Course Evaluation Data and Information
for CRD 809: Colloquium in CRDM
Fall Semester, 2005
Prof. Chris M. Anson
Before you begin: I strongly believe that teaching well is a lifelong pursuit--an art to be explored and developed, and a science that constantly presents new challenges and opportunities for analysis and growth. As a teacher, I am very much a learner. I need to reflect on what I'm doing and how I'm doing it. Student evaluations are one source of information for me to reflect and improve. As such, I use them formatively, as information helpful in the improvement of a significant part of my professional life: teaching students and teaching other teachers.
But student evaluations can also have a more public function, displaying areas of my teaching that students find to be strong, and areas they find to be in need of improvement. Below, you will see evaluation data from the course and term indicated above, along with a bit of reflection from me about what I see in these numbers and comments. Please use this information responsibly. If you're deciding whether to take a course from me, consider what you see here not only as evidence of ability, but as evidence of my willingness to listen to your peers and improve my teaching in ways that respond to their justified concerns and needs. If you're a fellow professional looking at these data because you want to learn about or evaluate my work, please consider them only as one part of an overall plan for teacher effectiveness and a lifelong pursuit of excellence.
In some cases, where appropriate, I have included anonymously written comments from the students in the course. If so, I have created a kind of "dialogue" from some of these comments by interspersing my own (italicized) thoughts and reflections, and on ways to address specific concerns the next time I teach the course. By working on areas of concern, I can then match student opinions in future courses against those here to see whether the changes are having a positive impact on the course and on students.
The following chart shows each question on the NC State University-Wide Evaluation of Instruction form. In the first box after the question appears the weighted mean of the results for that question (based on a scale of 1-5, as shown below). 5.0 is the highest mean score possible (every student would give a score of 5 on that question).
|
Score of 5:
|
Strongly Agree
|
|
Score of 4:
|
Agree
|
|
Score of 3:
|
Neutral
|
|
Score of 2:
|
Disagree
|
|
Score of 1:
|
Strongly Disagree
|
|
QUESTION FROM FORM |
Ave. Score |
|---|---|
| 1. The instructor stated course objectives/outcomes. |
4.8 |
| 2. The instructor was receptive to students outside the classroom. |
4.5 |
| 3. The instructor explained difficult material well. |
4.0 |
| 4. The instructor was enthusiastic about teaching the course. |
4.4 |
| 5. The instructor was prepared for class. |
4.6 |
| 6. The instructor gave prompt and useful feedback. |
4.0 |
| 7. The instructor effectively used instructional technology. |
4.3 |
| 8. The instructor consistently treated students with respect. |
4.8 |
| 9. Overall, the instructor was an effective teacher. |
4.6 |
| 10. The course readings were valuable aids to learning. |
4.4 |
| 11. The course assignments were valuable aids to learning. |
4.0 |
| 12. This course was intellectually challenging and stimulating. |
4.4 |
| 13. This course improved my knowledge of the subject. |
4.6 |
| 14. Overall, this course was excellent. | 4.4 |
|
4.4 |
What these numbers are telling me: This was the first time this course was offered in the new Ph.D. program in Communication, Rheetoric, and Digital Media. The 1-credit fall semester colloquium is required on a continuing basis for students enrolled in the program. Because there were only first-year students in the program, the intended function of the colloquium--to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas among doctoral students--couldn't be realized. Instead, I chose to organized the colloquium around a series of research presentations by faculty in the two departments (English and Communication) that collaborate to offer this interdisciplinary degree. Each visiting faculty member would assign one or more readings, then come to the colloquium to give a brief presentation followed by discussion. For this reason, the evaluation numbers are somewhat difficult to apply to my own "teaching" of the course. I gave one presentation myself, focusing on publications in our allied fields and how to find outlets for one's research. The students seemed to want more of this kind of information, rather than just presentations by the faculty about their own work, but did say they found it helpful to get to know the faculty as they look ahead to choosing advisors and taking courses. In all, I was satisfied with the evaluations considering that 80% of the course was "delivered" by other faculty.
Anonymous Written Comments from Students (from the evaluations):