Office of the Dean | National Technical Institute for the Deaf | RIT
Source: https://www.rit.edu/ntid/president/academic-affairs
Archived: 2026-04-23 17:30
Office of the Dean | National Technical Institute for the Deaf | RIT
Office of the Dean
Office of the Dean
Overview
NTID is the only RIT college that offers
associate degrees
and
pathways
to baccalaureate study in liberal arts, design, and a wide variety of STEM-related fields, as well as bachelor's and/or graduate degrees in
education
,
sign language interpreting
and
leadership
. In his role as Interim Dean, Gary Behm and his team of associate deans oversee 10
academic departments
, related
educational support areas
, and NTID's
research
initiatives. Gary ensures that the college is centered around students -- from enrollment through degree completion to job placement -- and prioritizes developing the teaching, research, and communication skills of all faculty and staff within NTID Academic Affairs.
The Office of the Dean is responsible for implementing numerous college functions and initiatives:
College policies, including promotion and tenure
College committees
Curriculum actions
Student Learning Outcomes assessment
Student Ratings Systems (SRATE & SRS)
Student and Faculty Awards
Faculty/Staff Professional Development
Course scheduling and degree certification
The
NTID Department and Academic Plan Directory
lists the programs offered by each NTID academic department and their program contacts.
Gary Behm
Interim Dean of NTID
gwbnts@ntid.rit.edu
COACHE Surveys
Direct inquiries regarding COACHE surveys to
Gary Behm
.
NTID Presentations and Data:
NFC Town Hall PPT (10/3/24)
NFC Town Hall Transcript (10/3/24)
Survey Data for NTID
NTID Town Hall PPT (4/28/21)
Survey Data for NTID
NTID Town Hall PPT – Part One (1/14/14)
NTID Town Hall PPT – Part Two (1/14/14)
NTID Town Hall PPT (10/1/14)
RIT Summary Reports, Presentations, Comment Analyses
College Committees
Direct inquiries regarding College Committees to
Jess LaSala
.
Academic Integrity Committee
NTID Curriculum Committee (NCC)
NTID DeafBlind Support Committee
NTID Distinguished Professor Award Committee
NTID Faculty Congress (NFC)
FEAD (Faculty Evaluation and Development) Committee
Final Grade Dispute Committee
NTID Online Advisory Steering Committee
NTID Online Liaisons Group
NTID Outstanding Graduate Award Committee (OGA)
RIT Outstanding Undergraduate Scholarship Committee (OUS)
Promotion in Rank Faculty Committees
Scholarship Awards Committee (SAC)
Signing in Public Spaces Committee (SPSC)
NTID Staff Senate (NSS)
NTID Student Ratings (NSR) Advisory Group (SRS1:1 Student/Services Ratings)
NTID Support Coordinators
Teaching/Tutoring Awards Committee (TTAC)
Tenure Committee
College Policies and Guidelines
Direct inquiries about the following college policies and guidelines to
Jess LaSalla
.
NTID Faculty Workload Report Template (Excel) – December 2023
Communication Diversity: Strategies for Ensuring Success in NTID Classrooms
NTID Academic Chairperson Replacement Process
NTID Lecturer Support Guidelines for Terminal Degrees
NTID Policy on Promotion in Rank of Tenured Faculty – April 2022
NTID Policy on Promotion to the Ranks of Senior and Principal Lecturer — April 2022
NTID Policy on Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor — April 2022
NTID Policy on Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review – April 2022
Scholarship Guidance Document
Signing in Public Spaces
Faculty Workload Guidelines (revised October 2025)
Faculty Leave
Communication Guidance for NTID Faculty
Communication Assessment Checklist
Direct inquiries about the following college policies and guidelines to
Gary Behm
:
Policies for Selected Expenditures
NTID Honorariums and Additional Payments
Guidance for Determining Developing vs Non-Developing Country Status for International Student Applicants
President and Academic Affairs Reimbursement Procedure
Request for Student Workers
Direct inquiries about the following college policies and guidelines to
Matthew Lynn
:
How to Confirm a Student’s Graduation Application Status – Nov 2023
Updated Intent to Enroll Process (effective Fall 2023)
Communications/Resources
Direct inquiries about the following communications/resources to
Gary Behm
.
Classroom Communication Sessions
Session 1: Introduction to Faculty Communication Expectations, February 28, 2025
Introduction ppt by NTID AVPAA Gary Behm (pdf)
Faculty Communication at NTID (pdf)
Quick Poll Results – NTID View on Communication (pdf)
Session 1 Transcript (pdf)
Session 2: Brainstorming Communication Ideas, March 7, 2025
Brainstorming Communication Ideas ppt (pdf)
Brainstorming Groups Summaries (pdf)
Session 2 Transcript (pdf)
Session 3: Application of Communication Expectations, April 4, 2025
Application of Communication Expectations ppt (pdf)
Session 3 Transcript (pdf)
Session 4: Communication 2025 and Beyond, May 2, 2025
Communication 2025 and Beyond ppt (pdf)
Session 4 Transcript (pdf)
Communication Task Force Report (1991)
Communication Task Force Five-Year Review Committee (2001)
Effective Communication
Communication Research Group Report, January 2005
Spoken Communication Strategies and Techniques
Communication Expectations Report (2012)
Direct inquiries about the following communications/resources to
Jess LaSala
.
