Andrew on Major Minor Fair

This is Andrew on Major Minor Fair

Assessment of evaluations: Courses vs. Ratemyprofessor

I recently looked at both the popular www.ratemyprofessor.com website and www.courses.qc.cuny.edu.  Based on 4 criterion, it is my understanding that the Courses system meets the needs of current students and could be the foundation for other colleges to follow with. Ratemyprofessor does not adequately assess or address true student concerns. Perhaps some time given and more students will begin to use and appreciate the new Courses system.

1. Validity

The evaluation criteria used by the Queens College senate evaluations are clarity, interaction, feedback, assignments, availability, and readings. These criteria permit for the use of effective simple down to earth tools that students understand and can assess of professors.

The evaluation criteria used by rate my professors are helpfulness, clarity, easiness, hotness, and overall quality.  Although at first this list of criteria looks effective, it is rather not because these tools of measurement are dumbed down to the point that it does not provide an ample marker for measuring effectiveness and overall educational attainment.

It appears that by comparing and contrasting both ratemyprofessor and the courses system, that Courses uses more comprehensive tools of measurements and assessing whether or not a professor is good.  Courses allows students to see actual student input from students who were enrolled at a given time with that instructor.

2. Representativeness

When looking at both Courses and ratemyprofessor, there is a clear difference that comes to light: how many students actually evaluated that professor.  On Courses, the system lists how many students were enrolled in each section that had the professor, whereas ratemyprofessor does not.  When looking at ratemyprofessor, the system lists comments from students, but it only lists about one or two students from each year. When students look at this system, they are looking at inaccurate data from too small of a sample, and from previous years rather than semesters.

In the courses system, about half of the students in each section has completed the evaluation. Overall, the percentage of students completing evaluations, college wide stands at 41%. Ratemyprofessor cannot even come close to this number because it is optional, it only includes few students, and allows for data to go beyond the scope of measurement, moving away from criteria and permitting feedback via comments.

About 4 of every ten students per section will complete the student evaluation forms on courses, whereas on ratemyprofessor there is not even an amount that is close to that. Instead the pattern is that data is from two or three students per year who either had strong opinion or felt like filling the survey out.

3. Reliability

Courses website at queens college is more consistent because it is conducted every semester during the final four weeks of the semester.  The evaluation period allows for ample time for professors and students to participate in the system. On ratemyprofessor, there are only two or three comments that will appear for a professor per each academic year. In courses, data is updated every semester with new and accurate information from students who just recently had that professor.

The evaluation data of the courses system includes information from every semester a professor has taught. The evaluation data is updated every semester whereas ratemyprofessor fluctuates.

The results from semester to semester are very consistent on the courses system versus ratemyprofessor. The new Course system allows for a student to see each semester and provides for a comparison of a particular professor with all of those who also teach the same particular subject.

4. Relative helpfulness

It appears that Courses is by far more accurate and contains far more information than ratemyprofessor does. The courses system lists information that is relevant to college students attending QC more so than ratemyprofessor. The Courses system uses criteria that is effective in measuring and assessing professors with regards to educational attainment. The hotness category on ratemyprofessor fails to address serious student academic needs such as availability and even course material.  By looking at both systems, I prefer using the Course evaluation system.

What is student leadership?

What is student leadership?

Andrew DeMasters QC12 and Jim Stellar

I (JS) remain interested in student leadership as a form of experiential learning right on campus.  But the question is what is a student leader? And what makes him or her tick?  To address those questions, I thought I would talk to one, someone I have known for a few years and who is making an important contribution to helping us raise our participation rates in the teacher evaluation process after it switched to on-line and suffered a classical drop in student participation rates. Oh…and Andrew writes his ownblog.

Andrew, let’s begin at the beginning.  What is a student leader and why do you want to be one?

A student leader is not someone who walks around with a title. Rather what I have come to understand is that more specifically, it is about taking initiative that inspires others to do the same. I have had the unique experience of coming to understand this concept. Ever since I could remember, I have always been in the active pursuit of trying to become part of a something more than myself. My sophomore year brought a lot of growth in the sense that I have to realize that having a title of “VP” or “senator” is meaningless unless you define it. My active engagement in trying not only understand myself but to look at what I was doing with a greater sense of purpose ultimately led me to become a student leader. In my time at Queens College, I have never held position in student government but I have made my best efforts to certainly change a campus I was invested in. Sometimes, without necessarily having “power” you can still make have friends, colleagues, supporters who realize the efforts you are trying to take to improve their lives as well. In my years here at QC, with the help of others, I am proud to be part of events such as Midnight Breakfast, War on Hate, Major/ Minor Fair, and more recently the Teacher Evaluation process. I believe that my continued experience has only been possible with the help of others who shared in the same vision as me. I do not say that I am a student leader. I often believe that I am the first follower of an idea and therefore the movement begins.

