# Instructor and Student Evaluations

10 May 2008

## Instructor Evaluation by Student

### MS 150 Statistics

Back in Fall 2001 I had the opportunity to analyze my Instructor Evaluation by Student results. I have not had access to the raw data since that time, making a re-analysis difficult. Spring 2008, having never seen my evaluations from the fall of 2007, I decided to go ahead and run an evaluation and tally the data so as to run a comparison.

The questions are included in the table below.

 Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always 01. Keeps regular schedule every class day 1 2 3 4 5 02. Shows interest in the subject 1 2 3 4 5 03. Gives individual help as needed 1 2 3 4 5 04. Available for student conference 1 2 3 4 5 05. Welcomes questions, suggestions, and discussions from students 1 2 3 4 5 06. Shows interest and respect for students 1 2 3 4 5 07. Helps the students in meeting individual learning needs 1 2 3 4 5 08. Uses classroom/lab time fully 1 2 3 4 5 09. Provides clear directions for assignment and instruction 1 2 3 4 5 10. Grades fairly and frequently 1 2 3 4 5 11. Makes the purpose of the course clear 1 2 3 4 5 12. Talks clearly and at an easy to follow pace 1 2 3 4 5 13. Lessons are well paced with activity as well as lecture 1 2 3 4 5 14. Makes the course interesting 1 2 3 4 5 15. Textbook was appropriate and helpful 1 2 3 4 5

Averages were calculated for each question based on the above numbers. The following table rearranges the questions into descending rank order for spring 2008.

MS 150 Statistics
nQuestionFall 2001Spring 2008Diff
01Regular schedule4.54.90.40
13Lessons well paced with activity4.74.840.14
02Shows interest in subject4.44.810.41
08Uses classroom lab time fully4.84.77-0.03
14Makes the course interesting4.74.770.07
05Welcomes questions suggestions54.77-0.23
11Makes the purpose of the course clear54.74-0.26
15Textbook appropriate4.24.710.51
09Provides clear directions for assignments4.64.650.05
06Shows interest and respect4.74.53-0.17
07Helps students meet learning needs4.84.52-0.28
12Talks clearly at easy to follow pace4.54.520.02
04Avails for student conference4.74.47-0.23
03Gives help54.42-0.58
Averages:4.714.68-0.02

#### Results

To summarize the statistics student evaluations for spring 2008, I keep a reqular schedule, have a course well paced with activities, show interest in the subject, and I grade fairly and frequently. I need to improve on giving help, providing individual attention, meeting the student's individual learning needs, and my availability for individual student conferences. Of concern to me is that my perceived helpfulness on an individual basis has fallen since 2001.

A statistical test of the 2001 versus the 2008 data shows no statistically significant difference in my overall average between the two years. Overall my gains in some areas are offset by losses in others.

The division-wide average in 2001 was 4.51. Both my 2001 and 2008 averages of 4.71 and 4.68 respectively are above the 2001 division-wide average. I have no other data against which to compare my performance.

• I recommend that this instructor keep his way of teaching the teachers perfectly. I understand everything he saya and even his lectures are not boring. He's always encouraging his students. He's clear and understandable. If I have to choose my instructor, I'll choose him.
• I enjoy this class since I started. It will be more advantage for all students to take this class. I suggest that all students must take this class, so they can communicate with numbers, applying with statistics.
• Best instructor I've ever had. Thanks for everything!
• Your salary should be increased

### SC 130 Physical Science

In SC 130 Physical Science the results were similar to MS 150 Statistics.

SC 130 Physical Science
nQuestionSpring 2008
02Shows interest in subject4.96
05Welcomes questions suggestions4.92
14Makes the course interesting4.89
09Provides clear directions for assignments4.89
13Lessons well paced with activity4.89
11Makes the purpose of the course clear4.89
01Regular schedule4.89
06Shows interest and respect4.86
12Talks clearly at easy to follow pace4.79
07Helps students meet learning needs4.79
03Gives help4.75
04Avails for student conference4.68
08Uses classroom lab time fully4.54
15Textbook appropriate3.96
Average:4.77

#### Results

Two items shifted position in the rank order, use of classroom and lab time fully and the appropriateness of the textbook. The later item fell to the lowest average for all items across both courses. Against results in 2001, a 3.96 is lower than all but one textbook in use in the division at that time. Note that one of the 3.9 values in the 2001 table was for the IS 201 Introduction to Computer Informations Systems course text book. I happened to be teaching that course that particular term.

Overall, as an instructor, students rated me higher in SC 130 Physical Science than in MS 150 Statistics. A 4.77 average would have placed me in first position in the rank order back in 2001.