Sign Language Proficiency Interview (SLPI)
ASL Training and Evaluation (ASLTE)
Teach2Connect
Curriculum
Direct inquiries regarding curriculum to
Matthew Lynn
.
Academic Affairs – Curriculum
Faculty Performance Review
Direct inquiries regarding faculty performance review to
Gary Behm
.
Annual Faculty Appraisal Process Forms:
Annual Appraisal Information (including RIT Policy E7.0)
2022 COVID Adjustment Statement from Provost and Faculty Senate
RIT/NTID Performance Category Descriptors
NTID Faculty Annual Review Form 2025
(Please save the PDF to your computer and open it in Acrobat Reader or Acrobat DC so the signature fields will be active.)
Faculty Workload Report
Mid-Course Feedback (MCF)
Direct inquiries regarding mid-course feedback to
Gary Behm.
Departments at NTID/RIT can decide to participate in Mid-Semester Course Evaluation via the SRATE/SmartEvals system or use a Qualtrics Survey. The differences between the two options can be found at this link:
Qualtrics and SRATE/SmartEvals
.
Mid-Course Feedback (MCF) is a process initiated in response to students’ desire to see that their opinions are valued by teachers and can impact what happens in their courses. Students rarely have the opportunity to observe improvements that directly result from their end-of-term evaluations such as NTID’s SRATE/SmartEvals and the Services Rating System (SRS1:1). MCF is a strategy that can lead to more meaningful, mutually satisfying, and potentially higher end-of-term student ratings, while also impacting a course while it is still in progress.
Student feedback solicited several weeks into the semester can lead to mid-course corrections regarding communication, teaching strategies, materials, assignments, pace and rigor. Instructors have the opportunity to improve their teaching effectiveness and student satisfaction in a timely way.
Mid-Course Feedback is a private process conducted between teachers and students and is not intended to be shared with anyone else unless an instructor chooses to do so. MCF is facilitated by the SRS Advisory Group in NTID Academic Affairs but it is not a part of the student rating systems. Unlike the SRS, MCF is an informal evaluation process with no formal data collection or reporting.
Mid-Course Feedback Sections
See
FAQ
for information and timelines about the Mid-Course Feedback (MCF).
See
Guidelines
for how to share students’ feedback (survey results) with them and make plans for responding to concerns.
See
Research
to learn more about the importance and benefits of MCF.
SRATE Mid-Course Feedback Survey
See
RIT's MCF Survey Sample
below for a list of statements and comment boxes used in the MCF SRATE/SmartEvals survey and guidance in creating your own survey.
Qualtrics Mid-Course Feedback Survey
See NTID's MCF
Qualtrics Survey Sample 1
that contains SRATE and SRS questions.
See MCF
Qualtrics Survey Sample 2
that contains a list of twenty popular questions.
See
Instructions
to get started with Qualtrics, then follow these steps:
Click here to download
two templates
onto your computer. Note: if you are unable to download, try a different browser such as Chrome or Firefox.
To open the selected template,
login
to Qualtrics.
Import the downloaded Qualtrics .qsf file template into the Qualtrics online platform as listed in the Instructions pdf.
Modify
your MCF survey questions as needed.
Add students to your Qualtrics survey; see
Emailing a Survey Invitation
instructions.
Setup single-use access connection by selecting
Survey Link Type 'Individual Link'
in your survey.
IMPORTANT: Ensure your surveys are anonymous for confidentiality by selecting
Individual Links with the Anonymize Responses
survey option.
Setup
Distribution and Survey Expirations
in your survey.
Send your survey to your students using the
Email Distribution
option setup above. We recommend sending the survey to students during weeks 6 -10.
For additional Qualtrics support visit
https://www.qualtrics.com/support/survey-platform/
WHAT?
Mid-Course Feedback (MCF) is an initiative of NTID Academic Affairs to provide tools for classroom instructors to solicit useful feedback from their students mid-way through the term. The primary tool is an online survey administered to students. The SRATE MCF includes five Likert agreement-scale items, each paired with an optional comment box for students to explain their answers regarding these topics:
Communication between instructor and student
Communication among students
Materials
Difficulty level and pace
Homework and projects
Two comment boxes allow students to indicate what is “best” and “worst” about the course.
A Qualtrics Survey will also be made available to faculty, that contains additional questions and opportunities to comment. Qualtrics offers the opportunity for the survey to be customized based on a student's responses, by automatically skipping inapplicable sections or providing additional applicable questions based on a certain prior response by the student.
MCF is optional, flexible and brief. Instructors can use the SRATE or Qualtrics survey, or they can create their own paper surveys using MCF questions on their own.
WHY?
Mid-Course Feedback benefits both students and instructors.