What do you think is the essential learning opportunity from being a student leader in or out of the student government?

There only needs to be one significant trait: a willingness to take action. I believe that being involved outside the classroom is highly educational for several reasons. First, regardless of any organization, you meet fellow students from all walks of life, whether they grew up in a bad neighborhood or avoided a giant debt with an undergraduate degree. By having a firsthand experience of just meeting these people, this is simply a taste of what the world and working environment is like outside of college.  Second, you learn how to participate in meetings. By actively engaging within an organization you learn about the membership, member’s strengths and weaknesses, and what the purpose of the organization really is. Third, you learn how to actively engage yourself within your surrounding community through creating events that are run by students for students. What is a better feeling than that of helping to bring something awesome to your college that will be fun and beneficial? Fourth and finally, you really get to discover what your potential can be through active participation. I have found that remember your college campus and participating in it helped to shape the type of person I am today. I often find myself doing things that I never thought I could do, e.g, sitting in a room doing paperwork or having coffee with a fellow member in the dining hall.  I believe it is some these basic truths that you receive outside the classroom that are so beneficial. In a way its learning that is optional, not required in a class. I have a firm belief that participating in an organization and having a chance to make a difference can certainly go a longer way, far past the perfect 4.0 GPA student.

 How do you see this tying back to your major field of study and what you hope to do (at this stage) for your career?

I really see that the experiences I have had in college have provided me with tremendous insight and planning for my future. I plan on attending law school with a Juris Doctor in Public Interest Law. I am attracted to this field because I have a deep sense for being involved with government related work.  My college career as a student leader has given me important skills such as scheduling meetings, policy research, public speaking, event organizing, and more importantly how to take an idea and put it into action. As both a double major in Political Science and Sociology, I believe that I have learned a great deal about how to understand and work with people, how to make successful policy, and how government should work for it’s people.  I have taken two seminar classes in Political Science: NYC Politics and Immigration Law. Each has given different perspectives of what problems are facing our country as well as extensive background information.  In Sociology, I have taken courses such as Deviant Behavior and Mass Media Pop culture that have exposed me to real problems, how information is relayed, and how it affects society as a whole. It is my intent to bring the same passion that motivated me as a student leader to my next challenge. My experiences as a student leader have certainty opened up the doors for what it is I want to do for the rest of my life: serve the public, make a difference, and be happy. I could not have asked for a better place as Queens College to further develop my skills, become a student leader, and have unforgettable experiences that provided me with how life after college will be.

Notice the use of the word “passion” just above.  Passion makes people act.  Some think it improves learning.  Certainly it improves time-on-task and that makes learning better.  In today’s world where so much of higher education is under criticism for not delivering a better educated student into the next level of schooling or into the workforce, this is an important concept.  Why?  Because a passionate student educates themselves as well as consuming what the college/university offers.  So the academic facts-and-theory learning is better because the student sees the point.  But more than that, the student sees the value.  Remember the old saying, “You can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink.” that common wisdom has set for us?  Well experiences like being a student leader can fire that thirst which we are calling passion. It can happen in the classroom, for sure.  But why not build programs outside the classroom that make it more likely to happen.  Why not let students help us build those programs?  Is that not experiential education itself?  Then we can leverage that passion with the curriculum, drive higher standards, enhance learning, and deliver the best educated student possible.

Motivation versus Participation: How do I get something done without doing it?

For a while I have been asking myself, how can I get something I want without necessarily doing it?  The answer is pretty simple.  Let me shed some light onto the issue. The real question at hand is the idea of motivation versus participation. It is very different to motivate someone versus getting them to actually do it.

For one, motivation is not just telling someone to do a task. It actually requires some thinking. Motivation to me has really come down to two points: purpose (goal) and empowerment.  Before you can do anything, you must identify a purpose. What is it that you wish to do? Is there a specific goal that you want to reach? From personal experience, we often seem to do things just for the sake of doing them. There is no real meaning behind it. However once we figure out why it is that we do, only them can you really identify the purpose. Purpose is what defines every action we do.  To be straight forward, purpose is the sense of satisfaction you receive simply by deciding that you want more out of life, something rewarding.  It is the driving force behind motivation itself. Without a purpose, you can tell people to do things; however, that message will simply be reflected in a different direction.  My second point is empowerment.  You have to get someone to feel like they are actually part of the solution.  You have to involve them in a way where they feel that they are important and essential to reaching the goal.  Empowerment is more than pure convincing; it is the ability to give someone that push to feel confident within them.  I strongly believe that with these two main points, you can get anyone to feel a sense of pride, a reason to get involve.

