{"id":437,"date":"2012-06-18T12:03:05","date_gmt":"2012-06-18T17:03:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.acu.edu\/johnehrke\/?page_id=437"},"modified":"2012-07-02T10:06:33","modified_gmt":"2012-07-02T15:06:33","slug":"teacher-effectiveness","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.acu.edu\/johnehrke\/teaching\/teacher-effectiveness\/","title":{"rendered":"Teaching Effectiveness (SOI)"},"content":{"rendered":"

In this section, we will examine the student opinion of instructor results, henceforth referred to as SOI, from each semester organized into tabular data. \u00a0Student comments and reflection on the results are provided at the end of the section.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u00a0Student Opinion of Instructor Data – Fall 2007<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

_______________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

\u00a0Student Opinion of Instructor Data – Fall and Spring 2008<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

_______________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

Student Opinion of Instructor Data – Fall and Spring 2009<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

_______________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

Student Opinion of Instructor Data – Fall and Spring 2010<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

_______________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

Student Opinion of Instructor Data – Fall and Spring 2011<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

_______________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n

Student Opinion of Instructor Data – Combined<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/strong>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/h1>\n

Remarks<\/h1>\n

By far, the class in which I received the lowest marks is the Fall 2007 (my first semester at ACU) MATH 124, PreCalculus II course. \u00a0I recall struggling with managing that course in particular because of a wide array of student skill levels and previous knowledge. \u00a0Some of the student comments from the course:<\/p>\n

\n

Not assume that people just know things…”you will remember from Precal one.” Most people just got confused<\/p>\n

His teaching was too complicated at times because he explained things we didn’t need to know and his teaching at times was too easy for what showed up on quizzes and tests.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

<\/em>There were also several comments along the lines of making the material clearer, or explaining things better. \u00a0In response to these comments, when I taught the course the following Fall, I provided a comprehensive set of lecture notes, streamlined the course taking out a few topics that were\u00a0superfluous and reviewed material from PreCalculus I where appropriate. \u00a0As a result the numbers for the Fall 2008 and Spring 2011 semesters showed marked improvements. \u00a0Some student comments from these semesters:<\/p>\n

\n

\u00a0He was very interesting. \u00a0He came to the problem thinking the way a student might think and made little refreshers to remind us of past knowledge instead of just expecting us to know things.<\/p>\n

He had us teach him how to do the problems. \u00a0Even if we knew it wouldn’t work he would show us why it wouldn’t work and how to do it the correct\/easier way.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

<\/em>The only course where my numbers showed regression the second time teaching a course was in MATH 186, Calculus II between the Fall 2007 and Fall 2008 semesters. \u00a0I have some theories as to why this was the case: \u00a0(1) Beginning in the Fall 2008 I placed a higher emphasis on investigating content in Maple that some student were not prepared for. \u00a0(2) I raised the level of the course from its initial level. \u00a0Some of the student responses speak directly to this.<\/p>\n

\n

He could work a wider expanse of problems. \u00a0Problems tended to be examples of easy problems, it would have helped to work harder examples.<\/p>\n

Maybe calm down a little bit on tests and homework.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

<\/em><\/em>I think what the general student response is in this regard is that my assessment for the course should more accurately reflect the material discussed in class and worked on the homework. \u00a0I agreed. \u00a0I made an honest effort to align exam type assessments more closely with the course material while also simultaneously increasing rigor in homework. I have also overhauled the lecture slides available to the class and implemented screencasting resources for students struggling with Maple and other more difficult topics. \u00a0As a result my numbers in Fall 2011 showed a considerable jump from their 2008 levels and even surpassed the 2007 levels. \u00a0I anticipate the Spring 2012 numbers to be even better despite a more rigorous course experience.<\/p>\n

In the most recent iteration of the course some of the student comments reflected positively on these changes.<\/p>\n

\n

He made lectures very interesting and insightful, and he was willing to help us out if we did poorly on a test.<\/p>\n

I appreciated that the instructor created notes to go with the lecture and then made these notes accessible to students.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

<\/em>As a general overview, I have included a chart mapping all my average scores per question, for each semester. \u00a0The chart includes a set of trend lines for each question asked of students on the SOI form. \u00a0All of the lines highlight positive trends and indicated growth as whole over my five years of teaching. \u00a0(Please note the vertical axis of the chart begins at a 3.0 since no scores were recorded below this value. \u00a0This helps make changes in the chart and associated trends more readable.)<\/p>\n

In addition to the specifically highlighted cases above, I include the following student comments which speak to specific aspects of what makes my teaching effective.<\/p>\n