Students gain because they feel they have some voice, some way to indicate a need for change before it’s too late. Many students indicated in a 2009 attitudes survey about the former course evaluations that they didn’t feel their ratings made any difference for themselves, and they couldn't see any changes over time across the term.
Instructors gain because they have an opportunity to improve their effectiveness (student learning) and student satisfaction in a timely way. A clear majority of instructors indicated in a 2011 survey that they were interested in soliciting and using mid-course student feedback. The MCF is an effort to facilitate that feedback.
Keeps private conversation going between the instructor and the students.
The MCF is not shared with anyone else, unless the instructor chooses to do so. It is not part of any formal evaluation process.
WHO?
Classroom instructors from any academic program can use the MCF.
WHEN?
Suggested timeline for activities during Weeks 2 through 10 of a 14-week semester-based term:
Week 2: Student Rating Coordinator sends Qualtrics or SRATE instructions to NTID.
Week 3: Reminder sent to NTID.
Week 4: Second reminder to NTID. Deadline for faculty to complete MCF selections.
Week 5: Student Rating Coordinator submits faculty selections to Registrar.
Week 6: Registrar processes information to create MCF surveys.
Week 7: Registrar sends out MCF surveys to students.
Week 8: Registrar processes student responses.
Weeks 9-10: Registrar sends out survey results to faculty.
Keep it short.
Sharing MCF survey results with your students should take NO MORE THAN ten minutes of teaching time at the start of class!
Thank the students for participating!
A better class can result with their help!
Briefly summarize the ratings.
Begin with a summary and overall distribution of the ratings for each question. Don’t place any specific positive or negative value on the results. Students shouldn’t think you had an expectation for what the ratings would be.
IMPORTANT:
DO NOT do ANYTHING that would reveal an individual student’s rating or comments! Don’t overemphasize comments from one person.
Bring up only one or two of the most important items and determine a possible plan of action.
Summarize insights and consensus comments. Note the areas you think may need attention.
Students need to know you read what they wrote and appreciate their feedback. It’s an attitude that you’re trying to convey. Be objective. Don’t take comments personally.
Invite discussion to clarify comments. This can be a shared problem-solving session.
Examples:
“I see several of you feel the homework is not helpful. What can we do?”
“A few people thought the pace was too slow. Would less repetition help?”
Students need to know you can’t change some things.
Example:
A textbook, or a specific test might need to be part of the class.
Suggest ways students can participate in addressing the concerns.
Example:
In-class participation, tutoring, study groups, or meeting with you.
Offer one-on-one meetings
as a follow-up.
Some students may not want to share or disclose their comments in the group situation.
Follow up in class in a few weeks.
Find out if what you and the students have been doing to address concerns has helped.
For further information about how to use Comments from Students, see
Syracuse University information
.
Seek tips from colleagues and the
RIT Teaching and Learning Services at Wallace
.
Research about student ratings and mid-course feedback
Benton, S. L., & Cashin, W. E. (2012).
IDEA Paper No. 50: Student ratings of teaching: A summary of research and literature.
Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center.
This IDEA Paper is an update of the IDEA Paper No. 32
Student Ratings of Teaching: The Research Revisited,
(Cashin, 1995). It attempts to summarize the conclusions of the major reviews of the student ratings research and literature from the 1970s to 2010. While that literature is extensive and complex, this brief paper offers broad, general summaries and a good number of citations. As such, it is an excellent resource which draws several noteworthy conclusions.
Download the document
Bullock, C.D. (2003). Online Collection of Midterm Student Feedback.
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 96,
95-102.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign created an electronic evaluation system (EON) for online courses which includes a mechanism for instructors to collect midterm (formative) feedback as well as end-of-term (summative) ratings. In this chapter, Bullock focuses on the midterm component, beginning with a review of pertinent literature. She describes a pilot program utilizing EON as well as a study that was conducted to gain an understanding of how and why instructors use midterm feedback. They found that instructors preferred this type of online system to paper-pencil evaluations and wanted consultative services for item development and for the interpretation of results.
Download the document
Spencer, K. J. & Schmelkin, L. P. ( 2002). Student Perspectives on Teaching and its Evaluation.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27
(5), 397-409.
The study described in this article explored student perspectives on course and teacher ratings as well as some issues related to teaching effectiveness and faculty roles. Spencer and Schmelkin found that while students were generally willing to complete teacher evaluations and provide feedback they had little confidence that faculty or administration viewed or paid attention to the results. Noting that end-of-term instruments should not be the only formalized way for students to express their views, they support “mid-term formative evaluations.”
Download the document
Medina, Brenda. ( 2011). As Emphasis on Student Evaluations Grows, Professors Increasingly Seek Midcourse Feedback.
The Chronicle of Higher Education
A growing number of academics are asking students to evaluate their teaching midcourse rather than waiting for feedback at the end of the term. Midterm feedback from students gives professors a chance to adjust their courses to improve learning and student satisfaction.
Read Online (Requires an RIT Account)
Question 1
Communication between the instructor and me is clear in this course.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 2
Optional: Explain your answer about communication with the instructor.
