kolenda.com

Home » teaching & learning » my teaching evaluations

my teaching evaluations

summary of recent evaluations

Course: PA506-1 Public Policy Development & Process, University of Illinois at Chicago
Semester: Spring 2017
Enrollment: 45
Respondents: 29
Average Score: 4.6 of 5.0
Overall rating of instructor: 4.5 of 5.0
High Score: 4.7 of 5.0 (instructor subject knowledge)

Download complete evaluation here:
UIC Course Evaluation Summaries – PA506-1-S17

Course: PA506-2 Public Policy Development & Process, University of Illinois at Chicago
Semester: Spring 2017
Enrollment: 35
Respondents: 32
Average Score: 4.5 of 5.0
Overall rating of instructor: 4.5 of 5.0
High Score: 4.7 of 5.0 (exams & assignments)

Download complete evaluation here:
UIC Course Evaluation Summaries – PA506-2-S17

Course: PA401 Public Administration Theory, University of Illinois at Chicago
Semester: Spring 2017
Enrollment: 15
Respondents: 12
Average Score: 4.5 of 5.0
Overall rating of instructor: 4.5 of 5.0
High Score: 4.8 of 5.0 (exams & assignments)

Download complete evaluation here:
UIC Course Evaluation Summaries – PA401-S17

Course: PA401 Public Administration Theory, University of Illinois at Chicago
Semester: Fall 2016
Enrollment: 45
Respondents: 32
Average Score: 4.9 of 5.0
Overall rating of instructor: 4.9 of 5.0
High Score: 5.0 of 5.0 (instructor clear & effective; instructor exhibited enthusiasm)

Download complete evaluation here:
UIC Course Evaluation Summaries – PA401-F16

Course: PA240 Environmental Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago
Semester: Fall 2016
Enrollment: 15
Respondents: 13
Average Score: 4.6 of 5.0
Overall rating of instructor: 4.5 of 5.0
High Score: 4.9 of 5.0 (instructor well-prepared; learned a great deal)

Download complete evaluation here:
UIC Course Evaluation Summaries – PA240-F16

 

Course: Planning Techniques, Appalachian State University
Semester: Spring 2015
Enrollment: 13
Respondents: 19
Average Score: 4.2 of 5.0
High Score: 4.5 of 5.0 (instructor subject knowledge)

Download complete evaluation here:
Evaluation ASU S15 3432-101

Course: Town, City and Regional Planning, Appalachian State University
Semester: Spring 2015
Enrollment: 37
Respondents: 19
Average Score: 4.1 of 5.0
High Score: 4.4 of 5.0 (instructor enthusiasm for the subject)

Download complete evaluation here:
Evaluation ASU S15 2410-101

Course: Introduction to Policy Analysis, Georgia State University
Semester: Summer 2014
Enrollment: 22
Respondents: 20
Average Score: 4.7 of 5.0
High Score: 4.9 of 5.0 (instructor subject knowledge)
Effectiveness considering the subject matter: 4.7 (dept. & college mean: 4.5)
Overall effectiveness: 4.6 (dept. mean: 4.4; college mean: 4.5)

Download complete evaluation here:
Student Evaluation GSU PMAP 4061 SS14.pdf

Course: Technology and Sustainable Economic Development, University of West Georgia
Semester: Spring 2012
Enrollment: 10
Respondents: 8
Average Score: 4.5 of 5.0
High Score: 4.9 of 5.0 (“course challenged my intellect”)
Average of Instructor-Centered Questions: 4.5 of 5.0

Download complete evaluation here:
UWG POLS 4701 Teaching Eval SUMMARY S2012.pdf

Course: Economic Development Policy, Georgia State University
Semester: Fall 2010
Enrollment: 35
Respondents: 31
Average Score: 4.1 of 5.0
High Score: 4.7 of 5.0 (one category)
Overall Effectiveness: 4.1 (college mean: 4.2)

Download complete evaluation here:
Student Evaluation GSU PMAP 4451 F10.pdf

what i’ve learned

In general, I have learned a lot from student comments; even those that were extremely negative outliers. I have learned the importance of making clear what is expected of the students, and to be respectful of their views and their time. I also seek feedback during the semester, early and often, in order to adapt each course to the specific classroom dynamic and skills level.

Two comments from my most recent evaluation led to changes in my current syllabus. First, students suggested quizzes and/or writing assignments to motivate reading and to spread out the grades more. This semester I added five quizzes to test reading, spread out over the semester. I also added a midterm exam, allowing for a major grade earlier in the semester.

Second, some students suggested reducing the grade dependent on group projects, and/or grading more individually on the group projects. I will replace part of the group grade with individual grades for participation in group projects the next time I teach this course.

In the current semester, I realized that the way that I was teaching the methods section was not working well. Consequently, I spent extra time on it with my current students, and will incorporate the new approaches in future syllabi.

Follow me on Twitter