future.”

Kate Froehlich can be reached for comment at [email protected].