End-of-Course

Evaluation


Anna Lynn Rambo
Instructor ____________________________________________

Course ______________________________________________
Understanding STEM (Woodrow Wilson Fellowship Program)

January 30, 2016

Date __________________

Fall 2015
Term _________________

Following the completion of each course, faculty are provided with a summary of the anonymous student course evaluations,
which also contain comments/feedback about students perceptions of their learning experience. The faculty member reflects
upon their strengths and areas for further development and discusses these with the department chair or program coordinator.
A copy of this form is provided to the instructor, the department chair, and the Office of the Dean in the School of Education.

Following a review of the student course evaluations, as well as your own perceptions about this course, please
list:

Strengths (List 2-5)

1. Designing an activity that prompted consideration of STEM education and potential application

2. Feedback on papers to support academic writing





Concerns (List concerns based upon ratings or derived from student comments)
1. Little opportunity was provided beyond summer 1 for fellows to collaborate and discuss growing understandings related to STEM
education.
2. Connecting of theories of learning and motivation, as well as philosophies of education, was not facilitated.




Areas for Development (Describe changes/modifications/improvements that you would make should you teach this or other similar courses again)

The Understanding
STEM lab needs to be more intentional, woven as a thread throughout the program with opportunities for fellows to

make connections
across readings, experiences, and the clinical context. For spring and summer 2, cohort 1 will be supported in


making these
types of connections and asked for input to improve the experience for subsequent cohorts.

Specific evidence of meaningful academic rigor (Examples include: advanced questioning, alignment of work to standards, challenging learning
opportunities)

In my opinion, rigor was evidenced through fellows' required written syntheses. Fellows wrote two academic reflection papers, one

from summer 1 readings and another following STEM exploratory visits. The challenge to organize logical connections, cite resources

correctly
(APA formatting), and communicate a cogent message was practiced and supported through the work of this lab.

Instructors signature ______________________________________________

Department chairpersons signature __________________________________

Date______________________

Date______________________