Question 3
Communication between students is clear in this course.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 4
Optional: Explain your answer about communication between students.
Question 5
The materials in this course are appropriate.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 6
Optional: Explain your answer about materials in this course.
Question 7
The difficulty level and pace of this course are appropriate for me.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 8
Optional: Explain your answer about the level of difficulty in this course.
Question 9
The homework and projects help me learn the information in this course.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 10
Optional: Explain your answer about the homework and projects in this course.
Question 11
What is best about this course?
Question 12
What is worst about this course?
Faculty/Staff Professional Development
Direct inquiries regarding faculty/staff professional development to
Gary Behm
,
Jess LaSala
,
Todd Pagano
, or
Hope Williams
.
Faculty/Staff Professional Development
Faculty Town Hall Meeting (11/20/15)
Direct inquiries to
Gary Behm
.
Faculty Town Hall Meeting
Faculty Teaching and Scholarship Awards
Direct inquiries to
Jess LaSala
.
Faculty Teaching and Scholarship Awards
Student Outcomes Assessment
Direct inquiries to
Matthew Lynn
.
Student Outcomes Assessment
Student Ratings (SRATE and SRS)
Direct inquiries to
Stacy Davis
.
Student Ratings (SRATE and SRS)
Emeritus Faculty
Direct inquiries to
Gary Behm
.
We recognize the dedication and service of our esteemed NTID faculty peers who have been awarded Emeritus Faculty designations. Their contributions to NTID students, faculty, and staff, will always remain highly valued and appreciated.
Name
Department
Year Awarded
Title
Stephen Aldersley
Liberal Studies
2026
Professor
Gerard Buckley
NTID Office of the President
2026
President Emeritus
Linda Gottermeier
Communication Studies and Services
2026
Professor
Richard Peterson
ASL and Interpreting Education
2025
Professor
Sidonie Roepke
Visual Communications Studies
2023
Professor
Paula Grcevic
Visual Communications Studies
2022
Professor
Vincent Samar
Liberal Studies
2022
Professor
Julie Cammeron
Cultural and Creative Studies
2021
Associate Professor
Marianne Gustafson
NTID Academic Affairs
2021
Professor
Gerald C. Bateman
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2020
Professor
Jane Jackson
Science and Mathematics
2020
Associate Professor
Ila Parasnis
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2020
Professor
Mark Marschark
NTID Office of the President
2019
Professor
Gerald Berent
Liberal Studies
2018
Professor
James DeCaro
NTID Office of the President
2018
Dean and Professor
Ronald Kelly
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2018
Professor
Geoff Poor
NTID Academic Affairs
2018
Professor
Rosemarie Toscano
Liberal Studies
2018
Professor
Dominic Bozzelli
Science and Engineering
2017
Associate Professor
Susan Foster
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2017
Professor
Michael Stinson
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2017
Professor
Peter Haggerty
Liberal Studies
2016
Associate Professor
John-Allen Payne
Liberal Studies
2016
Associate Professor
Frank Argento
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Associate Professor
Kenneth Hoffmann
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Professor
Tom Policano
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Associate Professor
Thomas Raco
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Professor
John Albertini
Liberal Studies
2014
Professor
Karen Christie
Cultural and Creative Studies
2014
Associate Professor
John Cox
Visual Communications Studies
2014
Professor
Vincent Daniele
Science and Mathematics
2014
Professor
Susan Fischer
Research and Teacher Education Studies
2014
Professor
Laurie Brewer
NTID Office of the President
2013
Vice Dean and Professor
T. Alan Hurwitz
NTID Office of the President
2012
President and Dean Emeritus
Harry Lang
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2011
Professor
Bonnie Meath-Lang
Cultural and Creative Studies
2011
Professor
Jean-Guy Naud
Visual Communications Studies
2011
Professor
Donald Beil
NTID Office of the President
2010
Professor
Robert D. Frisina
NTID Office of the President
2010
Professor
Marilu Raman
Science and Mathematics
2007
Associate Professor
Judy Egelston-Dodd
Science and Mathematics
2006
Professor
Christine Monikowski
ASL and Interpreting Education
2005
Professor
Elizabeth O’Brien
Liberal Studies
2005
Professor
Marvin Sachs
Science and Mathematics
2005
Associate Professor
Robert WW Taylor
Science and Mathematics
2004
Associate Professor
Robert Davila
NTID Office of the President
2003
Vice President Emeritus
Donald Johnson
Communication Studies and Services
2002
Professor
Ross E. Stuckless
Research and Teacher Education Studies
2000
Professor
Edward Maruggi
Science and Engineering
1991
Professor
Robert Panara
Liberal Studies
1987
Professor
Edward Scouten
Information and Computing Studies
1984
Professor
Loy Golladay
Liberal Studies
1980
Professor
Dean's Office File Share
The NTID Dean's Office Fileshare
is a central resource for the
Dean, Associate Deans, department chairs, and
their faculty members. To request access, please contact Jess La Sala.
Fileshare Login
Search RIT
This website uses cookies to provide better user experience and functionality. You can control and configure cookies in your web browser.
