香蕉视频

We are not able to delete course evaluation responses based on the inference of an error.聽

Comments that are determined to be hateful or discriminatory on the basis of gender, sexual identity, race, ethnicity or religion call into question the individual's ability to fairly assess an instructor鈥檚 teaching. These comments are antithetical to the principles of equity and inclusivity. They are further unhelpful to an instructor in reviewing and improving their own teaching abilities and strategies, or to that instructor's unit head in supporting their pedagogical development.

Any request to delete a submission, which shall be treated in confidence, should be directed to the apfa.provost [at] mcgill.ca (Acting Associate Provost (Academic Policies and Faculty Affairs)). The APEAP and the SSMU Equity Commissioner will assess the anonymized remarks to determine whether these merit deletion of the response. If this is found to be the case, the response in its entirety (numerical responses and comments) will be deleted.

This request can be made at any time and for any Mercury evaluations received during an instructor's time at McGill.

The Senate Policy on End-of-Course Evaluations defines "course instructors" as "members of the academic staff responsible for a Course." Facilitating one or several class sessions is not considered responsibility for a course; therefore, guest instructors should not be evaluated as "course instructors" using Mercury.

• It is recommended that course instructors seek feedback about guest instructors as soon as possible after each guest instructor's session, so that the feedback is fresh in students' minds. In these cases, course instructors can use tools such as Polling @ McGill, , or to collect anonymous feedback about the guest instructors. Course instructors can request a one-on-one consultation to learn more about the effective use of these tools.
• Course instructors are able to add up to 3 questions to their Mercury course evaluation questionnaire. For courses with multiple guest instructors, course instructors may wish to add a question that addresses the impact of guest instructors on students' learning, such as: "Overall, the class format with multiple guest instructors helped me learn the course materials." Click here to submit additional questions before each semester's deadline.

The Mercury system cannot be used for courses where fewer than 5 students are enrolled. The Senate Policy on End-of-Course Evaluations states that 鈥�7.1: All course evaluation results shall be anonymous.鈥� When so few students are enrolled in a course, it is difficult to respect their anonymity. Also, with so few responses, the statistical analyses performed automatically are not appropriate.

However, instructors are still encouraged to get feedback from students using alternative survey tools, such as聽,听, or聽Polling @ McGill. Instructors should make sure to ensure that the data collection tools are set for anonymous submissions. Note that an important aspect of the Mercury system is that responses officially on record in the system can be accessed by academic unit heads, as well as the course instructors. Responses collected with alternative tools are unofficial, are not systematically reported, and are only available to course instructors.

Instructors can聽request a one-on-one consultation聽to learn more about how to use alternative survey tools.

• Mercury is a comprehensive and validated system for providing instructors with constructive course feedback based on students' learning experiences. The University's official end-of-course evaluations are governed by an official Senate policy and administered by .
• Mercury, unlike RateMyProf and other third-party evaluation platforms, ensures that each person who submits a course evaluation is actually enrolled in the course.

• Platforms such as RateMyProf are, in part, a response to student frustration that many MERCURY course evaluation results are not available to McGill students. There are two reasons why MERCURY numerical results may not be posted on Minerva: first, when not enough students respond; and second, when an instructor has objected to sharing their numerical results.
• One of the attractions of third-party evaluation platforms such as RateMyProf is the comments. However, anyone can post on these platforms whether they took the course or not, making these comments unreliable.

• Increased access to numerical results improves student trust in our official system and decreases the desire to collect reviews by alternate, unregulated means. You can help by encouraging students to complete their course evaluations and by opting in to making your numerical course evaluation results available to students. As students will report and seek out this information either way, by opting in, you are ensuring that the information they find is from an official source.

Course evaluation results, both numerical ratings and comments, belong to the course instructor. Therefore, you can share your results as you please, such as on your website, in publications, or at conferences. If your course is co-taught, students鈥� feedback about the course belongs to all course instructors teaching that course. As a professional courtesy, you should check with your co-instructor(s) before sharing results from co-taught courses.