Course Evaluations in Explorance Blue: FAQ for Deans, Chairs and other administrators

UWM’s Office of Assessment and Institutional Research provides centralized course evaluation services through Explorance Blue. 

Explorance Blue is UWM’s campus course evaluation platform. UWM policy requires end-of-semester course evaluations to use the campus evaluation tool. Explorance Blue supports automated course evaluations, report distribution, personalized reminders, QR codes, and integration with PAWS and Canvas.

Note: while Explorance Blue is being piloted, departments may need to continue to use other solutions until they are onboarded.

Explorance Blue is currently being piloted at UWM. View the full list of departments in the [Link for document 160883 is unavailable at this time] knowledgebase article.

End-of-semester student evaluations are offered in every enrollment section of every course, where the enrollment section is the primary graded course section rather than an attached lab or discussion section. Non-graded sections such as some labs or discussions are not currently evaluated. 

Courses should not be evaluated when student anonymity is a practical impossibility. UWM policy prohibits evaluations for individual or independent courses such as independent studies, special research projects, thesis projects, and courses with fewer than five students. 

The five-student minimum protects student anonymity. Graduate “G” sections in combined undergraduate/graduate courses may be treated as separate sections, meaning each section must independently meet the enrollment threshold.

Departments should review course sections, instructor assignments, enrollment sections, and instructor “Print” box settings in PAWS. Instructors who should appear in course evaluations must have the “Print” box checked, which is also the setting used to show instructors in the UWM Schedule of Classes.

Instructors are included in Explorance Blue when they are assigned to the course section in PAWS and have the “Print” box checked. If an instructor is missing from an evaluation, the first place to check is the PAWS instructor assignment and “Print” box setting.

For course sections with multiple instructors, students receive instructor-specific questions for each instructor who has the “Print” box checked in PAWS. Students also receive one set of course-level questions for the course overall.

Yes. UWM policy requires all end-of-semester course evaluations to include the campus core questions, but departments may optionally add additional questions at their discretion.

Core Evaluations Questions for Course Evaluations in Explorance Blue (established in SAAP 1-14):

The following questions are administered with a Likert scale with five options: Strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, strongly disagree

• I understood what was expected of me in this course.
• The course workload was what I expected given the material and level of the course.
• The instructor encouraged student engagement with course content, discussions, and/or activities.
• The instructor engaged with students (e.g., providing timely responses, feedback, and opportunities to participate).
• The feedback I received improved my learning in this course.
• Open-ended: What would you change about this course?
• Open-ended: What did you like most about this course?

No. The seven core questions must be included in all course evaluations. The first five use a five-option Likert scale, and the final two are open-ended questions about what students would change and what they liked most about the course.

Added questions should support meaningful course, program, department, or instructional improvement. They should avoid collecting unnecessary personally identifiable information, should not pressure students to disclose sensitive information, and should be written so results can be interpreted fairly across course formats, instructors, and student populations.

At minimum, departments should have a documented local approval process for added questions. A practical model is department chair or program director approval, with school/college review when questions affect multiple departments, are used for personnel review, or will appear in recurring reports.

Keep a record of the question text, question owner, effective term, approval path, and whether the question is used for course improvement, program assessment, accreditation, personnel review, or another purpose.

Evaluation results are released after grades are submitted. UWM policy says evaluations should only be available for instructor review after grades are submitted, generally about one week after grade submission. The existing FAQ also states that results are made accessible approximately one week after the grade deadline.

Administrators such as department chairs, associate deans, deans, and the provost may access aggregated and individual reports for instructors under their purview. Access should be limited consistent with law and privacy requirements, including FERPA.

Report access should follow institutional role, academic hierarchy, and legitimate educational or administrative need.

An individual report is the most granular level of reporting in Explorance Blue. It provides data specific to one instructor per course.

How they’re used in course evaluations:

• Individual reports deliver results solely from the courses an instructor teaches.
• Instructors receive these reports automatically via an emailed link.
• These reports are also shared with department chairs, associate deans, deans, other department roles approved by department chairs (e.g., program directors, administrative staff), and the Provost’s Office.

A group by report aggregates survey results based on a selected group level, such as department, college, or the university as a whole.

How they’re used in course evaluations:

• Department chairs and associate deans receive an aggregate department-wide report.
• Deans receive aggregate reports for their departments and the college as a whole.
• The Provost’s Office receives aggregate reports for departments, colleges, and the university as a whole.
• These reports allow comparison across programs or units, helping facilitate broader assessments.

Mean (Average)

Explorance Blue reports calculate the mean response for each question, which provides a quick way of evaluating the average across respondents. This is done by assigning the following values to each response category: Strongly Agree = 5, Agree = 4, Neither Agree nor Disagree = 3, Disagree = 2, Strongly Disagree = 1.

Standard Deviation

Explorance Blue reports also calculate the standard deviation of responses for each question, which provides a quick way of evaluating the spread, or variability, of responses around the mean (average). A higher value represents more variability among responses and a lower value represents less variability.

Response Rate/Ratio

The response ratio (also known as completion or return rate) represents the percentage of individuals who submitted the questionnaire out of those invited.

Formula used by Explorance Blue: Completed Responses ÷ Total Invited

(Note: Includes partial completions, deleted users, and those who opted out.)

A higher response rate is generally desirable to improve the reliability and representativeness of evaluation results.

Departments and instructors should help create a safe feedback environment, explain why evaluations matter, provide time for students to complete evaluations, use reminders, and educate students about constructive feedback. UWM policy also says incentives such as extra credit should be excluded.

Yes. Five reminders are sent to a student's email while course evaluations are available.

No. Once a student submits an evaluation, the response is final.

You can view the Explorance Blue user guides for more information.

For course evaluation service questions, contact CASL.