• He is the best teacher among all my classes. He should not be removed from this college. He is the best for this class.
• Professor Lee Ling was a good teacher. He was so good in explaining things I do understand what he is talking about and I learned a lot from him. For instance, I did learned some of his experiments, and if I become teacher some day I will do his experiments to my students.
• He should be teaching physical science for the coming up semesters. I truly hope that the other students who haven't take this class will love to take it with him. He's a very nice instructor.
• Dana, nothing much to jot down for my comments. Least is I wanna thank you for the knowledge you poured in to me.
• Always come to class every day. Shows interest and respect to the students.
• Nothing, everything were perfect.
• He's a good instructor.
• Keep up the good work.
• He's cool
• Thanks for your hard working, Lee Ling! The Lord bless you!

Although the sample size was smaller for physical science (n = 28), there were more written comments than were received for statistics class. There is a suggestion that the writing core to the course spilled over into the student's willingess to add written comments.

## Student Self-Evaluation

The Student Self-Evaluation form was given in both MS 150 Statistics and SC 130 Physical Science. This survey was run by the college in conjunction with the instructor survey back in the 1990s.1

 Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always 1. I come to class on time 1 2 3 4 5 2. I am prepared each day 1 2 3 4 5 3. I turned in my homework on time 1 2 3 4 5 4. I spoke up when called upon 1 2 3 4 5 5. I asked questions in class 1 2 3 4 5 6. I met with my instructor during office hours 1 2 3 4 5 7. I paid attention in class 1 2 3 4 5 8. I asked for clarification when needed 1 2 3 4 5 9. I took the course seriously 1 2 3 4 5 10. I tried my best 1 2 3 4 5 11. My grade should be: A B C D F

The results for MS 150 Statistics and SC 130 Physical Science are reported below. The order is in descending order of the average for the two courses. This value is not displayed in the table below and was used only to derive a common order for both courses.

Student Self-Evaluation
nQuestionMS 150SC 130
10I tried my best4.434.50
9I took the course seriously4.214.35
7I paid attention in class4.104.35
1I come to class on time3.814.38
8I asked for clarification when needed3.324.35
4I spoke up when called upon3.634.00
2I am prepared each day3.743.77
3I turned in my homework on time3.423.96
6I met with my instructor during office hours2.133.15
Average:3.534.02

### Results

Students in both courses self-report that they tried their best, took the course seriously, paid attention in class, and came to class on time. Physical science students may have been more likely to ask for clarification and to have spoken up when called upon. Students self-report asking questions only rarely or sometimes.

Students also report not meeting with their instructor during office hours. This suggests that the lack of individual attention and help reported in the instructor survey by student is in part connected to students not coming to the office for assistance.

The statistics student's would collectively award themselves a 2.74 grade point average. The actual average for the course is 2.24. The student's meta-cognitive knowledge of their performance in the course is not as unaligned with reality as I had surmised it would be.

In physical science the student's self-estimated their GPA would be 3.21, the actual GPA for those who were surveyed was 2.75. This also a difference of half a grade point. Although individual grade estimates may or may not have been accurate, collectively the students only over-estimated their own grade by half a grade. This suggests that the course did a good job of helping the students know how they were performing. Bear in mind the question was "My grade should be" not "My grade is," the later would be a better measure of their meta-cognitive knowledge of their performance.

• I learn a lot of new informations from Dana Lee Ling. I wish I could be as wise as him in statistics.
• My problem is that I am not a morning person and this class is always given in the morning. Therefore I tend to be late all the time or have too many absences.
• It was a very difficult course to take but I did try my very best and it was very interesting the way you taught this class. It was fun. I guess I enjoyed too much that why I'm not doing so good.
• This class is interesting to learn. At the same time, it is the easiest math course I have ever taken.
• My statistics teacher rocks!
• Sorry, I tried to do good in class.
• I hope the instructor keeps up the good work. I really enjoy the lab activities.
• I am a good student. I always asked questions so I can understand what is in this course.
• Thank you, this class has been a wonderful course and it is worth taking. There was never a single day that I had thought of not attending class.
• Even though I didn't try my best in this class, I really enjoyed it.
• I like this class.
• I deserve "A".

## Affective domain survey in physical science

In conjunction with the above surveys, an affective domain survey was run in physical science and is available on line.

1The lack of the widespread deployment and use of research technologies like optical mark readers has forced the college curtail many of these surveys as hand-marking is impossible on the scale of the college. Research at the college using surveys has decreased over the past decade due in part to a lack of technological support for surveys out into the academic divisions. The college has made little effort to empower faculty as researchers in their own classrooms, while at the same time extolling the same faculty to engage in assessment activities. That a single scanner is kept in the administration building is of little use to faculty who typically work weekends and after hours on their course materials.