homepage

courses

previous -- view my teaching portfolio here

 

  

 

 

 Electronic Teaching Portfolio

Robert Morris University, Spring 2006

You can visit the course pages here.
*indicates that the score is reported to be above the mean for 4-year institutions.
+indicates reliably above the 90th percentile

(5=very effective, 1=ineffective) Math 1020 Math 2040 Math 2040 Math 2050 Math 2170
1. The instructor's explanation of course requirements. 4.44 4.24 3.76 4.88 3.23
2. The instructor's preparation for each class period. 4.44 4.32 4.00 4.88 2.77
3. The instructor's command of the subject matter. 4.41 4.29 4.05 4.88 2.92
4. The instructor's use of class time. 4.33 4.33 3.86 5.00+ 2.77
5. The instructor's way of summarizing or emphasizing important points in class. 3.89 4.19 3.62 4.88 2.46
Summary 1-5 4.24* 4.27* 3.86 4.90+ 2.83
6. The instructor's ability to make clear and understandable presentations. 4.00 3.91 3.86 4.63 2.17
7. The instructor's command of spoken English. 4.78 4.77 4.24 5.00+ 3.62
8. The instructor's use of examples or illustrations to clarify course material. 3.89 4.24 3.81 4.75 2.42
9. The instructor's use of challenging questions or problems. 4.33 4.19 4.05 5.00+ 3.00
10. The instructor's enthusiasm for the course material. 4.56 4.33 3.95 4.75 2.92
Summary 6-10 4.31* 4.29* 3.98 4.83 2.82
11. The instructor's helpfulness and responsiveness to students. 4.56 4.38 3.81 4.75 2.77
12. The instructor's respect for students. 4.67 4.57 4.00 5.00+ 3.38
13. The instructor's concern for student progress. 4.44 4.14 3.62 4.88 2.46
14. The availability of extra help for this class (taking into account the size of the class). 4.00 4.19 3.48 4.88 2.92
15. The instructor's willingness to listen to student questions and opinions. 4.67 4.38 4.00 5.00+ 3.38
Summary 11-15 4.47* 4.33* 3.78 4.90+ 2.98
16.  The information given to students about how they would be graded. 4.44 4.57 3.90 4.63 3.38
17. The clarity of exam questions. 4.33 4.33 3.76 4.75 3.08
18. The exams' coverage of important aspects of the course. 4.33 4.35 3.95 4.63 2.69
19. The instructor's comments on assignments and exams. 4.22 4.05 3.86 4.63 2.50
20. The over quality of the textbooks(s). 3.00 4.05 3.57 1.00 3.46
21. The helpfulness of assignments in understanding course material. 4.00 3.90 3.76 4.14 3.08
Summary 16-21 4.06* 4.21* 3.80 3.96 3.03
29. My learning increased in this course. 3.44 3.52 3.25 3.63 2.62
30. I made progress toward achieving course objectives. 3.33 3.38 3.40 3.63 2.77
31. My interest in the subject area has increased. 3.00 3.15 2.90 2.75 2.46
32. This course helped me to think independently about the subject matter. 3.33 3.24 3.20 3.25 2.77
33. This course actively involved me in what I was learning. 3.44 3.38 3.20 3.25 2.62
Summary 29-33 3.31 3.33 3.19 3.30 2.65
34. I studied and put effort into this course. 3.67 3.73 3.95 4.63+ 4.08
35. I was prepared for each class. 3.63 3.64 3.71 4.25 3.54
36. I was challenged by this course. 4.00 3.86 4.05 5.00+ 4.31
Summary 34-36 3.76* 3.74* 3.90* 4.63+ 3.97*
37. For my preparation and ability, the level of difficulty of this course was (5=very difficult, 1=very elementary) 3.52 3.4 3.71 4.67 4.11
38. The work load for this course in relation to other courses of equal credit was (5=much heavier, 1=much lighter) 3.33 3.8 3.86 4.75 4.81
39. For me, the pace at which the instructor covered the material during the term was (5=very fast, 1=very slow) 3.33 3.48 3.62 4.29 3.88
40. Rate the quality of the instruction in this course as it contributed to your learning (try to set aside your feelings about the course content). (5=very effective, 1=ineffective) 4.22* 3.86 3.33 4.00* 2.38
Summary and Reflections: The Math 1020 course (Trig) was really fun this semester.  The class was dynamic, asked a lot of questions, and was generally laid back and enjoyable, yet we still managed to accomplish what we needed to.  The Math 2040 (Finite Math and Applied Calc) courses went relatively smoothly, except in a couple places.  The Math 2050 (Applied Calc) course was incredibly time consuming.  This was the first time the course had been taught in a partially online format, and I ended up making extensive preparations outside of class for the format.  Once things were set up, I was able to spend more time actually teaching, but meeting as infrequently as we did was also difficult for the students.  In departing, I have left suggestions and materials for the next person to teach this class.  The class universally hated the textbook (and I didn't get to select it, and I hated it, too), but we managed.  As you can see from the evaluations, I think my efforts were worth it.  The Math 2170 (Calc II) was challenging a different way.  It was a course I had never taught before, and some of my students became quite impatient with occasional moments of uncertainty.  I think this frustration is reflected in the evaluations.  It was pretty clear to me only weeks into the semester, but there was little I could but slog through it and do the best I could.  I feel much better prepared to ever teach this course again, but the first time through was hard--on everyone.
(c) 2005 by Betsy McCall, all rights reserved
To contact the webmistress, email betsy@pewtergallery.com
last updated: 2006 June 1