Cookie Statement
|
How to Disable Cookies
Office of the Dean
Office of the Dean
Overview
NTID is the only RIT college that offers
associate degrees
and
pathways
to baccalaureate study in liberal arts, design, and a wide variety of STEM-related fields, as well as bachelor's and/or graduate degrees in
education
,
sign language interpreting
and
leadership
. In his role as Interim Dean, Gary Behm and his team of associate deans oversee 10
academic departments
, related
educational support areas
, and NTID's
research
initiatives. Gary ensures that the college is centered around students -- from enrollment through degree completion to job placement -- and prioritizes developing the teaching, research, and communication skills of all faculty and staff within NTID Academic Affairs.
The Office of the Dean is responsible for implementing numerous college functions and initiatives:
College policies, including promotion and tenure
College committees
Curriculum actions
Student Learning Outcomes assessment
Student Ratings Systems (SRATE & SRS)
Student and Faculty Awards
Faculty/Staff Professional Development
Course scheduling and degree certification
The
NTID Department and Academic Plan Directory
lists the programs offered by each NTID academic department and their program contacts.
Gary Behm
Interim Dean of NTID
gwbnts@ntid.rit.edu
COACHE Surveys
Direct inquiries regarding COACHE surveys to
Gary Behm
.
NTID Presentations and Data:
NFC Town Hall PPT (10/3/24)
NFC Town Hall Transcript (10/3/24)
Survey Data for NTID
NTID Town Hall PPT (4/28/21)
Survey Data for NTID
NTID Town Hall PPT – Part One (1/14/14)
NTID Town Hall PPT – Part Two (1/14/14)
NTID Town Hall PPT (10/1/14)
RIT Summary Reports, Presentations, Comment Analyses
College Committees
Direct inquiries regarding College Committees to
Jess LaSala
.
Academic Integrity Committee
NTID Curriculum Committee (NCC)
NTID DeafBlind Support Committee
NTID Distinguished Professor Award Committee
NTID Faculty Congress (NFC)
FEAD (Faculty Evaluation and Development) Committee
Final Grade Dispute Committee
NTID Online Advisory Steering Committee
NTID Online Liaisons Group
NTID Outstanding Graduate Award Committee (OGA)
RIT Outstanding Undergraduate Scholarship Committee (OUS)
Promotion in Rank Faculty Committees
Scholarship Awards Committee (SAC)
Signing in Public Spaces Committee (SPSC)
NTID Staff Senate (NSS)
NTID Student Ratings (NSR) Advisory Group (SRS1:1 Student/Services Ratings)
NTID Support Coordinators
Teaching/Tutoring Awards Committee (TTAC)
Tenure Committee
College Policies and Guidelines
Direct inquiries about the following college policies and guidelines to
Jess LaSalla
.
NTID Faculty Workload Report Template (Excel) – December 2023
Communication Diversity: Strategies for Ensuring Success in NTID Classrooms
NTID Academic Chairperson Replacement Process
NTID Lecturer Support Guidelines for Terminal Degrees
NTID Policy on Promotion in Rank of Tenured Faculty – April 2022
NTID Policy on Promotion to the Ranks of Senior and Principal Lecturer — April 2022
NTID Policy on Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor — April 2022
NTID Policy on Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review – April 2022
Scholarship Guidance Document
Signing in Public Spaces
Faculty Workload Guidelines (revised October 2025)
Faculty Leave
Communication Guidance for NTID Faculty
Communication Assessment Checklist
Direct inquiries about the following college policies and guidelines to
Gary Behm
:
Policies for Selected Expenditures
NTID Honorariums and Additional Payments
Guidance for Determining Developing vs Non-Developing Country Status for International Student Applicants
President and Academic Affairs Reimbursement Procedure
Request for Student Workers
Direct inquiries about the following college policies and guidelines to
Matthew Lynn
:
How to Confirm a Student’s Graduation Application Status – Nov 2023
Updated Intent to Enroll Process (effective Fall 2023)
Communications/Resources
Direct inquiries about the following communications/resources to
Gary Behm
.
Classroom Communication Sessions
Session 1: Introduction to Faculty Communication Expectations, February 28, 2025
Introduction ppt by NTID AVPAA Gary Behm (pdf)
Faculty Communication at NTID (pdf)
Quick Poll Results – NTID View on Communication (pdf)
Session 1 Transcript (pdf)
Session 2: Brainstorming Communication Ideas, March 7, 2025
Brainstorming Communication Ideas ppt (pdf)
Brainstorming Groups Summaries (pdf)
Session 2 Transcript (pdf)
Session 3: Application of Communication Expectations, April 4, 2025
Application of Communication Expectations ppt (pdf)
Session 3 Transcript (pdf)
Session 4: Communication 2025 and Beyond, May 2, 2025
Communication 2025 and Beyond ppt (pdf)
Session 4 Transcript (pdf)
Communication Task Force Report (1991)
Communication Task Force Five-Year Review Committee (2001)
Effective Communication
Communication Research Group Report, January 2005
Spoken Communication Strategies and Techniques
Communication Expectations Report (2012)
Direct inquiries about the following communications/resources to
Jess LaSala
.
