There is also a stream of research related to online versus paper surveys of faculty perfor-mance. In general, online ratings were found to be about the same as paper ratings. Theonline ratings were, if anything, slightly higher than paper ratings (Carini et al. 2003). Otherresearchers found that the properties of student ratings were similar for both paper andonline responses (Hardy 2003; McGhee and Lowell 2003). Even though there was a slightlylower response rate for online as opposed to paper ratings, researchers conclude that withacceptance of online ratings by students and faculty, appreciation of the advantages of onlineratings (thoughtful feedback, convenience and user-friendliness) and the development ofonline infrastructure, this response difference will diminish (Ballantyne 2003; Johnson2003)

Does ratemyprofessor.com really rate my professor?

RateMyProfessors.com offers biased evaluations

The opportunities are boundless,

“My mission in creating this wearable was to come up with a device that would be fashionable and fun for children while allowing their parents to keep a pulse on their safety while they are apart. The Paxie band also tracks activity to encourage healthy and active lifestyles.”

Osuna, C., Crux-Castro, L., & Sanz-Menedez, L. (2011). Overturning some assumptions about the effects ofevaluation systems on publication performance.Scientometrics, 86, 575–592

One potential use: get-ting students to create a multilayered re-cord of their thinking while attempting to solve math problems.

Is the only reason we persist with journals and their articles is because they provide a convenient means to weigh the pig?

we promote the lifecycle approach to exhibition evaluation because we know that when evaluation procedures are built into an exhibition’s lifecycle

Mine are truthful and distinct, as both the art and its practice prove when they have been thoroughly investigated. This is the first, the mid-dle, and the final support of my argument. I do not make evil use of the testimonies of men who can lie, but I establish my argument by the truth-fulness of unwavering, natural usage, the usage, I repeat, which I have been following for so many years with the greatest effort through daily practice and by experience in the subject.

But the writings of these scholars reveal that while they indeed collected a lot of material, they did not evaluate it sufficiently, for in some places I look in vain for a syllogism. And they did not arrange it in a sufficiently fitting order, for else-where I find a lack of method. I confidently state that I have truly judged and correctly organized this same material in my teachings.