CUE Guide Adopts New Format

The Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) agreed on series of steps to revamp its annual collection of course evaluations, the CUE Guide, to make it more useful and reader-friendly.

At their meeting with CUE Guide Editor Brianna M. Ewert '03 yesterday, faculty and student members of the committee exchanged suggestions and concerns before the book's staff begins work on next year's edition.

After the meeting concluded, Ewert said she expects several revisions to the 1,100-page book.

"There will definitely be changes--noticeable changes," Ewert said.

The most noticeable change will be the exclusion of fractions and equivalents that will be replaced with real percentages and/or raw numbers.

Currently, the Guide either uses fractions or representational phrases such as "a considerable number" and "a handful" to describe the written-in responses from the end-of-class surveys.

Ewert also said she plans to make more "synthesized connections" of the evaluation results without reducing the numerical charts.

The possible inclusion of student quotations raised the eyebrows of numerous members. A general consensus was reached that quotations invite "overly colorful" responses from students, regardless of the personal quality they offer to the reader.

Consequently, Ewert does not anticipate the use of quotations in the upcoming edition.

The balance between qualitative and quantitative information and the presentation of statistics claimed the primary attention of the committee members at the meeting.

"It is that connection between content and evaluation that we never seem to get," said Dean of Undergraduate Education Susan G. Pedersen '82, chair of the CUE.

Some wished to see the inclusion of more qualitative analysis and fewer "detached" graphs and charts, while others supported the opposite.

Members of the committee also expressed concern that Guide editors maintain objectivity in writing their analyses.

Several of those in attendance recommended the incorporation of an objective summary at the end of each evaluation, providing the reader with basic course information, such as the type of course--survey or seminar--and level of advancement.

"The course function and which students it serves should be included," Pedersen said.

Some committee members suggested presenting the views of distinct student groups within courses, such as concentrators, undecided first-years and graduate students.

Ewert said the addition of such information would probably "depend on the class populations."

A few members expressed the need to tone down the strength of the verbs chosen by the staff in descriptions. Until now, the editors have used verbs such as "lament" to describe the regrets of respondents and "exalted" to describe their praises.

Though some members said they were still unsure how much freedom to give Guide editors, the committee exhibited general confidence in the abilities of the CUE staff.

"I think we should liberate the editorial staff to use their discretion," said J. Russell Muirhead '88, assistant professor of government.

"We want to push that the CUE is something we believe in," Pedersen said.

"The CUE is my way of telescoping into the future," said Paul A. Gusmorino '02, president of the Undergraduate Council. "The presence or non-presence of comments is what affects my impression of the course."

--Staff Writer Eugenia B. Levenson contributed to the reporting of this article.

--Staff Writer Justin B. Gest can be reached at gest@fas.harvard.edu.