Sign Language Proficiency Interview (SLPI)
ASL Training and Evaluation (ASLTE)
Teach2Connect
Curriculum
Direct inquiries regarding curriculum to
Matthew Lynn
.
Academic Affairs – Curriculum
Faculty Performance Review
Direct inquiries regarding faculty performance review to
Gary Behm
.
Annual Faculty Appraisal Process Forms:
Annual Appraisal Information (including RIT Policy E7.0)
2022 COVID Adjustment Statement from Provost and Faculty Senate
RIT/NTID Performance Category Descriptors
NTID Faculty Annual Review Form 2025
(Please save the PDF to your computer and open it in Acrobat Reader or Acrobat DC so the signature fields will be active.)
Faculty Workload Report
Mid-Course Feedback (MCF)
Direct inquiries regarding mid-course feedback to
Gary Behm.
Departments at NTID/RIT can decide to participate in Mid-Semester Course Evaluation via the SRATE/SmartEvals system or use a Qualtrics Survey. The differences between the two options can be found at this link:
Qualtrics and SRATE/SmartEvals
.
Mid-Course Feedback (MCF) is a process initiated in response to students’ desire to see that their opinions are valued by teachers and can impact what happens in their courses. Students rarely have the opportunity to observe improvements that directly result from their end-of-term evaluations such as NTID’s SRATE/SmartEvals and the Services Rating System (SRS1:1). MCF is a strategy that can lead to more meaningful, mutually satisfying, and potentially higher end-of-term student ratings, while also impacting a course while it is still in progress.
Student feedback solicited several weeks into the semester can lead to mid-course corrections regarding communication, teaching strategies, materials, assignments, pace and rigor. Instructors have the opportunity to improve their teaching effectiveness and student satisfaction in a timely way.
Mid-Course Feedback is a private process conducted between teachers and students and is not intended to be shared with anyone else unless an instructor chooses to do so. MCF is facilitated by the SRS Advisory Group in NTID Academic Affairs but it is not a part of the student rating systems. Unlike the SRS, MCF is an informal evaluation process with no formal data collection or reporting.
Mid-Course Feedback Sections
See
FAQ
for information and timelines about the Mid-Course Feedback (MCF).
See
Guidelines
for how to share students’ feedback (survey results) with them and make plans for responding to concerns.
See
Research
to learn more about the importance and benefits of MCF.
SRATE Mid-Course Feedback Survey
See
RIT's MCF Survey Sample
below for a list of statements and comment boxes used in the MCF SRATE/SmartEvals survey and guidance in creating your own survey.
Qualtrics Mid-Course Feedback Survey
See NTID's MCF
Qualtrics Survey Sample 1
that contains SRATE and SRS questions.
See MCF
Qualtrics Survey Sample 2
that contains a list of twenty popular questions.
See
Instructions
to get started with Qualtrics, then follow these steps:
Click here to download
two templates
onto your computer. Note: if you are unable to download, try a different browser such as Chrome or Firefox.
To open the selected template,
login
to Qualtrics.
Import the downloaded Qualtrics .qsf file template into the Qualtrics online platform as listed in the Instructions pdf.
Modify
your MCF survey questions as needed.
Add students to your Qualtrics survey; see
Emailing a Survey Invitation
instructions.
Setup single-use access connection by selecting
Survey Link Type 'Individual Link'
in your survey.
IMPORTANT: Ensure your surveys are anonymous for confidentiality by selecting
Individual Links with the Anonymize Responses
survey option.
Setup
Distribution and Survey Expirations
in your survey.
Send your survey to your students using the
Email Distribution
option setup above. We recommend sending the survey to students during weeks 6 -10.
For additional Qualtrics support visit
https://www.qualtrics.com/support/survey-platform/
WHAT?
Mid-Course Feedback (MCF) is an initiative of NTID Academic Affairs to provide tools for classroom instructors to solicit useful feedback from their students mid-way through the term. The primary tool is an online survey administered to students. The SRATE MCF includes five Likert agreement-scale items, each paired with an optional comment box for students to explain their answers regarding these topics:
Communication between instructor and student
Communication among students
Materials
Difficulty level and pace
Homework and projects
Two comment boxes allow students to indicate what is “best” and “worst” about the course.
A Qualtrics Survey will also be made available to faculty, that contains additional questions and opportunities to comment. Qualtrics offers the opportunity for the survey to be customized based on a student's responses, by automatically skipping inapplicable sections or providing additional applicable questions based on a certain prior response by the student.
MCF is optional, flexible and brief. Instructors can use the SRATE or Qualtrics survey, or they can create their own paper surveys using MCF questions on their own.
WHY?
Mid-Course Feedback benefits both students and instructors.
Students gain because they feel they have some voice, some way to indicate a need for change before it’s too late. Many students indicated in a 2009 attitudes survey about the former course evaluations that they didn’t feel their ratings made any difference for themselves, and they couldn't see any changes over time across the term.