Now that we know the driving forces behind motivation, how do we get someone to participate in a task? I think the answer is simple: motivation.  You cannot expect someone to simply do a task because you said so. You have to show them the end goal. There must be a defined purpose or reason for their partaking.  The individual needs to feel empowered. Part of the reason why Barack Obama won the election was because his campaign was more than himself. He stated an idea, vision, for Americans to buy into. “Yes we can” empowered all kinds of voters from different background to feel a sense of pride and purpose, that together they would make change and more importantly history.  It seems rather simple that if you really want something, you have to make it not just about yourself but a larger picture. It is only then that with success and progress an end goal can be reached. In this case, the election of our current President, Barack Obama perfectly displays how motivation leads to participation.

New Panopticons; Social Networking sites

Society today has become much more connected through the recent trend and development of social networking websites; however, there are dangers that loom to any individual who chooses to participate.   Today, interactions between people are not only face to face, but now they have become digital.  Each individual who chooses to participate within a social networking website, decides to connect themselves with other individuals.  Although social networking websites were designed to create following and membership, they have inadvertently led to the creation of power, authority, and surveillance.  It is these side effects of social networking websites that are the same ideas first mentioned by social theorist and thinker Michel Foucault in his work titled Panopticism. There are two prime examples of social networking sites which illustrate increased power, authority, and surveillance: Foursquare and Linked-in.  The networking site Foursquare allows for any individual to “check in” to a location and allow any individual to view. In addition, the networking site Linked-in allows for any individual to see who a person may or may not know as well as their prior employment history.  In each case, it is the individual who participates that can wind up being placed in unnecessary surveillance through others who have power as well as authority.

Social networking in context refers to the unique social structure created between people or nodes which are connected to specifics types of interdependency or bonds (friends, relationships, colleagues, etc).  The term social networking was coined in the early 2000’s with booming sites such as Myspace. The original intent was targeted for teenagers to develop their own unique pages with pictures, favorite music, and lists of different things that they liked.  Social networking began to pick up later with sights such as Facebook and Twitter.  There was a huge boom to connect not only the youth, but not social networking became a business. It sought to connect individuals of all backgrounds, age groups, and demographics.  The number one priority shifted from individual profiles to increased membership through marketing.

One such social networking site that has grown increasingly popular is Foursquare.  Foursquare was invented in the year 2007 and is more recent to the social networking scene. Unlike other sites, Foursquare is a mobile application social networking tool that was designed to make visiting cities exciting. The site allows for any individual to join and “check in” to a specific location using a smartphone application. This in turn allows members to share their current locations with friends. The reward for doing so is distributed points as well as titled badges. A new person entering a restaurant for a first time will receive a newbie badge and 5 points. The site allows users to remember information about certain places they like to visit and suggests other locations to visit.  The social networking sight also allows merchants to purchase advertisement by offering deals to members. Therefore a person who checks into a place may receive a coupon they can use at that moment.  Foursquare has grown in its following as its membership has increased to more than eight million users.

A similar social networking site for a different purpose is Linked-In.  First launched in May of 2003, Linked-In is the first and the world’s largest professional social network on the internet.  Membership of Linked-In grows by about one million new accounts a week.  The site was originally designed as a way of not only keeping in touch with employers, but as a way of an online portfolio. Within the site, a member can display any current positions they may hold, where they have previously worked, as well as any other connections they may have in the workforce. Other information such as location, education, skills, and interests are also displayed.  Once an individual becomes a member, they can search for any coworkers as well as contacts they may know of. It is from here that a customized web can develop between the members past with employment, contacts, coworkers as well as prospective employers who already belong as well.  To this date there are over two billion users around the world that currently use this social networking site.

Although these are just two of the many social networking sites in current existence, there are some risks that come to users.  The first problem posed with using sites such as these is that members reveal their personal information without any real acknowledgement of protection. Another problem is that the information required is not only seen by the actual company but also to whomever the member is friends with or not.  Finally, by having member accounts the sites allow access to as many times per day. This causes a habit to develop with members who constantly log in to check any new updates whether it is with their friends, associates, or network.  It is this routine of checking which is worrisome in society because members and the companies have access to power to monitor others.  In effect, every individual member is also given the ability of surveillance upon which they can track and follow their fellow associates and friends.  The end effect of these actions can lead to unnecessary invasion of privacy.  Looking at contemporary social theory presented by Michel Foucault, there is evidence to prove that his ideas are still very much relatable in modern society with social networking sites.

