CORRECTION APPENDED

The Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) established a pilot program yesterday in which future editions of the online CUE guide will contain the full text of students’ reviews of classes. [SEE CORRECTION BELOW]

The program will be set up in the coming academic year so that professors will be able to opt into the new format of reviews of their classes. [SEE CORRECTION BELOW]

Next year, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences will vote on making the program required. [SEE CORRECTION BELOW]

All responses to the question, “Would you recommend this course to other students; Why or why not?” will be presented in the online version of the guide.

However, comments containing lewd and obscene language will not be published.

The legislation was proposed by Michael R. Ragalie ’09, who is the chair of the Student Affairs Committee and a member of the CUE.

“A lot of students feel like the current CUE guide is somewhat impersonal,” Ragalie said. “This was seen as a way of making those numbers more real.”

In the meeting, certain members of the committee voiced concern that professors had too little say in the process.

One committee member advocated allowing professors to post their own response to student’s reviews. This system, which he said is employed at Yale, allows professors to address criticism brought up in reviews.

“Ideally, every student would have an opportunity to talk to every professor before every class to find out if the class is right for me,” Ragalie said. “But that’s just not feasible.”

There was concern yesterday that some faculty would not support the proposal.

In a phone interview, Kenan Professor of Government Harvey C. Mansfield ’53, who is not on the CUE, called the proposal “much too much.”

He said course evaluations should be reduced, not increased.

“They pose a danger of consumerism,” he said.

“Students should seek to please their professors, not the other way around,” he added.

If the fall round is successful, the proposed legislation will be presented to the Faculty—probably next spring—for a vote to make the program required of all courses.

A mandate would not take effect until the 2008-2009 guide, according to the most recent draft of the legislation.

The committee also discussed a report by Tracy E. Nowski ’07 on the state of thesis advising at Harvard. Her report recommended the creation of a “database of all potential thesis advisers (faculty and graduate students) searchable by research interest and advising availability,” which the committee resolved to look into.

CORRECTION: The May 3 news article “CUE Guide Adopts Use of Full Text” incorrectly stated that the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) established a pilot program, set to begin next year, which would include the full text of student course evaluations in the online CUE guide. In fact, the CUE only decided to discuss the possibility of a pilot program with the Faculty Council. The story also incorrectly stated that the Faculty of Arts and Sciences will vote on making the program required next year. In fact, no date has been set for a vote since the CUE must secure Faculty Council approval before bringing it before the full Faculty.