Instructors gain because they have an opportunity to improve their effectiveness (student learning) and student satisfaction in a timely way. A clear majority of instructors indicated in a 2011 survey that they were interested in soliciting and using mid-course student feedback. The MCF is an effort to facilitate that feedback.
Keeps private conversation going between the instructor and the students.
The MCF is not shared with anyone else, unless the instructor chooses to do so. It is not part of any formal evaluation process.
WHO?
Classroom instructors from any academic program can use the MCF.
WHEN?
Suggested timeline for activities during Weeks 2 through 10 of a 14-week semester-based term:
Week 2: Student Rating Coordinator sends Qualtrics or SRATE instructions to NTID.
Week 3: Reminder sent to NTID.
Week 4: Second reminder to NTID. Deadline for faculty to complete MCF selections.
Week 5: Student Rating Coordinator submits faculty selections to Registrar.
Week 6: Registrar processes information to create MCF surveys.
Week 7: Registrar sends out MCF surveys to students.
Week 8: Registrar processes student responses.
Weeks 9-10: Registrar sends out survey results to faculty.
Keep it short.
Sharing MCF survey results with your students should take NO MORE THAN ten minutes of teaching time at the start of class!
Thank the students for participating!
A better class can result with their help!
Briefly summarize the ratings.
Begin with a summary and overall distribution of the ratings for each question. Don’t place any specific positive or negative value on the results. Students shouldn’t think you had an expectation for what the ratings would be.
IMPORTANT:
DO NOT do ANYTHING that would reveal an individual student’s rating or comments! Don’t overemphasize comments from one person.
Bring up only one or two of the most important items and determine a possible plan of action.
Summarize insights and consensus comments. Note the areas you think may need attention.
Students need to know you read what they wrote and appreciate their feedback. It’s an attitude that you’re trying to convey. Be objective. Don’t take comments personally.
Invite discussion to clarify comments. This can be a shared problem-solving session.
Examples:
“I see several of you feel the homework is not helpful. What can we do?”
“A few people thought the pace was too slow. Would less repetition help?”
Students need to know you can’t change some things.
Example:
A textbook, or a specific test might need to be part of the class.
Suggest ways students can participate in addressing the concerns.
Example:
In-class participation, tutoring, study groups, or meeting with you.
Offer one-on-one meetings
as a follow-up.
Some students may not want to share or disclose their comments in the group situation.
Follow up in class in a few weeks.
Find out if what you and the students have been doing to address concerns has helped.
For further information about how to use Comments from Students, see
Syracuse University information
.
Seek tips from colleagues and the
RIT Teaching and Learning Services at Wallace
.
Research about student ratings and mid-course feedback
Benton, S. L., & Cashin, W. E. (2012).
IDEA Paper No. 50: Student ratings of teaching: A summary of research and literature.
Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center.
This IDEA Paper is an update of the IDEA Paper No. 32
Student Ratings of Teaching: The Research Revisited,
(Cashin, 1995). It attempts to summarize the conclusions of the major reviews of the student ratings research and literature from the 1970s to 2010. While that literature is extensive and complex, this brief paper offers broad, general summaries and a good number of citations. As such, it is an excellent resource which draws several noteworthy conclusions.
Download the document
Bullock, C.D. (2003). Online Collection of Midterm Student Feedback.
New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 96,
95-102.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign created an electronic evaluation system (EON) for online courses which includes a mechanism for instructors to collect midterm (formative) feedback as well as end-of-term (summative) ratings. In this chapter, Bullock focuses on the midterm component, beginning with a review of pertinent literature. She describes a pilot program utilizing EON as well as a study that was conducted to gain an understanding of how and why instructors use midterm feedback. They found that instructors preferred this type of online system to paper-pencil evaluations and wanted consultative services for item development and for the interpretation of results.
Download the document
Spencer, K. J. & Schmelkin, L. P. ( 2002). Student Perspectives on Teaching and its Evaluation.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27
(5), 397-409.
The study described in this article explored student perspectives on course and teacher ratings as well as some issues related to teaching effectiveness and faculty roles. Spencer and Schmelkin found that while students were generally willing to complete teacher evaluations and provide feedback they had little confidence that faculty or administration viewed or paid attention to the results. Noting that end-of-term instruments should not be the only formalized way for students to express their views, they support “mid-term formative evaluations.”
Download the document
Medina, Brenda. ( 2011). As Emphasis on Student Evaluations Grows, Professors Increasingly Seek Midcourse Feedback.
The Chronicle of Higher Education
A growing number of academics are asking students to evaluate their teaching midcourse rather than waiting for feedback at the end of the term. Midterm feedback from students gives professors a chance to adjust their courses to improve learning and student satisfaction.
Read Online (Requires an RIT Account)
Question 1
Communication between the instructor and me is clear in this course.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 2
Optional: Explain your answer about communication with the instructor.
Question 3
Communication between students is clear in this course.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 4
Optional: Explain your answer about communication between students.
Question 5
The materials in this course are appropriate.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 6
Optional: Explain your answer about materials in this course.