In his work titled Panopticism, social theorist Michel Foucault describes a new mechanism of obtaining and using authority in society. His essay focuses on the development of Jeremy Bentham’s architectural design the Panopticon.  According to the design, the panopticon features a building in circular shape with an observation tower in the middle. Along the outside is a wall that features cells for prisoners. Although originally drawn as a mechanism of incarceration, Foucault goes on to explain how the structure is relevant to the idea of surveillance. The design features the outermost of the structure to contain cells for prisoners, whom are isolated from one another. These cells are designed in such a way that the prisoners cannot see others, however the central tower can see all actions. Every action taken can be observed by who ever decides to stay in the central tower.  Foucault goes on to state “we have seen that anyone may come and exercise in the central tower the functions of surveillance, and that, this being the case, he can gain a clear idea of the way in which the surveillance is practiced”. The main idea of surveillance is seen because the prisoners have no way to prevent anyone in the central tower from viewing their actions. Although the prisoners have the freedom to roam within their cell, it is the individuals in the tower who are given power automatically based on the establishment of the structure of the Panopticon.

Looking at modern social networking sites it is clear to see how correct Foucault was.  Social networking today requires individuals to reveal personal information in order to gain membership. Once that individual becomes a member, they willingly join a larger web of other individuals who can see their information. Membership within a social network permits for the use of power and surveillance.  Each other member part of the networking site as well as the web of contacts a member may have has access to an individual’s personal information.  A friend of a coworker can view another person’s birthday, location, and even pictures from their birthday party. The inevitable risk that social networking has created is a new ingrained habit of constantly monitoring other individuals.  Whether society likes it or not, as long as social networking sites exist, a new system of surveillance and power will coexist.  Rather than an actual architectural structure, the new panopticon will be social networking sites.  There is a constant reinforcement of power by simply having the ability to see other individual’s private information. In addition, each time a member logs into their account on these sites, they will have a monitor filled with the actions of others. Instead of having a central tower as in the structure of a panopticon, there will be millions of other members who will embody the same type of surveillance on others.

Members who decide to join Foursquare willingly give away not only their personal data but as well as their locations.  The incentives Foursquare offers to its members are far less than the dangers it poses.  A “newbie” badge as a token for “checking” into a place is certainly not worth the release of that type of information to be seen by other members.  What allows foursquare to pose more potential harm than most social networking sites is that it is accessible on a mobile phone.  When an individual checks into a restaurant, other friends know exactly where that individual is.  In a way, Foursquare emulates an approved method of virtual stalking of another person.  Similar to the ideas present by Foucault in Panopticism, Foursquare also increases the power that other members through the use of surveillance.  It allows power simply by revealing the location as well as previous visits a person made. It causes surveillance because any friend of a member on Foursquare can constantly have access to find out exactly where a person is at a given moment.

Other members who are a part of the site Linked-in also face a similar problem.  By joining the site, a person reveals not only their previous employment history, but also their basic information as well as contacts.  Simply by entering information like this, a member allows potential employers as well as previous ones to see what they have done.  Potential employers can see a members, friends, coworkers, where they live, how many jobs they have held all in a matter of a few clicks.  Although this site is meant for professional linking, it certainly presents many of the same problems discussed by Foucault as well. It permits power to anyone to view a member’s past employment and personal data. More importantly it allows surveillance by giving the ability to current and future employers to constantly monitor who a person may have worked for as well as previous history. There is a reinforcement of both power and surveillance simply by allowing members to log into their accounts, to permits other members to associate with other members, and even to willingly give out information to not only the company but also other members.

Foucault would believe that the newest “panopticon” in society are social networking tools.  It is these sites that reinforce both the ideas of power and surveillance.  Members constantly have the ability to not only see other people’s information but they also have the remote access to check it whenever they choose.  Although intended to boost social interaction, it can be seen that social networking has only reinforced some of the main ideas first forewarned by Michel Foucault.  These websites require the release of personal information, which is not entirely to the benefit of the individual.  In fact to an extent it can be seen as unnecessary invasion of privacy.  The web of connections that is created permits for an increased use of surveillance.  Every member part of one of these social networking sites is the sole reason why “panopticism” has gone digital: this time instead of a structural building, it is simply virtual.