Recently, the Office of the Associate Vice-President (Teaching and Learning) asked the teaching and learning community at Carleton to complete three questionnaires:
- EDC programming survey
- TLS communications survey
- IMS electronic classroom survey
Thank you to everyone who took the time to complete the questionnaires. Your input will help guide us and improve our services, strategies and support. A special congratulations goes out to the winners of the $250 Campus Card gift certificates: Emily Gray, Raúl Razo-Garcia and Elizabeth Friesen.
We have just started to examine the data and we wanted to share some preliminary results back to the community. Much like the practice of teaching should be about being transparent with students, we feel in Teaching and Learning Services that there should be transparency in how CUOL, EDC and IMS support and work with our stakeholders: faculty members, contract instructors, teaching assistants, staff and students.
Some preliminary results:
Educational Development Centre programming survey
N= 191
The EDC has many program and services and we looked to get feedback on these initiatives. One section of the questionnaire asked respondents to rate the importance of various EDC programs and services with the goal of helping us better understand what we do that is particularly useful to the Carleton community.
Out of the EDC’s portfolio of initiatives, the most useful services include cuLearn support, Scantron exam processing, our community building activities, such as our roundtables and teaching and learning forums, and the EDC website. Services that aren’t as useful, or not used as much by the community, are related to clickers and BigBlueButton.
Turning to satisfaction, the community seemed very satisfied with the way the EDC delivered some its services, with the Scantron service scoring 4.72 (out of 5), yet other services, such as BigBlueButton support, scored significantly lower at 3.81. Clearly there is some work to be done here.
Teaching and Learning Services communications survey
N= 164
TLS uses a number of different methods to communicate with faculty members and contract instructors and we are always looking at ways to improve. Are we sending too many emails? Not enough? Should we be using more social media? This questionnaire was our first attempt to get a better understanding at our communications strategy.
In terms of our communication methods, more traditional forms, such as email, websites and the newsletter, were far more popular than social media (Twitter and Facebook). That being said, social media was more popular than posters, postcards or hard copy newsletters.
In terms of the frequency, we seemed to be okay, with only six percent indicating too many and two percent responding that we didn’t send enough.
One area that we can work on is finding better ways to raise awareness of TLS programs and services as only 37 percent felt that they usually knew what programming was coming up at CUOL, EDC and IMS.
Instructional Media Services electronic classroom survey
N= 79
This questionnaire asked instructors who used electronic classrooms (which is most classrooms on campus) about their satisfaction with the room, equipment and services that IMS provides.
Again taking a cursory look at the results, we see that the most popular tools used in Carleton’s classrooms are the classroom computer (87 percent), the data projector (81 percent) and the chalkboard (71 percent). After these tools, the use of the other classroom technologies drops off significantly, including DVD players (28 percent) and microphones (18 percent), down to what is apparently little use of lecture capture and overhead projectors. In terms of how little lecture capture is used in our classrooms, this could mean a number of things: we need to do a better job of communicating the availability of the tool, the tool doesn’t meet the needs of our instructors, or it not suited for the pedagogically approaches applied.
We also asked respondents to rate several aspects of our classrooms (including aspects that IMS does not directly support/service, but should act as advocates for).
| Criteria | Score/5 |
| The overall suitability of the classroom for your teaching | 3.57 |
| The physical layout (the type and placement of student seating, the location of the podium/teaching console, and the location of the projection screen) of the classrooms | 3.26 |
| The cleanliness of the classroom | 3.38 |
| The overall physical appearance of the classroom | 3.56 |
| The selection of the technology in the classroom | 3.79 |
| The ease of use of the classroom technology | 3.63 |
The above scores are not overly encouraging. Clearly we have some work to do here. On a much more positive note, users of classroom technology indicate a high degree of satisfaction with IMS classroom technology support staff, with 87 percent of respondents noting satisfaction.
Moving forward we will dig much deeper into the feedback that you provided and look to make improvements, adjust our services and initiatives. We are committed to listening, to being better and supporting you and our learners. We will keep you posted as we move forward at Teaching and Learning Services.