Question 7
The difficulty level and pace of this course are appropriate for me.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 8
Optional: Explain your answer about the level of difficulty in this course.
Question 9
The homework and projects help me learn the information in this course.
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Question 10
Optional: Explain your answer about the homework and projects in this course.
Question 11
What is best about this course?
Question 12
What is worst about this course?
Faculty/Staff Professional Development
Direct inquiries regarding faculty/staff professional development to
Gary Behm
,
Jess LaSala
,
Todd Pagano
, or
Hope Williams
.
Faculty/Staff Professional Development
Faculty Town Hall Meeting (11/20/15)
Direct inquiries to
Gary Behm
.
Faculty Town Hall Meeting
Faculty Teaching and Scholarship Awards
Direct inquiries to
Jess LaSala
.
Faculty Teaching and Scholarship Awards
Student Outcomes Assessment
Direct inquiries to
Matthew Lynn
.
Student Outcomes Assessment
Student Ratings (SRATE and SRS)
Direct inquiries to
Stacy Davis
.
Student Ratings (SRATE and SRS)
Emeritus Faculty
Direct inquiries to
Gary Behm
.
We recognize the dedication and service of our esteemed NTID faculty peers who have been awarded Emeritus Faculty designations. Their contributions to NTID students, faculty, and staff, will always remain highly valued and appreciated.
Name
Department
Year Awarded
Title
Stephen Aldersley
Liberal Studies
2026
Professor
Gerard Buckley
NTID Office of the President
2026
President Emeritus
Linda Gottermeier
Communication Studies and Services
2026
Professor
Richard Peterson
ASL and Interpreting Education
2025
Professor
Sidonie Roepke
Visual Communications Studies
2023
Professor
Paula Grcevic
Visual Communications Studies
2022
Professor
Vincent Samar
Liberal Studies
2022
Professor
Julie Cammeron
Cultural and Creative Studies
2021
Associate Professor
Marianne Gustafson
NTID Academic Affairs
2021
Professor
Gerald C. Bateman
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2020
Professor
Jane Jackson
Science and Mathematics
2020
Associate Professor
Ila Parasnis
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2020
Professor
Mark Marschark
NTID Office of the President
2019
Professor
Gerald Berent
Liberal Studies
2018
Professor
James DeCaro
NTID Office of the President
2018
Dean and Professor
Ronald Kelly
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2018
Professor
Geoff Poor
NTID Academic Affairs
2018
Professor
Rosemarie Toscano
Liberal Studies
2018
Professor
Dominic Bozzelli
Science and Engineering
2017
Associate Professor
Susan Foster
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2017
Professor
Michael Stinson
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2017
Professor
Peter Haggerty
Liberal Studies
2016
Associate Professor
John-Allen Payne
Liberal Studies
2016
Associate Professor
Frank Argento
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Associate Professor
Kenneth Hoffmann
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Professor
Tom Policano
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Associate Professor
Thomas Raco
Visual Communications Studies
2015
Professor
John Albertini
Liberal Studies
2014
Professor
Karen Christie
Cultural and Creative Studies
2014
Associate Professor
John Cox
Visual Communications Studies
2014
Professor
Vincent Daniele
Science and Mathematics
2014
Professor
Susan Fischer
Research and Teacher Education Studies
2014
Professor
Laurie Brewer
NTID Office of the President
2013
Vice Dean and Professor
T. Alan Hurwitz
NTID Office of the President
2012
President and Dean Emeritus
Harry Lang
Department of Deaf Education (MSSE)
2011
Professor
Bonnie Meath-Lang
Cultural and Creative Studies
2011
Professor
Jean-Guy Naud
Visual Communications Studies
2011
Professor
Donald Beil
NTID Office of the President
2010
Professor
Robert D. Frisina
NTID Office of the President
2010
Professor
Marilu Raman
Science and Mathematics
2007
Associate Professor
Judy Egelston-Dodd
Science and Mathematics
2006
Professor
Christine Monikowski
ASL and Interpreting Education
2005
Professor
Elizabeth O’Brien
Liberal Studies
2005
Professor
Marvin Sachs
Science and Mathematics
2005
Associate Professor
Robert WW Taylor
Science and Mathematics
2004
Associate Professor
Robert Davila
NTID Office of the President
2003
Vice President Emeritus
Donald Johnson
Communication Studies and Services
2002
Professor
Ross E. Stuckless
Research and Teacher Education Studies
2000
Professor
Edward Maruggi
Science and Engineering
1991
Professor
Robert Panara
Liberal Studies
1987
Professor
Edward Scouten
Information and Computing Studies
1984
Professor
Loy Golladay
Liberal Studies
1980
Professor
Dean's Office File Share
The NTID Dean's Office Fileshare
is a central resource for the
Dean, Associate Deans, department chairs, and
their faculty members. To request access, please contact Jess La Sala.
Fileshare Login
Search RIT
This website uses cookies to provide better user experience and functionality. You can control and configure cookies in your web browser.
Cookie Statement
|
How to Disable Cookies