(Marked on a scale of 1 (highly unsatisfactory) to 7 (excellent).)
Ability to follow instructions: 1
Was anyone listening when I pointed out that there was a different set of evaluation forms for the lectures and that this set was only for evaluating the tutorials and the tutor (me)?
Because comments like, "This course had too much assessment" and "The lectures should have been more often than twice a week" are kind of... NOT RELEVANT.
Internal consistency: 1
Most students commented favourably on my ability to explain difficult concepts clearly (which, at the risk of blowing my own trumpet, I think is one of my biggest strengths in teaching). One said, "StyleyGeek clearly knows a lot, but can't put it into words to save herself."
95 % of the students gave me the top mark possible for "approachability and engagement with students". One commented, "The tutor was way too distant."
Two students said that I move through the material too fast and don't give them enough help with the practice problems. Another two said that my class is like "linguistics for morons" (yes, that's an exact quote) and that I should speed up and let them work out the details on their own.
Attention to (irrelevant) detail: 7
"StyleyGeek really needs to improve her handwriting."
Understanding of the time and effort your tutor owes you: 1
"Suggested improvements" included: "The tutor should run an after hours study group to help us with our assignments", and "StyleyGeek needs to be available in the weekends for students who work or have children."
Ability to compose comments that will make your tutor's day: 7
Also under "suggested improvements": "Fire ScaryLecturer and replace him with StyleyGeek."
Technorati tags: teaching carnival, academia
Wednesday, July 19, 2006